In Freshman physics, you demonstrated that the net gravitatinoal attraction inside a uniform sphere is zero? Are you sure you did this experimentaly and not just on paper? Maybe the state of Freshman physics has improved since my days, but color me sceptical.
Trickier would be how to tie in remote amozonian tribes. I'm not sure that sufficent time has passed for them to have a fully shared lineage with recent Europeans.
This applies to you as well, or just to other people? That is to say, have you sufferred extreme hardship and as a consequence come to a kind of maturity that others lack? If not, then are you really qualified to wish such things on other people? I've sufferred hardship, but I don't think it gave me maturity so much as compassion. It isn't the sort of thing I'd wish on others.
What's especially amusing to me is that you are rediculing the Guardian without doing any real research of your own; or even reading the article closely.
From TFA (emphasis mine)
Under his theory, published today in the journal Science with Paul Steinhardt at Princeton University in New Jersey
The 2002 paper was an introduction to a cyclical cosmological model. In the time since 2002, the authors have refined the initial idea and worked out some more of the details of the model. The latest paper demostrates that this new model may present an alternative explanation for the difference between early inflation and late inflation. I've read the relevent papers and your question is naive. If you aren't a cosmologist maybe you should stay away from criticising them.
From the article it is clear that this technology is specifically designed to address two of your concerns. Admittedly it helps to have a background in physics in order to understand some of the concepts (particularly the optics.) Firstly, the holographic lens and waveguide have been designed to direct certain ranges of wavelengths to the silicon and the other wavelengths away from it. This helps to prevent overheating of the silicon cells. Secondly, the lens system is there in order to collect more light per area of silicon used. This causes the $/Watt to increase, while the efficiency (Watts converted per Watt theoretically availlable) remains the same (well, in a perfect world, it sounds like this will work significantly better in their second generation.)
Along the same lines. Dvorak doesn't seem to realise that Microsoft is swimming in a sea of cash and does not face zero sum contraints regarding how they spend their developer's time. If MS thought it would make a difference, it could easily hire more developers for Vista rather than switch them over from IE.
I think you mean that marketing is sensible and also that it is necessary. In my experience very few marketing departments are much good at logic; but they tend to be very sensible and necessary (and for that matter effective.) The process of most marketing is more about intuition than it is about statistics; the numbers that float around tend to be poorly defined, poorly measured, used incorrectly and as often as not irrelevent. You can find exceptions, particularly at larger companies with many products. But even then, most of the people in the department are not statisticians and do not have a background which would allow them to take a scientific approach to testing, measuring and optimizing the marketing plan. What's more, such an approach would be extremely wasteful of time and resources and would rarely yield significantly better results.
Let's see:
1) Mother Goose has nothing to do with the Three Little Pigs.
2) The Mother Goose stories started off in the 17th century, so no chain saw.
3) The Three Little Pigs was written in the 19th century, so again no chain saw.
4) And finally, the wolf huffed and puffed and blew the houses down.
Perhaps it is your memory which 'Rules!'
If you had been curious enough to read the article, you'd know that the percentage was based on a particular demographic age range including 150 million persons and that 60 million was 40% of this population. Seriously though, there is no need for you to slit your wrists simply becuase you are part of the apathetic masses.
No, but Republican geeks tend to be very windy. Maybe its the combination of seeing most things in black and white and usually being able to outmaneuver others in a conversation - that's a pretty ugly combination.
So then, he knew what he was talking about. It's kind of like studying Nazi propaganda. Sure it's the Nazi's and they were evil incarnate. But they knew what they were talking about.
The poor probably are getting poorer as individuals. However poor households are getting richer. This is because the women in poor households are working more hours. I'll try to show that this is so, unfortunately the Census Bureau doesn't provide lal the necessary information.
Ok, so working backwards we see that women are earning more on a relative to men in 2001 than they were in 1980. This is due largely to increases in average number of hours worked but also due to better pay equality.
Correspondingly dual earner homes have had a bigger increase in income gains.
Women's workforce participation rate has also increased significantly in this time frame (have to get that stat from DOL.)
The end result is that across quintile HOUSEHOLD income has risen. But is this a real gain if the households are putting more aggregate hours into working for the same money?
And finally, there are important questions as to how meaningful the chained CPI really is. It is a rather rough metric that captures some information about inflation but the increase in income for the lowest quentile is probably well below any meaningful qualitative uncertainty in the chained CPI over that period.
Remind me, I'm a little fuzzy, which of the three forms of irony would that be. Physical, clearly not. Verbal, no that would require intent on my part. Must be dramatic. Well, no that doesn't really qualify either. See there would have to actually be aforementioned cameras watching you as well, then maybe it would qualify. But since the cameras don't exist except in your schizophrenic fantasy, there is no dramatic irony here. I think you mean something else entirely. Perhaps you meant "Lol the extent of my delusions is delicious!"; would that be the expression you were looking for? It would certainly flow better with the sentence that followed it; and it would be illiterative to boot.
Isotope, making us fear isn't a goal in and of itself. Learn the difference between a goal and a strategy. The strategy is a means to an end. Try again, what is their goal? Here's a hint, it has nothing to do with video cameras or our freedoms. Actually let me spell it out. They have many goals, they are pretty fractured ideologically. Some of their goals are various themes on, getting the West out of the Mid East militarily, economically, culterally and politically. Another is to unite the Islamic world under a caliph. And the ultimate goal is to convert the entire world to Islam. Terrorism is primarily aimed at the first combination of affiliated goals. And it actually makes a hell of a lot of sense. See if they can cause us sufficient pain and aingst, then they believe we will decide the Mid East isn't worth the trouble and we will pull out militarily, economically, culterally and politically. It wouldn't be a bad strategy except they are sitting on all that oil we want so we aren't going anywhere, period. Otherwise, it might have worked a long time ago. Notice that causing us to lose freedoms or become an Orwellian society doesn't achieve any of their goals (it actually probably hurts their goals.) So stop saying otherwise. You sound uneducated and naive, which I know that you are not. You've merely been indoctrinated. Which is forgivable, if annoying.
Well since this was a Spitzer suit, I'd guess the relevant question is "how many customers does AOL have in New York?" Now given that we New Yorkers are brighter than average (you can try to deny it, but we elected Eliot as our AG, so that proves my point right there), I think we probably have fewer AOL accounts than the national average. So the 1.5 million settlement might be in the right ball park after all.
As a person riding the subway every day, I have to say that your rhetoric is empty. I for one welcome the subway cameras. Which I consider a terrible waste of money for preventing terrorism. But an excellent use of money for preventing crime in the subways. See, if you lived here, you would know that the MTA has been seriously reducing the number of station agents making the stations, in principle, more dangerous at night. So the added security against real, day-to-day crime comes as a relief. If you do not live here, then why are you so passionate about this. I mean, look I appreciate your concern and all for me, but mind your own business.
Also, please explain to me what it is exactly that the terrorist will have won? What are their goals? Unless you can show me where turning the US into an Orwellian society is explicity one of their goals, then your rhetoric is absurd. Don't be such a fanatic. All fanaticism is the same, right or left. Just a bunch of fools who cannot deal with nuance.
I agree with most of your rant. However, Newton was never even remotely atheistic. 1/3 of all his writings were spent on the subject of theology. Well, as I understand it, mostly biblical numerology.
It doesn't change the analysis. That is all completely irrelevant to the analysis. They have two ways to raise capital. Debt or Equity. The analysis Alex shared is a fairly textbook explanation of why companiers avoid secondary offerings. It tends to look bearish to investors. It has nothing to do with the actual use of proceeds.
Okay, first off, do you really not reallize that the only reason you are reading about this stuff is because Rockstar Games marketing department is paying off (aka PR) news outlets to promote these nutjobs' protest. This is nothing but really cheap promotions for Rockstar Games. Rockstar is using the nutjobs and I think that is great. But don't be fooled and get sucked into thinking this is anything other than a well crafted drama, built for the consumption of the mass audience. Nothing makes the news for free except dead people. Do you really think this little mom and pop protest has the money or know-how to get their protest on the news. Jeez there must be thousands of protest across america every day.
Slashdot Mirror
In Freshman physics, you demonstrated that the net gravitatinoal attraction inside a uniform sphere is zero? Are you sure you did this experimentaly and not just on paper? Maybe the state of Freshman physics has improved since my days, but color me sceptical.
Trickier would be how to tie in remote amozonian tribes. I'm not sure that sufficent time has passed for them to have a fully shared lineage with recent Europeans.
This applies to you as well, or just to other people? That is to say, have you sufferred extreme hardship and as a consequence come to a kind of maturity that others lack? If not, then are you really qualified to wish such things on other people? I've sufferred hardship, but I don't think it gave me maturity so much as compassion. It isn't the sort of thing I'd wish on others.
The 2002 paper was an introduction to a cyclical cosmological model. In the time since 2002, the authors have refined the initial idea and worked out some more of the details of the model. The latest paper demostrates that this new model may present an alternative explanation for the difference between early inflation and late inflation. I've read the relevent papers and your question is naive. If you aren't a cosmologist maybe you should stay away from criticising them.
Yup I was being careless, what you said it what I meant.
From the article it is clear that this technology is specifically designed to address two of your concerns. Admittedly it helps to have a background in physics in order to understand some of the concepts (particularly the optics.) Firstly, the holographic lens and waveguide have been designed to direct certain ranges of wavelengths to the silicon and the other wavelengths away from it. This helps to prevent overheating of the silicon cells. Secondly, the lens system is there in order to collect more light per area of silicon used. This causes the $/Watt to increase, while the efficiency (Watts converted per Watt theoretically availlable) remains the same (well, in a perfect world, it sounds like this will work significantly better in their second generation.)
Along the same lines. Dvorak doesn't seem to realise that Microsoft is swimming in a sea of cash and does not face zero sum contraints regarding how they spend their developer's time. If MS thought it would make a difference, it could easily hire more developers for Vista rather than switch them over from IE.
I think you mean that marketing is sensible and also that it is necessary. In my experience very few marketing departments are much good at logic; but they tend to be very sensible and necessary (and for that matter effective.) The process of most marketing is more about intuition than it is about statistics; the numbers that float around tend to be poorly defined, poorly measured, used incorrectly and as often as not irrelevent. You can find exceptions, particularly at larger companies with many products. But even then, most of the people in the department are not statisticians and do not have a background which would allow them to take a scientific approach to testing, measuring and optimizing the marketing plan. What's more, such an approach would be extremely wasteful of time and resources and would rarely yield significantly better results.
Let's see: 1) Mother Goose has nothing to do with the Three Little Pigs. 2) The Mother Goose stories started off in the 17th century, so no chain saw. 3) The Three Little Pigs was written in the 19th century, so again no chain saw. 4) And finally, the wolf huffed and puffed and blew the houses down. Perhaps it is your memory which 'Rules!'
If you had been curious enough to read the article, you'd know that the percentage was based on a particular demographic age range including 150 million persons and that 60 million was 40% of this population. Seriously though, there is no need for you to slit your wrists simply becuase you are part of the apathetic masses.
I mean, isn't it AMAZING how complex the brain and human body actually is?! That's as good a reason for a deity existing as any.
I think, therefore God exists! Cognito ergo Deus?
I think you are confusing corrupt for dictatorial. Compared to those immediately before and after, Lincoln wasn't very corrupt at all.
Anyone who would choose no limb over a mismatched limb, has bigger problems than the lack of a limb.
You recall incorrectly.
Fruit-bats (mega bats) evolved from micro bats.
Try not to spread incorrect factoids... it isn't cool.
I guess they give mod points to just anyone these days.
Indeed, it seems they will give an account to just about anyone these days. Lovely bit of trolling there my brash libertarian friend.
180 a degrees, eh? Isn't that the rot26 of polarized light. Perhaps you meant 90 degrees.
No, but Republican geeks tend to be very windy. Maybe its the combination of seeing most things in black and white and usually being able to outmaneuver others in a conversation - that's a pretty ugly combination.
So then, he knew what he was talking about. It's kind of like studying Nazi propaganda. Sure it's the Nazi's and they were evil incarnate. But they knew what they were talking about.
The poor probably are getting poorer as individuals. However poor households are getting richer. This is because the women in poor households are working more hours. I'll try to show that this is so, unfortunately the Census Bureau doesn't provide lal the necessary information.
l
t ml
t ml
l
t ml
Mean Household income for the bottom quintile in constant 2001 dollars:
2001 $10,136
1980 $9,122
http://www.census.gov/hhes/income/histinc/h03.htm
Mean household income for single earner households constant in 2003 dollars:
2001 $50,064
1980 $38,043
Mean household income for dual earner households constant in 2003 dollars:
2001 $83,312
1980 $56,299
http://www.census.gov/hhes/income/histinc/h12ar.h
Median income of men in 2003 dollars:
2001 $31,325
1980 $28,241
Median income of women in 2003 dollars:
2001 $17,793
1980 $11,065
http://www.census.gov/hhes/income/histinc/p13ar.h
Ok, so working backwards we see that women are earning more on a relative to men in 2001 than they were in 1980. This is due largely to increases in average number of hours worked but also due to better pay equality.
Correspondingly dual earner homes have had a bigger increase in income gains.
Women's workforce participation rate has also increased significantly in this time frame (have to get that stat from DOL.)
The end result is that across quintile HOUSEHOLD income has risen. But is this a real gain if the households are putting more aggregate hours into working for the same money?
And finally, there are important questions as to how meaningful the chained CPI really is. It is a rather rough metric that captures some information about inflation but the increase in income for the lowest quentile is probably well below any meaningful qualitative uncertainty in the chained CPI over that period.
And finally, some stats on income inequality:
Gini index:
1980 - 0.403
2001 - 0.466
http://www.census.gov/hhes/income/histinc/ie6.htm
Share of aggreate income by lowest quintile:
1980 - 4.3%
2001 - 3.4%
http://www.census.gov/hhes/income/histinc/h02ar.h
Remind me, I'm a little fuzzy, which of the three forms of irony would that be. Physical, clearly not. Verbal, no that would require intent on my part. Must be dramatic. Well, no that doesn't really qualify either. See there would have to actually be aforementioned cameras watching you as well, then maybe it would qualify. But since the cameras don't exist except in your schizophrenic fantasy, there is no dramatic irony here. I think you mean something else entirely. Perhaps you meant "Lol the extent of my delusions is delicious!"; would that be the expression you were looking for? It would certainly flow better with the sentence that followed it; and it would be illiterative to boot.
Isotope, making us fear isn't a goal in and of itself. Learn the difference between a goal and a strategy. The strategy is a means to an end. Try again, what is their goal? Here's a hint, it has nothing to do with video cameras or our freedoms. Actually let me spell it out. They have many goals, they are pretty fractured ideologically. Some of their goals are various themes on, getting the West out of the Mid East militarily, economically, culterally and politically. Another is to unite the Islamic world under a caliph. And the ultimate goal is to convert the entire world to Islam. Terrorism is primarily aimed at the first combination of affiliated goals. And it actually makes a hell of a lot of sense. See if they can cause us sufficient pain and aingst, then they believe we will decide the Mid East isn't worth the trouble and we will pull out militarily, economically, culterally and politically. It wouldn't be a bad strategy except they are sitting on all that oil we want so we aren't going anywhere, period. Otherwise, it might have worked a long time ago. Notice that causing us to lose freedoms or become an Orwellian society doesn't achieve any of their goals (it actually probably hurts their goals.) So stop saying otherwise. You sound uneducated and naive, which I know that you are not. You've merely been indoctrinated. Which is forgivable, if annoying.
Well since this was a Spitzer suit, I'd guess the relevant question is "how many customers does AOL have in New York?" Now given that we New Yorkers are brighter than average (you can try to deny it, but we elected Eliot as our AG, so that proves my point right there), I think we probably have fewer AOL accounts than the national average. So the 1.5 million settlement might be in the right ball park after all.
As a person riding the subway every day, I have to say that your rhetoric is empty. I for one welcome the subway cameras. Which I consider a terrible waste of money for preventing terrorism. But an excellent use of money for preventing crime in the subways. See, if you lived here, you would know that the MTA has been seriously reducing the number of station agents making the stations, in principle, more dangerous at night. So the added security against real, day-to-day crime comes as a relief. If you do not live here, then why are you so passionate about this. I mean, look I appreciate your concern and all for me, but mind your own business.
Also, please explain to me what it is exactly that the terrorist will have won? What are their goals? Unless you can show me where turning the US into an Orwellian society is explicity one of their goals, then your rhetoric is absurd. Don't be such a fanatic. All fanaticism is the same, right or left. Just a bunch of fools who cannot deal with nuance.
I agree with most of your rant. However, Newton was never even remotely atheistic. 1/3 of all his writings were spent on the subject of theology. Well, as I understand it, mostly biblical numerology.
It doesn't change the analysis. That is all completely irrelevant to the analysis. They have two ways to raise capital. Debt or Equity. The analysis Alex shared is a fairly textbook explanation of why companiers avoid secondary offerings. It tends to look bearish to investors. It has nothing to do with the actual use of proceeds.
Okay, first off, do you really not reallize that the only reason you are reading about this stuff is because Rockstar Games marketing department is paying off (aka PR) news outlets to promote these nutjobs' protest. This is nothing but really cheap promotions for Rockstar Games. Rockstar is using the nutjobs and I think that is great. But don't be fooled and get sucked into thinking this is anything other than a well crafted drama, built for the consumption of the mass audience. Nothing makes the news for free except dead people. Do you really think this little mom and pop protest has the money or know-how to get their protest on the news. Jeez there must be thousands of protest across america every day.