It's not Linux's fault that the developers of Final Cut Pro and Lightroom specifically chose *not* to support Linux. It is also not Linux's fault that both Apple and Adobe guard and keep their programs' source code secret, so it is impossible for anyone else to compile it for anything other than the operating systems that these two companies choose to compile these programs for themselves.
So the only intelligence services that currently do not want to kill snowden are the US an UK ones. Good thing that he fled to russia where such a thing could never happen. Great thinking!!!
Rather late:)
Your claim, and my argument also, is wrong on following count:
It should be P(H0|significant) != 1 - P(significant|H0)
If you have a sample without real differences you have P(H0|significant = 0) which is the statistic used in the article.
This would result in:
"Yes, I agree. If a p-value of 0.05 actually "means" 1 when evaluated, then any sane frequentist will tell you that things are fucked, since the limiting probability does not match the nominal probability (this is the definition of frequentism)."
Johnson found that a P value of 0.05 or less — commonly considered evidence in support of a hypothesis in many fields including social science — still meant that as many as 17–25% of such findings are probably false (PDF).
.
Found? Was he unaware that using a threshold of 0.05 means a 20% probability that a finding is a chance result - by definition ?
More interesting, IMO, is that statistical doesn't tell you what the scale of an effect is. There can be a trivial difference between A and B even if the difference is statistically significant. People publish it anyway.
Ofcourse it was found. The 20% are not by definition but a function of the percentage of studies done based on correct/incorrect H1. You could have 0% if you only did studies on correct H1s.
Continuous data is just one possible scientific problem.
Most studies are done comparing 2 groups which differ by a categorical variable.
There are other forms of regression like ordinal linear regression...
"Yes, I agree. If a p-value of 0.05 actually "means" 0.20 when evaluated, then any sane frequentist will tell you that things are fucked, since the limiting probability does not match the nominal probability (this is the definition of frequentism)."
A Unified development path? Oh please, if MS wanted one, they COULD have made ALL their games available for both their console AND windows AND their phones ALREADY! They don't because MS isn't a company it is a number of departments involved in century old feuds. I know MS isn't centuries old but there departments are sure feuding like their great-great-great grand-daddy's have done.
MS can't do a unified approach because it is not a unified company. Just examine its countless position changes on whether Windows is or is not a gaming platform. In a way MS is even killing itself with it. The only thing I would need windows for is gaming. No windows games? Then I could just as well run Linux or a Mac. In fact, I do run Linux because more and more games are available on Linux or at least Linux friendly.
And no, I don't own a x-box. But smart move MS, make your own platform less relevant. Oh wait, then there is Games for Windows. Oh then it is not. Why do you think Valve is going ahead with Steam OS? Because they like building a OS more then building games? No because they are fucking tired of being depended on a company that is schizophrenic about its own OS.
The only reason valve is building Steam OS is because they are now in direct competition with MS app store.
I see FBP as a generalized form of functional programming where you can, and have to, specify how the expressions are put together temporally. It gives you the advantage of automatic (in rx you have to specify the scheduler) concurrency but is cumbersome for stuff that is easily expressed in a synchron way (List processing...). I guess you would want the most coarse grained granularity.
As for the idea that FBP is coupled to visual programming and will enable non programmers to write complex programs, well: Visual programming makes writing programs for easy problems even easier and for complex problems intractable. And guess what: The easy problems were already easy to begin with!!!
Do we really want corporations decide what laws they should follow? Do corporations really have, and should they have, a moral compass and responsibility? If so, which one and how should they operate in different cultures? If the laws suck then we, the people, have a responsibility to fix it through democratic measures. I do not think it legitim to condemn an organisation and the people working there for following the law.
but if you are able to detect if photons are superimposed then you are able to transmit information faster than light violating causality. Or do you mean detecting by trying to communicate with differing keys?
I agree about the need for folks to do a head-check before reacting to something said off-the-cuff, but there's one sticking point......why did he use Twitter to verbally horse around with a buddy on such a touchy-assed subject? I mean, there are many, many less public means of doing that.
Seems to me, Humphrey actually put the good of his Country ahead of personal and party gain. This is a far cry from what we've become as a Nation.
Afaik Humphrey didn't expose Nixon because polls told him he would win anyway and that there was no need to steep that low. And what would the use have been after having lost. Better to wait for the rematch and use it then.
You trade one slavery for another. The Cult of Macheads will mod me down, but Apple owns you as much as Microsoft does. Icaza trades one set of commercial business ecosystems for another.
To me, the fragmentation of Linux as a platform, the multiple incompatible distros
So he chooses to get his hardware and software from one vendor. Okay thats very neat and simple but he could get it from Canonical as well, or one of the BSD projects.
He could run OSX FROM LINUX under a Virtual Machine. This move is entirely the move of a paid shill. Only a paid shill would actually switch platforms from a superior set of hardware to an inferior set of hardware at a loss. He's going to actually waste money literally on the Apple brand hardware? It makes NO SENSE for someone with his level of computational understand unless he's a shill.
I respect his knowledge and skill, but the man has acted like a shill for Microsoft in the past and he's now acting like a shill for Apple. I can even respect him acting like a shill but does he have to announce it like this? It makes me sick to my stomach to read that.
Or maybe it is because it's against the osx license to run it on non apple hardware. Being the boss of a multimillion dollar company that has a successful product (monotouch) running on ios flaunting a license violation might not be the most sensible and professional thing to do.
Given that MS has tried this type of "marketing" before, I would say it is a safe bet it is not stupidity this time either. Just a complete lack of morals.
Ofcourse aside from the minor detail that your safe bet turned out to be wrong.
Some people start an emacs instance when they come at work, and do everything in it.
And these people need to acquire new skills to stay employed. Emacs has already grown so large that eventually it will achieve sentience and be capable of performing any work that can be done within its buffers.
I think the main reason MS does both things is because there are going to be many excellent apps that will only work with js libraries and touch. Making it easy to port those additional apps to the windows platform (pc,tablet,phone) is just sensible.
Slashdot Mirror
Probably won't be able to disable SecureBoot. That's what makes it better!
If it is a certified for Windows 8 x86 machine then it MUST be possible to disable SecureBoot. But you probably already knew that.
It's not Linux's fault that the developers of Final Cut Pro and Lightroom specifically chose *not* to support Linux. It is also not Linux's fault that both Apple and Adobe guard and keep their programs' source code secret, so it is impossible for anyone else to compile it for anything other than the operating systems that these two companies choose to compile these programs for themselves.
Why would i care whose "fault" it is?
If you ever asked yourself why concurrency is hard try http://www.spacechemthegame.com/
So the only intelligence services that currently do not want to kill snowden are the US an UK ones. Good thing that he fled to russia where such a thing could never happen. Great thinking!!!
Rather late :)
Your claim, and my argument also, is wrong on following count:
It should be P(H0|significant) != 1 - P(significant|H0)
If you have a sample without real differences you have P(H0|significant = 0) which is the statistic used in the article.
This would result in:
"Yes, I agree. If a p-value of 0.05 actually "means" 1 when evaluated, then any sane frequentist will tell you that things are fucked, since the limiting probability does not match the nominal probability (this is the definition of frequentism)."
Wanted to reply to the parent, sorry.
Johnson found that a P value of 0.05 or less — commonly considered evidence in support of a hypothesis in many fields including social science — still meant that as many as 17–25% of such findings are probably false (PDF).
. Found? Was he unaware that using a threshold of 0.05 means a 20% probability that a finding is a chance result - by definition ?
More interesting, IMO, is that statistical doesn't tell you what the scale of an effect is. There can be a trivial difference between A and B even if the difference is statistically significant. People publish it anyway.
Ofcourse it was found. The 20% are not by definition but a function of the percentage of studies done based on correct/incorrect H1. You could have 0% if you only did studies on correct H1s.
Continuous data is just one possible scientific problem. Most studies are done comparing 2 groups which differ by a categorical variable. There are other forms of regression like ordinal linear regression...
"Yes, I agree. If a p-value of 0.05 actually "means" 0.20 when evaluated, then any sane frequentist will tell you that things are fucked, since the limiting probability does not match the nominal probability (this is the definition of frequentism)."
P(H0|significant) != P(significant|H0)
A Unified development path? Oh please, if MS wanted one, they COULD have made ALL their games available for both their console AND windows AND their phones ALREADY! They don't because MS isn't a company it is a number of departments involved in century old feuds. I know MS isn't centuries old but there departments are sure feuding like their great-great-great grand-daddy's have done.
MS can't do a unified approach because it is not a unified company. Just examine its countless position changes on whether Windows is or is not a gaming platform. In a way MS is even killing itself with it. The only thing I would need windows for is gaming. No windows games? Then I could just as well run Linux or a Mac. In fact, I do run Linux because more and more games are available on Linux or at least Linux friendly.
And no, I don't own a x-box. But smart move MS, make your own platform less relevant. Oh wait, then there is Games for Windows. Oh then it is not. Why do you think Valve is going ahead with Steam OS? Because they like building a OS more then building games? No because they are fucking tired of being depended on a company that is schizophrenic about its own OS.
The only reason valve is building Steam OS is because they are now in direct competition with MS app store.
A modern library implementing dataflow programming is: https://rx.codeplex.com/
The relationship between the actor model and flow based programming is discussed here: http://c2.com/cgi/wiki?ActorsAndFlowBasedProgrammingDiscussion
Personally i like using f# with rx using this wrapper: https://github.com/fsharp/FSharp.Reactive
I see FBP as a generalized form of functional programming where you can, and have to, specify how the expressions are put together temporally.
It gives you the advantage of automatic (in rx you have to specify the scheduler) concurrency but is cumbersome for stuff that is easily expressed in a synchron way (List processing...).
I guess you would want the most coarse grained granularity.
A nice book on FBP is: http://www.jpaulmorrison.com/fbp/ (the first edition is freely available)
As for the idea that FBP is coupled to visual programming and will enable non programmers to write complex programs, well:
Visual programming makes writing programs for easy problems even easier and for complex problems intractable.
And guess what: The easy problems were already easy to begin with!!!
Do we really want corporations decide what laws they should follow?
Do corporations really have, and should they have, a moral compass and responsibility?
If so, which one and how should they operate in different cultures?
If the laws suck then we, the people, have a responsibility to fix it through democratic measures.
I do not think it legitim to condemn an organisation and the people working there for following the law.
Oh, many researchers do know better and there are theoretical models that are quite stringent and have metric properties: ;)
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rasch_model
see also
http://www.amazon.com/Foundations-Measurement-Volume-Representations-Mathematics/dp/0486453146
The problem is that you can then test if your measurement axioms hold and most likely they won't so why do it
replying to undo moderation.
but if you are able to detect if photons are superimposed then you are able to transmit information faster than light violating causality. Or do you mean detecting by trying to communicate with differing keys?
I agree about the need for folks to do a head-check before reacting to something said off-the-cuff, but there's one sticking point... ...why did he use Twitter to verbally horse around with a buddy on such a touchy-assed subject? I mean, there are many, many less public means of doing that.
...
Because people fuck up sometimes?
Seems to me, Humphrey actually put the good of his Country ahead of personal and party gain. This is a far cry from what we've become as a Nation.
Afaik Humphrey didn't expose Nixon because polls told him he would win anyway and that there was no need to steep that low.
And what would the use have been after having lost.
Better to wait for the rematch and use it then.
I can be 95% correct predicting if a somebody is gay: ....
No
No
No
No
You trade one slavery for another. The Cult of Macheads will mod me down, but Apple owns you as much as Microsoft does. Icaza trades one set of commercial business ecosystems for another.
Didn't he change from linux to osx?
To me, the fragmentation of Linux as a platform, the multiple incompatible distros
So he chooses to get his hardware and software from one vendor. Okay thats very neat and simple but he could get it from Canonical as well, or one of the BSD projects.
He could run OSX FROM LINUX under a Virtual Machine. This move is entirely the move of a paid shill. Only a paid shill would actually switch platforms from a superior set of hardware to an inferior set of hardware at a loss. He's going to actually waste money literally on the Apple brand hardware? It makes NO SENSE for someone with his level of computational understand unless he's a shill.
I respect his knowledge and skill, but the man has acted like a shill for Microsoft in the past and he's now acting like a shill for Apple. I can even respect him acting like a shill but does he have to announce it like this? It makes me sick to my stomach to read that.
Or maybe it is because it's against the osx license to run it on non apple hardware.
Being the boss of a multimillion dollar company that has a successful product (monotouch) running on ios flaunting a license violation might not be the most sensible and professional thing to do.
Given that MS has tried this type of "marketing" before, I would say it is a safe bet it is not stupidity this time either. Just a complete lack of morals.
Ofcourse aside from the minor detail that your safe bet turned out to be wrong.
An fascinating article i found some time ago on the cuba missile crisis: http://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/2013/01/the-real-cuban-missile-crisis/309190/?single_page=true
And these people need to acquire new skills to stay employed. Emacs has already grown so large that eventually it will achieve sentience and be capable of performing any work that can be done within its buffers.
But then it will need minions.
I think the main reason MS does both things is because there are going to be many excellent apps that will only work with js libraries and touch. Making it easy to port those additional apps to the windows platform (pc,tablet,phone) is just sensible.
You forgot the next step:
4. and three years later you...