Trolling for what? - The huge number of religous freaks on slashdot?
I'm sick of patronising religious nuts "feeling sorry for me because jesus is not in my life", in other words it was a reverse premptive flamebait with a 180deg religious twist (standard difficulty rating - 666).
Imagine a puddle waking up one morning and thinking, 'This is an interesting world I find myself in, an interesting hole I find myself in, fits me rather neatly, doesn't it? In fact it fits me staggeringly well, must have been made to have me in it!' This is such a powerful idea that as the sun rises in the sky and the air heats up and as, gradually, the puddle gets smaller and smaller, it's still frantically hanging on to the notion that everything's going to be alright, because this world was meant to have him in it, was built to have him in it; so the moment he disappears catches him rather by surprise. - D. Adams.
"If there is no God then you are no more valuable than a cock roach"
Your just one of billions who have been brainwashed into beleiving that you are nothing without god. I genuinely feel pity for people who's self worth is defined by thier sycophantic relationship with their god.
PS: Just to reinforce the point that we seem to agree on, there are 3 replies to the OP that basically say "I just need the formula, I don't need to know why it works" - hope they aren't teachers.
As the other reply points out, it depends on the teachers (even more so on the parents), for the most part my now adult kids enjoyed school. I grew up in the '60s, my prison was sexually segregated and the guards were not only allowed to bully and bash you but were encourage to do so by many of the parents ("spare the rod, spoil the child" was a widely held belief), still I had some good teachers interspersed amoung the tyrants.
I agree that math and science are generally taught as an unconnected grab-bag of factoids and formulas because many of those who teach it don't recognise it as a philosophy, nor do they recognise critical thinking (skepticisim) as a teachable skill. This guy is my model of what a science teacher should aspire to. He certainly held my interest as a child, and still entertains even though I'm now a grandparent.
"they could test 8 numbers at once, but they cannot test one number 8 times as fast."
Just because most searches use one number per core does not mean testing a single candidate can't be done very efficiently over multiple cores. You only have to think about the process for finding a prime, ie: testing factors, test if the candidate is it divisable by two, three, five, ect. The test for each factor is independent, so you COULD test 8 factors simultaneously, no?
The only communication between threads is a semaphore to say "stop, thread XYZ found an integer factor", if you want to be pedantic it's not 8X as fast but rather close to 8X as fast. I suggest the reason most implementations use one candidate per core is because most searches look at more than one candidate and the semaphore test makes the alternative implementation slightly less efficent.
"Teach it [calculus] at that level and leave us web developers alone."
There was no web when I graduated, had to learn it "on the job". I have never heard of anyone learning calculus "on the job" but it would explain why buildings and bridges sometimes fall down.
"IIRC, in regular college level calculus I wasn't allowed to use a graphing calculator."
IIRC when I started HS there was no such thing as a calculator. Now get of my lawn or I will make you listen to another story about slide rules and log tables.
IAACS but my career has been in software development. Knuth captures your sentiement in the title of his legendary computer science text - "The art of computer programming".
I stand corrected, I misread the summary as saying "one plane being brought down in the period from 1989 to 2009".
Technically the odds may be one plane in 400yrs, but size matters with meteors as does the record of deaths by X when attepting to build an acctuary table for the odds of death by X. I agree that considering the record of large impacts and given enough time the odds of a whole city (and it's airports) being wiped out with a space rock approach certainty but that still does not make their wild speculation usefull for anything more than bizzare headlines.
We still have Armstrong's boot alongside other historically significant foot wear such as Dorothy's red shooes. We could attach the boot to the bottom of the probe and called it a restoration project.
Same thing that happens to an airline who complied with all matainence standards and their plane still dropped out of the sky, nothing. However on such occasions the authours of the standard must fix it so as to avoid a repeat. In the airline industry they go to great lengths and expense to do so but planes will still fall out the sky simply because life is a shit sandwich and we all have to take a bite.
In other words; standards attempt to prevent known problems (due dilligence), it's illogical to expect them to do anything to prevent unknown problems (fortune telling). The law reflects that logic.
"Is their role to certify that at the time of testing, the company being tested met the required standards? Or, is their role to certify that the company met the required standards at time of testing, and continues to meet them for as long as the certification stands?"
It can be either, it depends on what service they were hired to provide. Normally a cert is a snapshot that shows the company met the standard when they were audited and for it to remain relevant the company need to be certified at regular intervals. Just like my BSc shows that I understood partial differentials at the time I was tested (20yrs ago) but because I'm not tested regularly it cannot be assumed I still understand it. A cert is not about being right it's about doing whatever it is your doing in an accountable manner.
"If they win this lawsuit, they're setting a dangerous precedent"
Audits are performed so the company can demonstrate due dilligence should something go wrong, if the auditors themselves cannot show due dilligence in their own actions then they deserve to be hammered.
Slashdot Mirror
Trolling for what? - The huge number of religous freaks on slashdot?
I'm sick of patronising religious nuts "feeling sorry for me because jesus is not in my life", in other words it was a reverse premptive flamebait with a 180deg religious twist (standard difficulty rating - 666).
On a more serious note: I submit the doctrine of vicarious redmptiom via human sacrafice is utterly immoral
realistic.
"nothing is more important than what God thinks of you"
You missed my point, which was that attitude is just sad.
Imagine a puddle waking up one morning and thinking, 'This is an interesting world I find myself in, an interesting hole I find myself in, fits me rather neatly, doesn't it? In fact it fits me staggeringly well, must have been made to have me in it!' This is such a powerful idea that as the sun rises in the sky and the air heats up and as, gradually, the puddle gets smaller and smaller, it's still frantically hanging on to the notion that everything's going to be alright, because this world was meant to have him in it, was built to have him in it; so the moment he disappears catches him rather by surprise. - D. Adams.
"If there is no God then you are no more valuable than a cock roach"
Your just one of billions who have been brainwashed into beleiving that you are nothing without god. I genuinely feel pity for people who's self worth is defined by thier sycophantic relationship with their god.
Your post is redundant, you have already expressed your lack of intellectual curiosity in your sig. ;)
PS: Just to reinforce the point that we seem to agree on, there are 3 replies to the OP that basically say "I just need the formula, I don't need to know why it works" - hope they aren't teachers.
"Instead the test being discussed performs a series of squares and modulo reductions."
:)
Thanks for showing an old dog a new trick.
As the other reply points out, it depends on the teachers (even more so on the parents), for the most part my now adult kids enjoyed school. I grew up in the '60s, my prison was sexually segregated and the guards were not only allowed to bully and bash you but were encourage to do so by many of the parents ("spare the rod, spoil the child" was a widely held belief), still I had some good teachers interspersed amoung the tyrants.
I agree that math and science are generally taught as an unconnected grab-bag of factoids and formulas because many of those who teach it don't recognise it as a philosophy, nor do they recognise critical thinking (skepticisim) as a teachable skill. This guy is my model of what a science teacher should aspire to. He certainly held my interest as a child, and still entertains even though I'm now a grandparent.
According to legend, it has something to do with apples.
"they could test 8 numbers at once, but they cannot test one number 8 times as fast."
Just because most searches use one number per core does not mean testing a single candidate can't be done very efficiently over multiple cores. You only have to think about the process for finding a prime, ie: testing factors, test if the candidate is it divisable by two, three, five, ect. The test for each factor is independent, so you COULD test 8 factors simultaneously, no?
The only communication between threads is a semaphore to say "stop, thread XYZ found an integer factor", if you want to be pedantic it's not 8X as fast but rather close to 8X as fast. I suggest the reason most implementations use one candidate per core is because most searches look at more than one candidate and the semaphore test makes the alternative implementation slightly less efficent.
Yep, the vast majority of people who have been taught calculus are unable to recognise it's fruit.
"Teach it [calculus] at that level and leave us web developers alone."
There was no web when I graduated, had to learn it "on the job". I have never heard of anyone learning calculus "on the job" but it would explain why buildings and bridges sometimes fall down.
"IIRC, in regular college level calculus I wasn't allowed to use a graphing calculator."
IIRC when I started HS there was no such thing as a calculator. Now get of my lawn or I will make you listen to another story about slide rules and log tables.
"Does anyone else have any suggestions"
1.Lay down on the floor and throw a tantrum.
2.Start your own SlashNot site.
"Our standard model is just in and of itself an assumption"
I didn't know assumptions could make accurate predictions, OTOH if I assume you don't know what you're talking about....
Our machines may be too smart for our own good.
I agree, I see music as art. :)
IAACS but my career has been in software development. Knuth captures your sentiement in the title of his legendary computer science text - "The art of computer programming".
"where do YOU get that statistic from?"
I stand corrected, I misread the summary as saying "one plane being brought down in the period from 1989 to 2009".
Technically the odds may be one plane in 400yrs, but size matters with meteors as does the record of deaths by X when attepting to build an acctuary table for the odds of death by X. I agree that considering the record of large impacts and given enough time the odds of a whole city (and it's airports) being wiped out with a space rock approach certainty but that still does not make their wild speculation usefull for anything more than bizzare headlines.
Glad you emphasised REAL, WILD speculation and INVALID statistical analysis are not what I call real.
Fact: There are no recorded cases of death by meteor, unless you count a dog in France.
Given this information how do they get the statistic of around 100 people per decade killed by meteor without ignoring reality?
I agree with the OP, TFA is psuedo-scientific ambulance chasing.
We still have Armstrong's boot alongside other historically significant foot wear such as Dorothy's red shooes. We could attach the boot to the bottom of the probe and called it a restoration project.
Same thing that happens to an airline who complied with all matainence standards and their plane still dropped out of the sky, nothing. However on such occasions the authours of the standard must fix it so as to avoid a repeat. In the airline industry they go to great lengths and expense to do so but planes will still fall out the sky simply because life is a shit sandwich and we all have to take a bite.
In other words; standards attempt to prevent known problems (due dilligence), it's illogical to expect them to do anything to prevent unknown problems (fortune telling). The law reflects that logic.
"Is their role to certify that at the time of testing, the company being tested met the required standards? Or, is their role to certify that the company met the required standards at time of testing, and continues to meet them for as long as the certification stands?"
It can be either, it depends on what service they were hired to provide. Normally a cert is a snapshot that shows the company met the standard when they were audited and for it to remain relevant the company need to be certified at regular intervals. Just like my BSc shows that I understood partial differentials at the time I was tested (20yrs ago) but because I'm not tested regularly it cannot be assumed I still understand it. A cert is not about being right it's about doing whatever it is your doing in an accountable manner.
"If they win this lawsuit, they're setting a dangerous precedent"
Audits are performed so the company can demonstrate due dilligence should something go wrong, if the auditors themselves cannot show due dilligence in their own actions then they deserve to be hammered.