For your information, the LOFAR system also processes data immediately. All the stations are connected with 10Gbit networks to the central processing system in Groningen.
Each LOFAR antenna produces 0.8 Gbyte of data per second. When finallized, the system will consist of about 7000 antenna spread out over about 40 field most of which are in the Netherlands, but about ten of them will be abroad. I understand that each field will perform some preprocessing before the data is send to the central processing unit where it is correlated and further reduced before it being stored and made available for off-line processing. See here for a detailed description.
I do not understand what is so interesting about this. Another dish added to various international VLBI networks. There is also one such dish near Urumqi in China in a very remote area. There are so many of these kind of dishes around the world. Even here in the Netherlands we have one. But we also have LOFAR, which is also capable of producing large amounts of data everyday. This kind of systems usually only operate for short periodes and the data produced are immediately processed and only the results are stored.
Lice are not very good at surviving without food (= blood). Half of them have died within 24 hours. A bedbug would be much better, because they can go for months without food and they are very difficult to get rid off, once you get them in your house.
Dutch astronomer Rudolf le Poole has argued for the same. He said that according to scientifical models, the particles that are most dangerous for the engines have dropped out of the ash cloud in about two days and through mixing the concentrations are quickly reduced. There is a big difference between flying through an ash plume and flying through air that has been deluted with a mixture of vocanic ashes and other products. He also explained that planes also regularly fly through dust clouds caused by deserts all around the world and that these dust clouds have similar levels of partical concentrations.
Some scientist in the Netherlands has stated that the whole problem is overhyped. Yes of course it is dangerous to fly through an ash-cloud within 100 miles from the vulcano, but after some days (and that is what we are talking about) most of the big particles in the cloud have fallen to the earth, and the rest has been deluted to such an extend that there is no acute danger. Planes also regularly fly through other dust clouds (from deserts) and that too is not a reason for planes to be grounded.
It looks like Eyjafjallajökull has stopped producing ashes (at large quantities) now that lava is flowing out vulcano. But its 'Big Sister' Katla could erupt as well. Eyjafjallajökull erupts less often than Katla (which erupts every 40 to 80 years) and in all known cases that Eyjafjallajökull did erupt, Katla did follow. Katla mostly erupt is the fall we the ice layer is the tinnest. Locals believe Katla will erupt soon. In the past days tremours have been detected around Katla and in the past months GPS stations around the vulcan have measured a displacement away from the vulcano. All signs that something is happening beneath Katla.
According to this news announcement Perelman turned down the price offer saying "he had all he wanted." and that "he is not interested in money or fame."
I am very happy that they have awarded the price only to him, although he did meet the requirement that the proof should be published in a peer-reviewed journal. I am very happy that they did not included those two Chinese guys who did write down the proof (about 260 pages) and claimed that they had proven the conjecture. Perelman was very upset by this especially that other mathematics did not raise their voice. I hope that Perelman will accept the price. He said (some years ago) that he would only decide when the offer was made, if he would except the price or not.
I would have wished those where my words. It seems only very little people have the right perspective on space travel, if I see the responses to this comment.
I also doubt whether space colonisation is the answer. If we are still around at that time, we probably have mapped out most of the objects in the Oort cloud and/or build a deflection system for commets that might threat Earth (or possibly some other planets/moons in our solar system that we have inhabited).
Interesting how he put a quiet universe in the middle with two universes coming out in two directions. Some years ago, I got this idea that the arrow of time is different in each location of the universe. Or in other words our 3-dimensional world is actually an expanding 3D-'sphere' in a 4D-space. Of course, I have no idea if this 'model' fits the observations in any way. I just thought it to be an interesting idea. It also means that the time is not going in two directions but in an infinite number of directions.
Most black holes are surrounded by an acceleration and (if the rotation direction of the black hole differs from that of the disk, a recent paper suggests) two jets at the poles. This makes the picture a whole lot less peacefull as given in this simulation. When approaching a black hole you probably die from radiation long before the stretching effect of approaching the event horizon.
This deal was only about the US government being allowed to monitor all money transfers made by SWIFT and had noting to do with any European organisation being allowed to see money transfers inside the US. Please note that the US government was already monitorying all money transfers made by SWIFT secretly before the previous agreement (or the one before that). But as I understood it, there was some (gentlemen's) agreement that the US government would share their finding of terrorist activities after having analyzed the data.
Not at all. I'm not sure what you mean by "values" here (I'll touch on that below), but the strict definition of a functional language is "a language that has functions as first-class values". That's all there is to it.
I would define a functional language a language in which all expressions (including defined functions) have no side effects.
Object oriented to me means the introduction of object identity. Object oriented languages often work with collections of objects, that have references between them. Of course it is possible to define a function that queries a collection of objects, but as soon as you introduces means to alter attributes of objects (including references between them) you get serious problems with definining the semantics of your language, because you are introducing side effects. Side effects have a profound implication on things like execution order, which in a purely functional language should not matter (think about lazy evaluation). The only way you can avoid these problems is to let all your functions work on the whole collection of objects. Which means that if you modify one attribute of an object, the whole collection of objects (closed over objects that reference each other) are modified, implying that all objects are modified that belong to that collection. When you reason like this way about a collection of objects, that collection of objects becomes a value.
But often when people talk about object oriented, that put the objects (and not the 'universe', the collection of objects that they belong to) at the center of their attention. For more of my thought, read the articles The Art of Programming and Object-Oriented Considered Harmful.
It is impossible to combine a object oriented language with a functional language. Functional languages are about values. Values are closed. Values are the opposite of objects. Functional languages could only work on closed collections of objects as a whole, because such a collection would behave as an object. Any attempt to combine the two will lead to very strange and counter intuitive semantics where either one of the two has is seriously damaged. Either you get a functional language (working on collections of objects as a whole) or you get a object oriented language with non-functional semantics. Everybody who claims that functional and object oriented can be joined either does not understand what these words mean or have an alternative interprettation of what of either one of the two terms.
This often very true, even in the area of computer science and math. People who referee article often pass them to their PhD-students if the paper does not have a familiar name as one of the authors. And these PhD-students often haven't a clue what the article is really about. I got the impression that one of my papers was only accepted because it carried the name of a reasonably well-known professor, who didn't have any input on the article except for reading it once. I cannot remember if I did get any useful comments, maybe only the some general suggestions.
A good friend of mine, who published some leading articles in his research area, would often get three response. One of the reviewers would say the the article was very interesting, one would say that its okay, and one reviewer would simply state that the proposed idea had been tried before and didn't work, and that the article should be rejected. But from the comments of the last reviewer gave, it was clear that he hadn't understood the paper and the approach taken was slightly different from the one that was shown not to work. When the papers did get published (because he already had a good publish track-record) they often would be cite a lot after a number of years as being break-through articles.
It is my experience that most medical specialist are more like engineers than scientists. I have noticed that they way they make a diagnoses has many similarities with how I as a software engineer diagnose bugs. It is a process of eliminating the most likely causes until you have found the cause. Medical specialist are usually only interested in fixing the problem and not in understanding the deeper cause or finding a better therapy for a disease. If they cooperate in medical trails it is almost always only as an executor of the trials.
I found some articles related to Transcranial magnetic stimulation and Alzheimer
A search on Transcranial magnetic stimulation and Alzheimer returns many scientifical articles from which I understand that there is some (temporary?) effect. Because MRI makes use of magnetic fields, it is also a form of TMS.
When my wife got an MRI when as part of the process to determine if she had Alzheimer's Disease, which turned out to be the case, she experienced a clearing of her mind during the MRI which lasted for about a day. When I reported this to the neurologist, she frowned upon it. I wonder if anybody has reported this effect, or whether it is even a real effect.
With the progress they have made in the past weeks, and the problems that they had with the broken wheels (two wheels seems not be 'broken' by now), and the fact that the rover is still sinking deeper and deeper, I think I would stop the extraction process and go for getting Spirit survive the winter. It is a pitty for all the energy they invested in trying to find a safe extraction path with a spare rover here on earth, but maybe it is time to expect that the Spirit rover is stuck forever.
There seems to be a huge gap between these kind of academic projects and the commercial available programs. I have come across several commenrcial applications that can do these kind of things, but these applications cost at least a 1000 dollars or even more. And then there are all these academic projects (going on for at least two decades), which present nice video's and papers, and sometimes release some software. But when you look at the software, you discover that you first have to download nine other package and compile the whole thing and what you get is some kind of script you have to run, with all sorts of command line options. But sofar, I have never found an application with a solid interface on the level of the Gimp or Blender for the matter of the fact. I find this rather strange. I am almost getting the impression that some of the results are sold to the developers of the commercial packages.
With a language with so many keywords, there are almost no valid variable names left to be used. The list is way too long. Even scrolling through the list takes some time. To me it seems more than half of the keywords are used in less than 1% of the functions. Finding the right keyword for calling some function is going to take a long time. It seems to me that this is the wrong way to solve the programming problem. I strongly doubt whether the claims that this environment save you money are based on solid facts.
One of the adversized features of ElcomSoft Distributed Password Recovery is that all network communications between password recovery clients and the server are securely encrypted. How is that possible, I wonder.
Slashdot Mirror
For your information, the LOFAR system also processes data immediately. All the stations are connected with 10Gbit networks to the central processing system in Groningen.
Each LOFAR antenna produces 0.8 Gbyte of data per second. When finallized, the system will consist of about 7000 antenna spread out over about 40 field most of which are in the Netherlands, but about ten of them will be abroad. I understand that each field will perform some preprocessing before the data is send to the central processing unit where it is correlated and further reduced before it being stored and made available for off-line processing. See here for a detailed description.
I do not understand what is so interesting about this. Another dish added to various international VLBI networks. There is also one such dish near Urumqi in China in a very remote area. There are so many of these kind of dishes around the world. Even here in the Netherlands we have one. But we also have LOFAR, which is also capable of producing large amounts of data everyday. This kind of systems usually only operate for short periodes and the data produced are immediately processed and only the results are stored.
Lice are not very good at surviving without food (= blood). Half of them have died within 24 hours. A bedbug would be much better, because they can go for months without food and they are very difficult to get rid off, once you get them in your house.
Dutch astronomer Rudolf le Poole has argued for the same. He said that according to scientifical models, the particles that are most dangerous for the engines have dropped out of the ash cloud in about two days and through mixing the concentrations are quickly reduced. There is a big difference between flying through an ash plume and flying through air that has been deluted with a mixture of vocanic ashes and other products. He also explained that planes also regularly fly through dust clouds caused by deserts all around the world and that these dust clouds have similar levels of partical concentrations.
Some scientist in the Netherlands has stated that the whole problem is overhyped. Yes of course it is dangerous to fly through an ash-cloud within 100 miles from the vulcano, but after some days (and that is what we are talking about) most of the big particles in the cloud have fallen to the earth, and the rest has been deluted to such an extend that there is no acute danger. Planes also regularly fly through other dust clouds (from deserts) and that too is not a reason for planes to be grounded.
It looks like Eyjafjallajökull has stopped producing ashes (at large quantities) now that lava is flowing out vulcano. But its 'Big Sister' Katla could erupt as well. Eyjafjallajökull erupts less often than Katla (which erupts every 40 to 80 years) and in all known cases that Eyjafjallajökull did erupt, Katla did follow. Katla mostly erupt is the fall we the ice layer is the tinnest. Locals believe Katla will erupt soon. In the past days tremours have been detected around Katla and in the past months GPS stations around the vulcan have measured a displacement away from the vulcano. All signs that something is happening beneath Katla.
According to this news item he has not made up his mind yet.
According to this news announcement Perelman turned down the price offer saying "he had all he wanted." and that "he is not interested in money or fame."
I am very happy that they have awarded the price only to him, although he did meet the requirement that the proof should be published in a peer-reviewed journal. I am very happy that they did not included those two Chinese guys who did write down the proof (about 260 pages) and claimed that they had proven the conjecture. Perelman was very upset by this especially that other mathematics did not raise their voice. I hope that Perelman will accept the price. He said (some years ago) that he would only decide when the offer was made, if he would except the price or not.
I would have wished those where my words. It seems only very little people have the right perspective on space travel, if I see the responses to this comment.
I also doubt whether space colonisation is the answer. If we are still around at that time, we probably have mapped out most of the objects in the Oort cloud and/or build a deflection system for commets that might threat Earth (or possibly some other planets/moons in our solar system that we have inhabited).
Interesting how he put a quiet universe in the middle with two universes coming out in two directions. Some years ago, I got this idea that the arrow of time is different in each location of the universe. Or in other words our 3-dimensional world is actually an expanding 3D-'sphere' in a 4D-space. Of course, I have no idea if this 'model' fits the observations in any way. I just thought it to be an interesting idea. It also means that the time is not going in two directions but in an infinite number of directions.
Most black holes are surrounded by an acceleration and (if the rotation direction of the black hole differs from that of the disk, a recent paper suggests) two jets at the poles. This makes the picture a whole lot less peacefull as given in this simulation. When approaching a black hole you probably die from radiation long before the stretching effect of approaching the event horizon.
This deal was only about the US government being allowed to monitor all money transfers made by SWIFT and had noting to do with any European organisation being allowed to see money transfers inside the US. Please note that the US government was already monitorying all money transfers made by SWIFT secretly before the previous agreement (or the one before that). But as I understood it, there was some (gentlemen's) agreement that the US government would share their finding of terrorist activities after having analyzed the data.
Not at all. I'm not sure what you mean by "values" here (I'll touch on that below), but the strict definition of a functional language is "a language that has functions as first-class values". That's all there is to it.
I would define a functional language a language in which all expressions (including defined functions) have no side effects.
Object oriented to me means the introduction of object identity. Object oriented languages often work with collections of objects, that have references between them. Of course it is possible to define a function that queries a collection of objects, but as soon as you introduces means to alter attributes of objects (including references between them) you get serious problems with definining the semantics of your language, because you are introducing side effects. Side effects have a profound implication on things like execution order, which in a purely functional language should not matter (think about lazy evaluation). The only way you can avoid these problems is to let all your functions work on the whole collection of objects. Which means that if you modify one attribute of an object, the whole collection of objects (closed over objects that reference each other) are modified, implying that all objects are modified that belong to that collection. When you reason like this way about a collection of objects, that collection of objects becomes a value.
But often when people talk about object oriented, that put the objects (and not the 'universe', the collection of objects that they belong to) at the center of their attention. For more of my thought, read the articles The Art of Programming and Object-Oriented Considered Harmful.
Lisp already had variables. Thus not being purely functional. A pure functional language is a language where the functions do not have side effects.
It is impossible to combine a object oriented language with a functional language. Functional languages are about values. Values are closed. Values are the opposite of objects. Functional languages could only work on closed collections of objects as a whole, because such a collection would behave as an object. Any attempt to combine the two will lead to very strange and counter intuitive semantics where either one of the two has is seriously damaged. Either you get a functional language (working on collections of objects as a whole) or you get a object oriented language with non-functional semantics. Everybody who claims that functional and object oriented can be joined either does not understand what these words mean or have an alternative interprettation of what of either one of the two terms.
It is not unthinkable that Microsoft has some (kind of) agreement with NSA with respect to not fixing these kind of security holes.
This often very true, even in the area of computer science and math. People who referee article often pass them to their PhD-students if the paper does not have a familiar name as one of the authors. And these PhD-students often haven't a clue what the article is really about. I got the impression that one of my papers was only accepted because it carried the name of a reasonably well-known professor, who didn't have any input on the article except for reading it once. I cannot remember if I did get any useful comments, maybe only the some general suggestions.
A good friend of mine, who published some leading articles in his research area, would often get three response. One of the reviewers would say the the article was very interesting, one would say that its okay, and one reviewer would simply state that the proposed idea had been tried before and didn't work, and that the article should be rejected. But from the comments of the last reviewer gave, it was clear that he hadn't understood the paper and the approach taken was slightly different from the one that was shown not to work. When the papers did get published (because he already had a good publish track-record) they often would be cite a lot after a number of years as being break-through articles.
It is my experience that most medical specialist are more like engineers than scientists. I have noticed that they way they make a diagnoses has many similarities with how I as a software engineer diagnose bugs. It is a process of eliminating the most likely causes until you have found the cause. Medical specialist are usually only interested in fixing the problem and not in understanding the deeper cause or finding a better therapy for a disease. If they cooperate in medical trails it is almost always only as an executor of the trials.
I found some articles related to Transcranial magnetic stimulation and Alzheimer
A search on Transcranial magnetic stimulation and Alzheimer returns many scientifical articles from which I understand that there is some (temporary?) effect. Because MRI makes use of magnetic fields, it is also a form of TMS.
When my wife got an MRI when as part of the process to determine if she had Alzheimer's Disease, which turned out to be the case, she experienced a clearing of her mind during the MRI which lasted for about a day. When I reported this to the neurologist, she frowned upon it. I wonder if anybody has reported this effect, or whether it is even a real effect.
With the progress they have made in the past weeks, and the problems that they had with the broken wheels (two wheels seems not be 'broken' by now), and the fact that the rover is still sinking deeper and deeper, I think I would stop the extraction process and go for getting Spirit survive the winter. It is a pitty for all the energy they invested in trying to find a safe extraction path with a spare rover here on earth, but maybe it is time to expect that the Spirit rover is stuck forever.
There seems to be a huge gap between these kind of academic projects and the commercial available programs. I have come across several commenrcial applications that can do these kind of things, but these applications cost at least a 1000 dollars or even more. And then there are all these academic projects (going on for at least two decades), which present nice video's and papers, and sometimes release some software. But when you look at the software, you discover that you first have to download nine other package and compile the whole thing and what you get is some kind of script you have to run, with all sorts of command line options. But sofar, I have never found an application with a solid interface on the level of the Gimp or Blender for the matter of the fact. I find this rather strange. I am almost getting the impression that some of the results are sold to the developers of the commercial packages.
With a language with so many keywords, there are almost no valid variable names left to be used. The list is way too long. Even scrolling through the list takes some time. To me it seems more than half of the keywords are used in less than 1% of the functions. Finding the right keyword for calling some function is going to take a long time. It seems to me that this is the wrong way to solve the programming problem. I strongly doubt whether the claims that this environment save you money are based on solid facts.
But SSL is based on the same kind of encryption methods that the system is aimed at breaking. Hence the word 'secure' no longer applies.
One of the adversized features of ElcomSoft Distributed Password Recovery is that all network communications between password recovery clients and the server are securely encrypted. How is that possible, I wonder.