You could probably get the same results with a little time management and hard-work. However nowadays there is the prominent attitude that you don't have to work hard for a long amount of time to get the results you want. So they pop some pills and study for 10 hours straight to ace a test. However of course they forget 75% of it the next day. Instead you could study a little bit everyday for a month straight and remember 90% of it.
This is why less and less credence is being given to a standard BA. Maybe it's time to rethink Standardized Testing.
Will they all practice packet discrimination? I doubt it.
Why do you assume business will act against its own self-interest. I quote Edward Whitacre, CEO of AT&T Inc.
They don't have any fiber out there. They don't have any wires. They don't have anything. They use my lines for free - and that's bull. For a Google or a Yahoo! or a Vonage or anybody to expect to use these pipes for free is nuts!
You can say that this breaks the "spirit of the internet", but some packet discrimination is essential when routers have to choose which packets to forward first, especially when some traffic should be low-latency, other high-bandwidth, other low-priority. I agree that the best solution is for the end-users to pay for their traffic, not the solution provider, but again -- it's the ISP's infrastructure and they can choose their own business model.
Net Neutrality is not about eliminating QoS. It's about eliminating unfair use of QoS based on dst and src.
It would be fair if as a customer I could go to another dry-cleaner maybe one that gives discounts to the brand of clothing I prefer. However if you have only 2 dry-cleaners in town and 20 different brands of clothing, you see how the dry-cleaners are using their monopoly to an unfair advantage. Wtf were we talking about again?
Is it fair to charge people more for dry-cleaning if they don't own your brand of clothing?
That's the problem, the telecoms wan't to become content providers. Instead of allowing a fair playing field they want to tilt it towards the content they will provide. Maybe I don't want to use Verizon's search-engine, why should I in the end-result pay to use their competitor?
It's not tiered based on content. That's the whole crux of this dilemma. You as a content-provider could pay for the appropriate bandwidth allocation and still not reach efficient delivery because you did not pay individual ISPs to "QoS" your content. Also as a customer you could pay for the appropriate bandwidth but not be able to reach efficient delivery from a content-provider because they did not pay your ISP. It adds a whole another dimension to tiered service.
All changes in behavior are equivalent to changes in brain chemistry. Therefore all addictions are chemical.
However I think the chemical addiction you refer to is where a person is addicted to a foreign chemical substance. Yet the only difference between addiction to a foreign substance and a foreign stimuli is the external contributing factor which changes brain chemistry. The root of addiction lies in the change of brain chemistry.
Heroin is addictive because of the change in brain chemistry that results from adding heroin into your system. The same could be said for external stimuli, like video games. The external stimulation results in a change in brain chemistry. This change is what is addictive, not the substance or stimuli itself.
Too late. The Markey ammendment to add net neutrality provisions to HR 5252 already failed. The motions to recommit the bill (which means send back to committee) failed too. That pretty much means it is going to pass. The margin of victory was about 100. Unless you can convice 100 representatives in 24 hours, it is going to pass.
The only hope now is the Senate blocks it or votes down their similar bill. And that the Net Neutrality bill is passed in the House. However if they voted down the Markey amendment, it doesn't look so good.
A 3-manifold is a 3 dimensional object. A 3-sphere is a 3-manifold in a 4-space. A "typical" sphere is a 2-manifold in a 3-space.
The generalized PC says every simply-connected closed n-manifold is homeomorphic to a n-sphere. The unproven case and the original conjecture was n=3. Actually n=2 had been proven a long time ago.
Actually Perelman did prove it. The thing is he doesn't really care about the Millennium Prize. So he wasn't too concerned about those who were unable to see the proof fall out. These Chinese mathematicians just did a more lucid proof. Without Perelman's work there would no "other" proof. He solved the major problems and completed Hamilton's work on Ricci flow. In a historic sense Perelman will be the major figure while Huaidong and Xiping will be mere footnotes.
Many believe he did prove it. It was just his work was so difficult to fully understand. These Chinese mathematicians it appears just gave a more detailed account and thus easier to see how the proof "falls out".
In topology spheres are identical to cubes and pyramids. However spheres are not identical to doughnuts. What PC says is that spheres are the only class of objects that are not doughnut-like (has holes). This seems trivial and obvious to most of us however to prove it is really hard. What it shows is that there is something fundamental and important about the sphere-like class of objects. It also says something important about space itself.
I thought the general consesus was that Perelman had proved Thurston's geometrization conjecture. If this proof by Zhu Xiping and Cao Huaidong is correct it must be a rephrasing of Perelman's work. Perelman is credited with making the major theoretical advances in order for any such proof. Basically he did most of the heavy lifting while these Chinese mathematicians basically dotted the i's and crossed the t's.
The proof is 300 pages but I would guess the majority of it is an overview of Perelman's extension of Hamiltion's Ricci Flow.
Is by far one of my favorite blogs. A blog that actually has people who know what they talking about giving analysis on important subjects. Are there more blogs like this?
If you work for the government and you witness or have indirect evidence of wrongdoing on the government's part, do not report it to your boss. He will most likely either fire you or demote you. Rather resign in protest then leak whatever information you have to the press. Or be quiet and pretend like nothing is happening. I have a feeling most people will pick the latter. In essence this will discourage most people from speaking up when they feel something illegal is going on in the government.
There is a lurking presupposition to your claims. Mainly that killing is a cathartic and satisfactory experience. And therefore the simulation of killing is also cathartic and rewarding.
There is a difference between fantasy and reality. In fantasy we can create a victimless crime. In such the person to kill is not human but an automaton without real human feelings and emotions. This makes simulated violence easy to partake in and to receive positive feelings from.
However in reality, you kill actual human beings. These people have feelings and family members and through human interaction we empathize with them. This makes murder a somewhat empty experience. The murderer is often racked with guilt and shame.
In war there is a dehumanizing effort by soldiers on their enemies. This becomes a self-defense mechanism in order to partake in murder without guilt. They almost create a fantasy like realm where they are not killing humans but automatons. This is not always a conscious effort but an unconscious one.
The effects of war on the soldier can be devastating. When they rotate back into the world they tend to have problems readjusting. The damage done to many soldiers psyche can be debilitating. The idea that violence is somewhat natural to human beings is true. However is not true to say violence and murder can have no negative effects on the actors.
I think we could see a somewhat indie appearance through the use of Virtual Consoles. Geometry Wars was a big hit even though it did come from a major "game studio". If there could be some sort of open market for Virtual Consoles, like the development kit is free or relatively cheap and game makers get a certain cut of the profits perhaps 50%. That would definitely lead to some interesting games.
I don't know what kind of high school you went to but in mine the school population was segmented into groups according to academic achievement (grades). With the more well-off white and asian kids in the higher levels and the poor minorities in the lower ones. That doesn't sound very "politically correct" to me.
Actually those in the lower levels tended to fail over and over again. That created a major problem of over-population. So the lower levels received less teaching one-on-one (who also happened to need it the most) because of the immensive class sizes. Eventually the school would either expel these students or just give them a diploma. Making it possible for someone who can not even read to graduate high school.
And I mean this wasn't like the 1970s or anything... this was late 1990s.
Here is a online NewsHour story about FIRST founded by Dean Kamen. An excerpt..
DEAN KAMEN: In this country, we have kids who think what they want to excel at is football or basketball, what they want to do with their time is the entertainment industry, and I think the balance is so distorted that it literally leaves our country at the risk of losing its position in leadership, in technology.
And, as a consequence of that, we will lose our position of leadership in quality of life, standard of living, security, health care, and all of the other things that Americans somehow take for granted. And we've got to change kids' attitudes fast.
You know why not just make bandwidth a commodity like everything else. Let the market decide how much a GB is worth. Then charge everyone the market price of a GB of data.
Honestly I wouldn't mind giving the telecoms $10 billion dollars or so to invest in capacity. Bring in some third party to validate the usage of this money so the telecoms don't try to line their pockets. The government doesn't mind handing out huge subsidies to oil companies when the they don't build refineries and are having record profits.
I mean if the money goes towards improving the broadband infrastucture within the United States, that seems like money well spent. Much better than the various other crap the US government funds.
Saul Kripke who is a logician and a philosopher made major discoveries in Modal Logic which is actively being researched by computer scientists. But Kripke also did important work derived from his work in modal logic which was philosophical in nature. Such as philosophy of mind, metaphysics of necessity and an argument against private language (Kripkenstein).
We can utilize a Kripkean account (possible-world semantics) to analyze what the name "chicken" means. The name "chicken" points to a specific kind of animal in every possible-world where this animal exists.
Introduce the identity statement "chicken is X" where X would be equivalent to chicken and therefore points out a chicken in every possible-world where chickens exist. Normally we take X to be certain essential characteristics that distinctly point out a chicken. We know from Genetics that essential characteristics that distinctly differentiate an animal species and sub-species can be reduced to a DNA sequence. Therefore X means a DNA sequence that points out every chicken in possible-worlds where chickens exist.
The app does not "run under wine". It links against WineLib. Big sh*t.
In this fashion it is absolutely no different than if the app linked to GTK or QT to release a "native" version. It is native. It is compiled for and runs under Linux without any API emulators or ABI interfaces required. That is the definition of a native application.
Actually... from this post on the Wine devel mailing list
Many people assume that when porting a Windows app to Linux using Wine, the best thing to do is link Winelib into the application to create a native Linux application. Not so! It's just as effective, and a heck of a lot easier, to run the same binary on both Windows and Wine. So that's what the Picasa team did. Picasa for Linux uses slightly different text messages, but the.exe file is identical for both Windows and Linux.
Can anyone confirm that the Windows and Linux binary are identical? If true it should be read as Google pays Codeweavers to fix Wine to run Picasa. Which I guess is still a good thing.
Slashdot Mirror
You could probably get the same results with a little time management and hard-work. However nowadays there is the prominent attitude that you don't have to work hard for a long amount of time to get the results you want. So they pop some pills and study for 10 hours straight to ace a test. However of course they forget 75% of it the next day. Instead you could study a little bit everyday for a month straight and remember 90% of it.
This is why less and less credence is being given to a standard BA. Maybe it's time to rethink Standardized Testing.
Why do you assume business will act against its own self-interest. I quote Edward Whitacre, CEO of AT&T Inc. You can say that this breaks the "spirit of the internet", but some packet discrimination is essential when routers have to choose which packets to forward first, especially when some traffic should be low-latency, other high-bandwidth, other low-priority. I agree that the best solution is for the end-users to pay for their traffic, not the solution provider, but again -- it's the ISP's infrastructure and they can choose their own business model.
Net Neutrality is not about eliminating QoS. It's about eliminating unfair use of QoS based on dst and src.
It would be fair if as a customer I could go to another dry-cleaner maybe one that gives discounts to the brand of clothing I prefer. However if you have only 2 dry-cleaners in town and 20 different brands of clothing, you see how the dry-cleaners are using their monopoly to an unfair advantage. Wtf were we talking about again?
Is it fair to charge people more for dry-cleaning if they don't own your brand of clothing?
That's the problem, the telecoms wan't to become content providers. Instead of allowing a fair playing field they want to tilt it towards the content they will provide. Maybe I don't want to use Verizon's search-engine, why should I in the end-result pay to use their competitor?
It's not tiered based on content. That's the whole crux of this dilemma. You as a content-provider could pay for the appropriate bandwidth allocation and still not reach efficient delivery because you did not pay individual ISPs to "QoS" your content. Also as a customer you could pay for the appropriate bandwidth but not be able to reach efficient delivery from a content-provider because they did not pay your ISP. It adds a whole another dimension to tiered service.
All changes in behavior are equivalent to changes in brain chemistry. Therefore all addictions are chemical.
However I think the chemical addiction you refer to is where a person is addicted to a foreign chemical substance. Yet the only difference between addiction to a foreign substance and a foreign stimuli is the external contributing factor which changes brain chemistry. The root of addiction lies in the change of brain chemistry.
Heroin is addictive because of the change in brain chemistry that results from adding heroin into your system. The same could be said for external stimuli, like video games. The external stimulation results in a change in brain chemistry. This change is what is addictive, not the substance or stimuli itself.
Too late. The Markey ammendment to add net neutrality provisions to HR 5252 already failed. The motions to recommit the bill (which means send back to committee) failed too. That pretty much means it is going to pass. The margin of victory was about 100. Unless you can convice 100 representatives in 24 hours, it is going to pass.
The only hope now is the Senate blocks it or votes down their similar bill. And that the Net Neutrality bill is passed in the House. However if they voted down the Markey amendment, it doesn't look so good.
A 3-manifold is a 3 dimensional object. A 3-sphere is a 3-manifold in a 4-space. A "typical" sphere is a 2-manifold in a 3-space.
The generalized PC says every simply-connected closed n-manifold is homeomorphic to a n-sphere. The unproven case and the original conjecture was n=3. Actually n=2 had been proven a long time ago.
Actually Perelman did prove it. The thing is he doesn't really care about the Millennium Prize. So he wasn't too concerned about those who were unable to see the proof fall out. These Chinese mathematicians just did a more lucid proof. Without Perelman's work there would no "other" proof. He solved the major problems and completed Hamilton's work on Ricci flow. In a historic sense Perelman will be the major figure while Huaidong and Xiping will be mere footnotes.
A 3-manifold is a 3D object.
Many believe he did prove it. It was just his work was so difficult to fully understand. These Chinese mathematicians it appears just gave a more detailed account and thus easier to see how the proof "falls out".
In topology spheres are identical to cubes and pyramids. However spheres are not identical to doughnuts. What PC says is that spheres are the only class of objects that are not doughnut-like (has holes). This seems trivial and obvious to most of us however to prove it is really hard. What it shows is that there is something fundamental and important about the sphere-like class of objects. It also says something important about space itself.
I thought the general consesus was that Perelman had proved Thurston's geometrization conjecture. If this proof by Zhu Xiping and Cao Huaidong is correct it must be a rephrasing of Perelman's work. Perelman is credited with making the major theoretical advances in order for any such proof. Basically he did most of the heavy lifting while these Chinese mathematicians basically dotted the i's and crossed the t's.
The proof is 300 pages but I would guess the majority of it is an overview of Perelman's extension of Hamiltion's Ricci Flow.
Is by far one of my favorite blogs. A blog that actually has people who know what they talking about giving analysis on important subjects. Are there more blogs like this?
If you work for the government and you witness or have indirect evidence of wrongdoing on the government's part, do not report it to your boss. He will most likely either fire you or demote you. Rather resign in protest then leak whatever information you have to the press. Or be quiet and pretend like nothing is happening. I have a feeling most people will pick the latter. In essence this will discourage most people from speaking up when they feel something illegal is going on in the government.
Corrupt Government 1 Citizens 0
There is a lurking presupposition to your claims. Mainly that killing is a cathartic and satisfactory experience. And therefore the simulation of killing is also cathartic and rewarding.
There is a difference between fantasy and reality. In fantasy we can create a victimless crime. In such the person to kill is not human but an automaton without real human feelings and emotions. This makes simulated violence easy to partake in and to receive positive feelings from.
However in reality, you kill actual human beings. These people have feelings and family members and through human interaction we empathize with them. This makes murder a somewhat empty experience. The murderer is often racked with guilt and shame.
In war there is a dehumanizing effort by soldiers on their enemies. This becomes a self-defense mechanism in order to partake in murder without guilt. They almost create a fantasy like realm where they are not killing humans but automatons. This is not always a conscious effort but an unconscious one.
The effects of war on the soldier can be devastating. When they rotate back into the world they tend to have problems readjusting. The damage done to many soldiers psyche can be debilitating. The idea that violence is somewhat natural to human beings is true. However is not true to say violence and murder can have no negative effects on the actors.
I think we could see a somewhat indie appearance through the use of Virtual Consoles. Geometry Wars was a big hit even though it did come from a major "game studio". If there could be some sort of open market for Virtual Consoles, like the development kit is free or relatively cheap and game makers get a certain cut of the profits perhaps 50%. That would definitely lead to some interesting games.
I don't know what kind of high school you went to but in mine the school population was segmented into groups according to academic achievement (grades). With the more well-off white and asian kids in the higher levels and the poor minorities in the lower ones. That doesn't sound very "politically correct" to me.
Actually those in the lower levels tended to fail over and over again. That created a major problem of over-population. So the lower levels received less teaching one-on-one (who also happened to need it the most) because of the immensive class sizes. Eventually the school would either expel these students or just give them a diploma. Making it possible for someone who can not even read to graduate high school.
And I mean this wasn't like the 1970s or anything... this was late 1990s.
You know why not just make bandwidth a commodity like everything else. Let the market decide how much a GB is worth. Then charge everyone the market price of a GB of data.
Honestly I wouldn't mind giving the telecoms $10 billion dollars or so to invest in capacity. Bring in some third party to validate the usage of this money so the telecoms don't try to line their pockets. The government doesn't mind handing out huge subsidies to oil companies when the they don't build refineries and are having record profits.
I mean if the money goes towards improving the broadband infrastucture within the United States, that seems like money well spent. Much better than the various other crap the US government funds.
Saul Kripke who is a logician and a philosopher made major discoveries in Modal Logic which is actively being researched by computer scientists. But Kripke also did important work derived from his work in modal logic which was philosophical in nature. Such as philosophy of mind, metaphysics of necessity and an argument against private language (Kripkenstein).
We can utilize a Kripkean account (possible-world semantics) to analyze what the name "chicken" means. The name "chicken" points to a specific kind of animal in every possible-world where this animal exists.
Introduce the identity statement "chicken is X" where X would be equivalent to chicken and therefore points out a chicken in every possible-world where chickens exist. Normally we take X to be certain essential characteristics that distinctly point out a chicken. We know from Genetics that essential characteristics that distinctly differentiate an animal species and sub-species can be reduced to a DNA sequence. Therefore X means a DNA sequence that points out every chicken in possible-worlds where chickens exist.
In this fashion it is absolutely no different than if the app linked to GTK or QT to release a "native" version. It is native. It is compiled for and runs under Linux without any API emulators or ABI interfaces required. That is the definition of a native application.
Actually... from this post on the Wine devel mailing listCan anyone confirm that the Windows and Linux binary are identical? If true it should be read as Google pays Codeweavers to fix Wine to run Picasa. Which I guess is still a good thing.
Don't forget about F-Spot for us GNOME users.