Choose any goddamn thing to start documenting (I use MediaWiki, since everybody seems to have some experience with Wikipedia nowadays, so it's not so jarring).
Job swapping is essential, since you'll never know how good your doco is until you test it.
Choose the best communicator with skillset A, the best communicator with skillset B, and let A do B's job with B watching over, documenting all the way. Swap and repeat.
Do the same thing with all other combinations of skillsets you've got.
Then test again: when A takes a day off, find a B to replace him/her as a stand-in. See how well he does.
If it's not tested, it's useless.
If someone like the NSA knew how, I doubt they would let that information leak without a really, really good reason. And "think of the children" doesn't count in that arena.
I'm really late, so probably noone will read this, but...
Here's what I do:
CDS/DVDs have checksums to catch read errors, but little to no redundancy. RAID has the redundancy, but relies on the HDDs to correctly remember the information. ZFS has both, so it's self healing. Plus, you can ask it to scrub itself on a regular basis to detect errors before they become uncorrectable (I do it weekly)
Offsite clone for obvious reasons (ask your in-laws).
When you upgrade, your drives, just replace the disks with larger models, and ZFS will automatically grow the filesystem to use the extra space. No muss, no fuss.
So the dilemma is: 1) don't pass this bill, US companies continue to censor at the whim of the Chinese government, or 2) pass this bill, and the Chinese government censors US-based information either overbroadly or entirely.
From the text of the bill:
A BILL
To promote freedom of expression on the Internet, to protect United States businesses from coercion to participate in repression by authoritarian foreign governments, and for other purposes.
I don't see how it achieves goal 1 (in both horns of the dilemma, Chinese citizens receive filtered information). I guess you could kind of say it achieves goal 2, in a way The other purposes, I can't speak to, of course.
If the goal really is as narrow as you say, then it'll achieve its goal for US companies (that can't be bribed or otherwise corrupted by the Chinese government, of course). And not much else.
However, you only need to look at the anti-Western and nationalist sentiment that the torch relay protests stirred up, to tell what the long-term consequences of this law will be.
So to the average Chinese resident, services like YouTube will just disappear. Then they'll see a story on the gubmint-run news saying how the West cut off all those sites because they hate the Chinese and don't want them to succeed.
And we're going to convince them otherwise... how again?
I agree that "15% faster than Linux" isn't defendable, but I think the point of the benchmarks was to get a taste of the SMP scalability. pgsql and mysql were just the vehicles to demonstrate it.
Now once the scheduler becomes topology-aware... look out!
I'll tell you what I first thought when I read this:
I read in, I think it was a Steven Pinker book, about studies done on identical twins using the big five personality traits. What he said was that on the big five, identical twins raised together were roughly 50% similar, and identical twins raised apart were... roughly 50% similar. So when it comes to nature/nurture on the big five, you get 50% genetics, maybe 1-2% environment, the rest comes from ?????.
As you say, those numbers are probably based on the assumption of the genetic code being exactly the same, so those numbers can't represent reality as we know it now. But I'll be interested to see how the numbers fall out after the variance in twins' sequences is factored in. I would guess that it's the explanation for some of the ????? above, but how much?
The story reminds me of my first paid-for job, in 1993. I worked for a company that had customers still running on PDP-11/73's with RSTS/E (1993!). I had coworkers giving me shit because I didn't know COBOL. Sometime later, they needed to get their VAXen with VMS integrated into a TCP/IP Unix environment, and all that C and FreeBSD I had done in school started saving their asses.
Ah do decla-uh, Miss Daisy Mae, Ah believe Ah have found the solution to our impendin' labor shortage here on Daddy's plantation. Allow me to elaborate:
First, when I say faith, I'm using the definition "belief that is not based on proof".
Now... The one thing and the other thing you see in your example above are constructs of your mind. Apples don't exist except as we apply the concept of "apple" to a collection of electrons, protons, neutrons, etc. So your proof above amounts to saying one mental construct in your head "1+1=2" agrees with another set of mental constructs in your head "apple apple == apple apple". You're self consistent. Woo hoo. "black == green && green != white therefore black != white" is self consistent, too.
Your example doesn't even touch the zero construct, which is hard to say is empirical since there doesn't appear to be a true void in this universe. What, zero seems obvious to you? It actually has a checkered history of acceptance (see Wikpiedia): "Records show that the ancient Greeks seemed unsure about the status of zero as a number: they asked themselves "How can nothing be something?", leading to philosophical and, by the Medieval period, religious arguments about the nature and existence of zero and the vacuum."
How long did it take for imaginary numbers to become accepted because they seemed to have no touch with reality? (ans: approx. 200 years, but still better than zero's fate). I wouldn't say math is pioneering in taking things on faith, but the usefulness of math has always overridden empirical concerns.
Our concept of math is guided and informed by experience, but it is independent of it. We happen to live in a space that is pretty Euclidean locally. So when we measure a circle's circumference and its diameter and take the ratio, it comes pretty close to pi. If we lived in a highly curved space, that ratio would have a different value. Possibly much different. But that wouldn't affect the value of pi. Pi is completely independent, and no amount of empirical data will ever convince a mathematician to give it a different value. To a mathematician, pi is beyond material concerns. Sound kinda religious?
In closing, I'll just quote Albert Einstein: "How can it be that mathematics, being after all product of human thought which is independent of experience, is so admirably appropriate to the objects of reality?" He didn't know the answer to that question, but he had faith (probably blind faith) that math would lead the way for him.
Logic is a system of rules which let you take truths (which may be axioms or derived truths) and manipulate them into (i.e., derive) other truths.
Faith is those axioms.
Maybe I have an overly broad definition of faith.
But as far as I know, there is no proof that 1+1=2 without including some definitions first like 1 is successor to 0 and 2 is successor to 1 (and we take 0 as an assumption).
My understanding is that the definitions of 0, 1, and 2 are outside of the framework of number theory, and hence illogical. They are taken on faith, with the assumption that it will be beneficial to have made these assumptions down the line. Just like most religions. I can't think of any major religions that promise, "Just stick with us, and when you die you'll say to yourself 'What a fucking waste of time that was'". Even the Church of the Subgenius offers camaraderie!
Slashdot Mirror
Or any changing needs of its own.
those pesky minarets! Yeppers!
Choose any goddamn thing to start documenting (I use MediaWiki, since everybody seems to have some experience with Wikipedia nowadays, so it's not so jarring). Job swapping is essential, since you'll never know how good your doco is until you test it. Choose the best communicator with skillset A, the best communicator with skillset B, and let A do B's job with B watching over, documenting all the way. Swap and repeat. Do the same thing with all other combinations of skillsets you've got. Then test again: when A takes a day off, find a B to replace him/her as a stand-in. See how well he does. If it's not tested, it's useless.
I think they're pictures of the MCP from Tron.
or that they aren't open to people at that level
If someone like the NSA knew how, I doubt they would let that information leak without a really, really good reason. And "think of the children" doesn't count in that arena.
which is nice.
At least, it's good to know. :)
That clearly depends on its tensile strength.
Sexually uninhibited: Priceless.
Actually, as I look around, that may not be correct.
Amend my original post!
IIRC, suicide is a special case of homicide.
Probably because you don't get a practice round.
Imagine a world where all deaths are either by tragic accident or homicide...
Here's what I do:
CDS/DVDs have checksums to catch read errors, but little to no redundancy. RAID has the redundancy, but relies on the HDDs to correctly remember the information. ZFS has both, so it's self healing. Plus, you can ask it to scrub itself on a regular basis to detect errors before they become uncorrectable (I do it weekly)
Offsite clone for obvious reasons (ask your in-laws).
When you upgrade, your drives, just replace the disks with larger models, and ZFS will automatically grow the filesystem to use the extra space. No muss, no fuss.
Good luck!
What kind of punch, and what kind of pie?
That said, I don't know what else to do.
From the text of the bill:
I don't see how it achieves goal 1 (in both horns of the dilemma, Chinese citizens receive filtered information). I guess you could kind of say it achieves goal 2, in a way The other purposes, I can't speak to, of course.
If the goal really is as narrow as you say, then it'll achieve its goal for US companies (that can't be bribed or otherwise corrupted by the Chinese government, of course). And not much else.
However, you only need to look at the anti-Western and nationalist sentiment that the torch relay protests stirred up, to tell what the long-term consequences of this law will be.
So to the average Chinese resident, services like YouTube will just disappear. Then they'll see a story on the gubmint-run news saying how the West cut off all those sites because they hate the Chinese and don't want them to succeed. And we're going to convince them otherwise... how again?
I agree that "15% faster than Linux" isn't defendable, but I think the point of the benchmarks was to get a taste of the SMP scalability. pgsql and mysql were just the vehicles to demonstrate it.
Now once the scheduler becomes topology-aware... look out!
I'll tell you what I first thought when I read this:
I read in, I think it was a Steven Pinker book, about studies done on identical twins using the big five personality traits. What he said was that on the big five, identical twins raised together were roughly 50% similar, and identical twins raised apart were... roughly 50% similar. So when it comes to nature/nurture on the big five, you get 50% genetics, maybe 1-2% environment, the rest comes from ?????.
As you say, those numbers are probably based on the assumption of the genetic code being exactly the same, so those numbers can't represent reality as we know it now. But I'll be interested to see how the numbers fall out after the variance in twins' sequences is factored in. I would guess that it's the explanation for some of the ????? above, but how much?
Heh!
The story reminds me of my first paid-for job, in 1993. I worked for a company that had customers still running on PDP-11/73's with RSTS/E (1993!). I had coworkers giving me shit because I didn't know COBOL. Sometime later, they needed to get their VAXen with VMS integrated into a TCP/IP Unix environment, and all that C and FreeBSD I had done in school started saving their asses.
Ignorance, regrettably, is relative.
Core stack? What the heck's a core stack? Does that mean get a backtrace out of a core dump?
Heh. If you're just going to dismiss Einstein, then you obviously have no interest in trying to understand my argument. I quit. You win, dude.
Dinner got in the way of my reply, sorry.
First, when I say faith, I'm using the definition "belief that is not based on proof".
Now... The one thing and the other thing you see in your example above are constructs of your mind. Apples don't exist except as we apply the concept of "apple" to a collection of electrons, protons, neutrons, etc. So your proof above amounts to saying one mental construct in your head "1+1=2" agrees with another set of mental constructs in your head "apple apple == apple apple". You're self consistent. Woo hoo. "black == green && green != white therefore black != white" is self consistent, too.
Your example doesn't even touch the zero construct, which is hard to say is empirical since there doesn't appear to be a true void in this universe. What, zero seems obvious to you? It actually has a checkered history of acceptance (see Wikpiedia): "Records show that the ancient Greeks seemed unsure about the status of zero as a number: they asked themselves "How can nothing be something?", leading to philosophical and, by the Medieval period, religious arguments about the nature and existence of zero and the vacuum."
How long did it take for imaginary numbers to become accepted because they seemed to have no touch with reality? (ans: approx. 200 years, but still better than zero's fate). I wouldn't say math is pioneering in taking things on faith, but the usefulness of math has always overridden empirical concerns.
Our concept of math is guided and informed by experience, but it is independent of it. We happen to live in a space that is pretty Euclidean locally. So when we measure a circle's circumference and its diameter and take the ratio, it comes pretty close to pi. If we lived in a highly curved space, that ratio would have a different value. Possibly much different. But that wouldn't affect the value of pi. Pi is completely independent, and no amount of empirical data will ever convince a mathematician to give it a different value. To a mathematician, pi is beyond material concerns. Sound kinda religious?
In closing, I'll just quote Albert Einstein: "How can it be that mathematics, being after all product of human thought which is independent of experience, is so admirably appropriate to the objects of reality?" He didn't know the answer to that question, but he had faith (probably blind faith) that math would lead the way for him.
Reconcile?
Logic is a system of rules which let you take truths (which may be axioms or derived truths) and manipulate them into (i.e., derive) other truths.
Faith is those axioms.
Maybe I have an overly broad definition of faith.
But as far as I know, there is no proof that 1+1=2 without including some definitions first like 1 is successor to 0 and 2 is successor to 1 (and we take 0 as an assumption).
My understanding is that the definitions of 0, 1, and 2 are outside of the framework of number theory, and hence illogical. They are taken on faith, with the assumption that it will be beneficial to have made these assumptions down the line. Just like most religions. I can't think of any major religions that promise, "Just stick with us, and when you die you'll say to yourself 'What a fucking waste of time that was'". Even the Church of the Subgenius offers camaraderie!
Figure out how Brits can stand Marmite.