What you want is a makefile that will track the dependencies in the latex documents, and generate.eps files from the figures. There are a few around on the web, but I haven't yet seen a 'does everything' version. What program do you use to generate the.eps ?
Not necessarily: you lose fidelity, that is true, but you don't need to fill in the pixels with solid color;)
There are interesting follow-on questions from this. For example, there are fractal-based algorithms that, instead of pixellating the image, put in some fractal image based on the surrounding area. While it doesn't stand very close scrutiny, it does provide an illusion of detail. Or you could have an artist paint in the missing detail. Are these copyright infringement? I think surely yes, it is certainly a derivative work.
Yeah, you're probably right. I was thinking maybe it had a formal proceedings, but a closer look at the meeting homepage suggests not (I did look earlier, just not very thoroughly).
I was about to write a comment panning this submission, because apparantly a one-paragraph press release - that doesn't give much room for an intelligent discussion - was the only information on this discovery. But I did find an abstract for a talk given at the American Astronomical Society Meeting 209, which was held in January this year.
Authors:
Jee, Myungkook J.; Ford, H. C.; Illingworth, G. D.; White, R. L.; Broadhurst, T. J.; Coe, D. A.; Meurer, G. R.; van der Wel, A.; ACS Science Team
We present a comprehensive mass reconstruction of the z = 0.4 rich galaxy cluster CL0024+17 from Advanced Camera for Surveys data, unifying both strongand weak-lensing constraints. The weak-lensing signal from a dense distribution of background galaxies ( 120 per arcmin^2) across the cluster enables the derivation of a high-resolution parameter-free mass map. The strongly-lensed objects tightly constrain the mass structure of the cluster inner region on an absolute scale, breaking the mass-sheet degeneracy. The mass reconstruction of CL0024+17 obtained in such a way is remarkable. It reveals a ring-like dark matter substructure at r 75" surrounding a soft, dense core at r<50". We interpret this peculiar sub-structure as the result of a high-speed line-of-sight collision of two massive clusters 1-2 Gyr ago. Such an event is also indicated by the cluster bimodal velocity distribution. Our numerical simulation with purely collisionless particles demonstrates that such density ripples can arise by radially expanding, decelerating particles that originally comprised the pre-collision cores. ACS was developed under NASA contract NAS5-32865, and this research was supported by NASA grant NAG5-7697.
Unfortunately I can't find the paper itself. So there is slightly more info, but not much:-(
No, zero is zero, no matter what base you are in. Aside from zero, you need at least one other number, otherwise you don't have a multiplicative identity (ie. '1') and you can't reproduce usual arithmetic. What you have described is closer to base 1. 1 (base 1) = 1, 11 (base 1) = 2, 111 (base 1) = 3,...
Pointing out to Microsoft all these bits of prior art is useless, they already know all about them. Microsoft sold their own version of UNIX in the 80's (Xenix - actually it was a SCO product I think), and the DOS manuals of that era state quite clearly how DOS was evolving towards Unix compatibility with the view to being eventually replaced by Xenix. But it didn't work out that way; instead Microsoft hired some old VMS kernel programmers to write a new kernel, which became Windows NT.
Right, but that is not why Microsoft have the patent. There is no way they would bother trying to enforce it, they wanted it because it gives them one more patent to say "Linux infringes on N+1 Microsoft patents. It isn't legally safe to use Linux."... And then demonstrate how benevolent they are by choosing not to sue you.
Aside: what makes you think 'sudo' dates from 1989? Isn't it more like 30 years' prior art?
The AC that replied is correct: you need an authentication step as well, or you don't know whether you are talking to the person who you thought you were (the alternative is that you are talking to them via some man-in-the-middle).
The only way that I know of to stop these attacks is to have a *trusted* public key of everyone that you want to phone. The only way to get that trust is to verify somehow (perhaps by meeting up with them) that the key you have listed for them is in fact their key.
Actually, for telephone conversations it would even be possible to speak a few digits of the key and see if the person on the other end agrees. You couldn't do this for a text protocol, because it would be trivial for the man-in-the-middle to substitute a different set of digits (ie. the ones that it knows are correct). But in a real-time telephone conversation, it would be pretty hard to substitute (but not impossible!).
Maybe, but it wouldn't be that big a change, the estimated amount of dark matter is way more than the amount of visible matter anyway, needing a little bit more won't make much difference.
I guess you meant 133Mb/s for the IDE bandwidth. And HDD's exceeded that a while ago, 133Mb/s is less than 20 MBytes/sec. SATA drives (even slow ones) do 50MBytes/sec and up.
Right, but you omitted the important stat from your link: their projected energy density is only 60Wh/kg, only half that of a Li-ion battery. Who really cares if the power density is much greater? Ok, so you can get an output of 100kW/kg from your ultracapacitor, but at that rate it will discharge in just over 2 seconds/kg. This is surely useful for some applications, but not for most things we currently use batteries for.
Ok, but even if (although I don't believe this) humans are not a significant cause of increase in temperature, it is still possible that we can take steps to mitigate the effects. That is, can humans take steps to mitigate non-human effects on temperature? Why not?
Just to repeat, I don't actually believe this. If there was any significant difference in solar output (beyond the well-known sunspot cycles etc), then we would know about from direct observation, long before the people observing mars.
Unfortunately, I just lost my mod points by replying to a previous comment in this thread. But this is not a
troll; there are plenty of scientists observing the sun directly, whereas we know bugger all about the weather patterns on mars. If there were significant changes happening to the sun, we would already know about it. Anyway, does the source of global warming actually matter much?
The bottom line is the correlation between greenhouse gases and temperature is well known (you can reproduce it in a simple lab experiment), so does it actually matter, in the end, what the source of warming is, if we aleady know how to prevent it? That is, even if the recent increases in temperature are due to some other cause, we know for sure we could reduce the effect by reducing human output of greenhouse gases (exactly how much we can reduce it by, is another question...).
Its basically a Microsoft WTF. While every sane operating system keeps the hardware clock on universal time (UTC/GMT), Windows keeps the hardware clock on local time. This affects things like the date format stored on disk in the filesystem.
Well, the vast majority of papers are aimed at other experts in the field. How many non-experts have any chance of understanding even a well-written academic paper?
The reason the system has grown into the monstrosity that it is, is precisely because non-experts have no way of distinguishing what is a good paper from what is not.
That is almost entirely wrong. It is true that the current system of evaluating research quality is based on paper counts and citation counts, rather than any real measure of quality (of which there aren't any, at least none that a bean counter could grok). And this tends to encourage people to publish a lot of papers, which are often at best minor advances to the field. But they certainly DO NOT want their publications to be buried: as useful as publications are to the bean counters, a paper that is CITED is always far more useful. To that end, it is much better to have your work disseminated as widely as possible, in the hope that some clueless noob will cite it.
This isn't fishy at all, it is common practice. There are many business that rely on just this - contracting work to add features or even develop projects from scratch under the GPL license. Cygnus (later bought out by redhat, unfortunately) is a famous example.
Slashdot Mirror
What you want is a makefile that will track the dependencies in the latex documents, and generate .eps files from the figures. There are a few around on the web, but I haven't yet seen a 'does everything' version. What program do you use to generate the .eps ?
Umm, what do you think internal combustion engines have air intakes for, if not for sucking up lots of oxygen?
There are interesting follow-on questions from this. For example, there are fractal-based algorithms that, instead of pixellating the image, put in some fractal image based on the surrounding area. While it doesn't stand very close scrutiny, it does provide an illusion of detail. Or you could have an artist paint in the missing detail. Are these copyright infringement? I think surely yes, it is certainly a derivative work.
Dunno about that, you must have weird television channels where you come from.
Yeah, you're probably right. I was thinking maybe it had a formal proceedings, but a closer look at the meeting homepage suggests not (I did look earlier, just not very thoroughly).
I was about to write a comment panning this submission, because apparantly a one-paragraph press release - that doesn't give much room for an intelligent discussion - was the only information on this discovery. But I did find an abstract for a talk given at the American Astronomical Society Meeting 209, which was held in January this year.
Unfortunately I can't find the paper itself. So there is slightly more info, but not much :-(
No, zero is zero, no matter what base you are in. Aside from zero, you need at least one other number, otherwise you don't have a multiplicative identity (ie. '1') and you can't reproduce usual arithmetic. What you have described is closer to base 1. 1 (base 1) = 1, 11 (base 1) = 2, 111 (base 1) = 3, ...
First of all, you have to define what base 0 means. Then I will answer.
That should be 10, base 13,256,278,887,989,457,651,018,865,901,401,704,640 . '1' is '1', no matter what base you are in.
Pointing out to Microsoft all these bits of prior art is useless, they already know all about them. Microsoft sold their own version of UNIX in the 80's (Xenix - actually it was a SCO product I think), and the DOS manuals of that era state quite clearly how DOS was evolving towards Unix compatibility with the view to being eventually replaced by Xenix. But it didn't work out that way; instead Microsoft hired some old VMS kernel programmers to write a new kernel, which became Windows NT.
Right, but that is not why Microsoft have the patent. There is no way they would bother trying to enforce it, they wanted it because it gives them one more patent to say "Linux infringes on N+1 Microsoft patents. It isn't legally safe to use Linux."... And then demonstrate how benevolent they are by choosing not to sue you.
Aside: what makes you think 'sudo' dates from 1989? Isn't it more like 30 years' prior art?
The AC that replied is correct: you need an authentication step as well, or you don't know whether you are talking to the person who you thought you were (the alternative is that you are talking to them via some man-in-the-middle).
The only way that I know of to stop these attacks is to have a *trusted* public key of everyone that you want to phone. The only way to get that trust is to verify somehow (perhaps by meeting up with them) that the key you have listed for them is in fact their key.
Actually, for telephone conversations it would even be possible to speak a few digits of the key and see if the person on the other end agrees. You couldn't do this for a text protocol, because it would be trivial for the man-in-the-middle to substitute a different set of digits (ie. the ones that it knows are correct). But in a real-time telephone conversation, it would be pretty hard to substitute (but not impossible!).
Maybe, but it wouldn't be that big a change, the estimated amount of dark matter is way more than the amount of visible matter anyway, needing a little bit more won't make much difference.
I guess you meant 133Mb/s for the IDE bandwidth. And HDD's exceeded that a while ago, 133Mb/s is less than 20 MBytes/sec. SATA drives (even slow ones) do 50MBytes/sec and up.
Right, but you omitted the important stat from your link: their projected energy density is only 60Wh/kg, only half that of a Li-ion battery. Who really cares if the power density is much greater? Ok, so you can get an output of 100kW/kg from your ultracapacitor, but at that rate it will discharge in just over 2 seconds/kg. This is surely useful for some applications, but not for most things we currently use batteries for.
A living-room form factor? I can see why it failed - how many people would have the room for it?
Why? This is something that is easily measured in a lab experiment. What are you driving at?
Ok, but even if (although I don't believe this) humans are not a significant cause of increase in temperature, it is still possible that we can take steps to mitigate the effects. That is, can humans take steps to mitigate non-human effects on temperature? Why not?
Just to repeat, I don't actually believe this. If there was any significant difference in solar output (beyond the well-known sunspot cycles etc), then we would know about from direct observation, long before the people observing mars.
Unfortunately, I just lost my mod points by replying to a previous comment in this thread. But this is not a troll; there are plenty of scientists observing the sun directly, whereas we know bugger all about the weather patterns on mars. If there were significant changes happening to the sun, we would already know about it. Anyway, does the source of global warming actually matter much?
The bottom line is the correlation between greenhouse gases and temperature is well known (you can reproduce it in a simple lab experiment), so does it actually matter, in the end, what the source of warming is, if we aleady know how to prevent it? That is, even if the recent increases in temperature are due to some other cause, we know for sure we could reduce the effect by reducing human output of greenhouse gases (exactly how much we can reduce it by, is another question...).
The short answer is, no. Come back in a few billion years.
Its basically a Microsoft WTF. While every sane operating system keeps the hardware clock on universal time (UTC/GMT), Windows keeps the hardware clock on local time. This affects things like the date format stored on disk in the filesystem.
Well, the vast majority of papers are aimed at other experts in the field. How many non-experts have any chance of understanding even a well-written academic paper?
The reason the system has grown into the monstrosity that it is, is precisely because non-experts have no way of distinguishing what is a good paper from what is not.
That is almost entirely wrong. It is true that the current system of evaluating research quality is based on paper counts and citation counts, rather than any real measure of quality (of which there aren't any, at least none that a bean counter could grok). And this tends to encourage people to publish a lot of papers, which are often at best minor advances to the field. But they certainly DO NOT want their publications to be buried: as useful as publications are to the bean counters, a paper that is CITED is always far more useful. To that end, it is much better to have your work disseminated as widely as possible, in the hope that some clueless noob will cite it.
In the UK at least, that right no longer exists, at least as pertains to encryption keys.
This isn't fishy at all, it is common practice. There are many business that rely on just this - contracting work to add features or even develop projects from scratch under the GPL license. Cygnus (later bought out by redhat, unfortunately) is a famous example.