Almost the same story here but in my case there was an almost new notebook with S-video port, lite-on power brick with PS/2 style port (+5V *and* +12V),
and a clueless brother.
I like Carl G. Hempel's take on scientific explanation:
1. Nomological-deductive explanation:
1) At least one scientific law (say pV=nRT)
2) Antecedent conditions (at that moment air temperature was 22degC etc.) -------- 3) Phenomenon/Explanans (Volume of the ball has increased when put to direct sunlight.)
2. Inductive-statistical explanation:
1) In majority of cases if subjects with angina were treated with penicillin then they soon recovered.
2) Grom Hellscream was treated with penicillin. -------- 3) Therefore, Grom Hellscream will probably recover soon from angina.
If one can construct one of these kinds of arguments to explain some phenomena, then his explanation is a scientific one. I don't see how creationism fits in this picture.
Did I said something like that? Thanks for the strawman.
How do you judge whether one should have university diploma or not? To rephrase it, is 8% of the population with uni diploma high percentage or low? And do you think that dilution of anything is always a bad thing? Believe it or not, I think that doubling that percentage could be only a good thing to do. Yes, some people in 8% will bitch and moan but that's pretty much irrelevant and amusing. Very smart people will remain very smart. Smart people will finally get their diplomas.
-s
PS to escape possible ad hominem, I'll get my uni diploma in a year so I'm not in bitter in that regard.
>Life isn't fair. Thats a nice catch-all phrase. And a red-herring at the same time unfortunately. I'm not saying that life is fair.
Yes, we do have excellent scientists, lawyers etc. But every other country has even more of them. And here I mean percentage. As I said in my previous post *only* 8% of citizens have university diploma. In other countries its more than triple that.
As for the constant number of diplomas - you are right, there is no written law regarding that. The problem is the unwritten one existing in the minds of profs. Let's take civil engineering (that's construction of buildings) for example. My home city has about 180K of citizens. 2 or possibly 3 civil engineering firms (can't recall the right term) exist here. Most of the profs work in one. There is no real competition between those firms (I know this first hand). The best interest of the profs is to keep numbers of new engineers very low. That is, to eliminate future competition. Moreover, when students graduate, they usually get a job in one of those firms. The fact that there is a chamber (or society) of civil engineers doesn't help. They are artificially keeping the supply of new engineers low through their profs on colleges. That's a conflict of interest and circulus viciousus. It's the same in any other branch like science, law, medicine and other high paying job.
It's not easy to describe the problem in such a few sentences. You really have to experience it on your own skin to really understand it. I can go on with this but my English doesn't let me go any further.
I live in Portugal and we get a load of imigrants from Ukrania an several other countries of the area, trying to earn some money. They mostly end up in the construction business, but they're all college graduates, management, economy, engineering. And they're well-formed people.
Off course they are. The other 98.9% of people are at home. The lucky and exceptional ones are the ones you're seeing.
Sure. They do that in Croatia all right. 8% of population has university diploma.
It goes like this. Primary and high school are OK, and very small percent has problems with them.
University is a world on its own. On about half of them (science,law,medicine etc.) there is drop-out rate of 70% on the first year alone!
On my college first year started with 90 students of EE. Little less then 30 managed to get to second year. Moreover, on the ship-building study, about 100 students entered the first year. About 5 got their diplomas after 4 (or even more) years. That's really devastating to yourself if you know that you are not in that top bracket. Did I mention that average number of studying is more than 7 years?
Most of the profs say something like this: "You obviously can't solve this (say math) problem. You are better off shoveling new roads or something like that." And they tell it straight in your face with 30+ people watching. At the same time minister of science claims on TV that we have to get more students with university education. He fails to mention that no matter how many students you have on the first year, there is about the const number of diplomas waiting for const number of students.
You are right. You said what I did not in my previous oversimplified post.
Based on a study, 3/4 of American managers understands free time as "relaxation to do their job better afterwards". It's a cultural thing because in UK only 2.3% said something similar. Almost 1/4 of UK managers said that in their free time they want to forget about their job. They want their life to be separated from work like drawers. Managers in the UK work 20h/week less then American managers. American culture demands strong work ethics, individual success and work on yourself, so the work is considered like a tool to reach those goals.
In my Sociology 101 book I found some interesting facts.
When they are at home, blue collar workers don't do anything. They usually watch TV and do small tasks. Thats because their work is so physically hard that they are exhausted when they arrive at home.
White collar workers when at home usually do some hobby unrelated to their actual work. They do some sport or any other hobby.
Managers (or the upper class) usually do the same job when they come home. In a way they do the same job the whole day. That is because their work is not physically demanding so they can work the whole day.
Saying the game is terrible because it lacked resolution at the end is done by those who would have complained between installments of the Lord of the Rings trilogy. It's not a complete series, it's part of a longer story.
You are somewhat right, but people said pretty much the same when Matrix reloaded was released. Revolutions was released year after, and I found resolution at the end somewhat disappointing. So your analogy with LOTR isn't completely valid.
Well, you are familiar with some older photographers who call RAW files negatives simply because of mental inertia. What happens when they die out and are replaced by photographers who never held a true negative in their hands? If you see my point, it would be awkward for younger photographers to call RAWs by the name of negatives. It would also be funny if we would call "a gun" by the name of, say "flaming crossbow".
You are right, there are similarities but IMO the differences are too great:
* a RAW file isn't negative, it doesn't have to be inverted (the main feature of a negative) * If one calls RAW files "negatives", by analogy he is supposed to call "developed" files positives which is ridiculous * film is film and file is file * pc isn't a electronic typewriter, it goes beyond that.
In other words, I think we are better off calling things with their real/objective names then recycling old names.
RAW files are used only *by* professionals and they really *do* know what digital photography is all about; so calling new digital format with archaic/absolete/wrong name which is aimed at professionals doesn't make sense.
"Negative" is only for the older folks who buy point-and-shoot cameras and don't really need DNG/RAW files.
[The Islamic fundamentalists] willingly raise their children to hate non-Muslims so violently that they will strap bombs on themslves to make a statement.
Maybe yes, maybe no. But one thing is certain, if invaders bomb/kill all your innocent family including your 7 years old daughter whose birthday you celebrated yesterday, would you die to avenge them?
Slashdot Mirror
Given the bonuses for good performance, I wonder if HP is going to bill Ms. Fiorina for the apparently poor performance under her leadership?
Of course not. They are giving her 21 million.
from CNNmoney
Ouch!
Almost the same story here but in my case there was
an almost new notebook with S-video port, lite-on
power brick with PS/2 style port (+5V *and* +12V),
and a clueless brother.
But miraculously everything is working just fine.
What's so wrong with PS/2 port?
Can you give me some reasons for that statement?
Sometimes old!=bad.
risk -> religion/faith.
no risk -> no religion/faith.
Compare:
There are numerous examples in real life for this theory.
1997 called, they want their game back.
Thats' Need For Speed Underground 2.
Do yourself a favor and buy National Geographic Magazine from Semptember with the main story:
Global Warming.
The evidence for rapid climate change is here and its very real.
I like Carl G. Hempel's take on scientific explanation:
1. Nomological-deductive explanation:
1) At least one scientific law (say pV=nRT)
2) Antecedent conditions (at that moment air temperature was 22degC etc.)
--------
3) Phenomenon/Explanans (Volume of the ball has increased when put to direct sunlight.)
2. Inductive-statistical explanation:
1) In majority of cases if subjects with angina were treated with penicillin then they soon recovered.
2) Grom Hellscream was treated with penicillin.
--------
3) Therefore, Grom Hellscream will probably recover soon from angina.
If one can construct one of these kinds of arguments to explain some phenomena, then his explanation is a scientific one. I don't see how creationism fits in this picture.
Did I said something like that? Thanks for the strawman.
How do you judge whether one should have university diploma or not? To rephrase it, is 8% of the population with uni diploma high percentage or low? And do you think that dilution of anything is always a bad thing? Believe it or not, I think that doubling that percentage could be only a good thing to do. Yes, some people in 8% will bitch and moan but that's pretty much irrelevant and amusing. Very smart people will remain very smart. Smart people will finally get their diplomas.
-s
PS to escape possible ad hominem, I'll get my uni diploma in a year so I'm not in bitter in that regard.
>Life isn't fair.
Thats a nice catch-all phrase. And a red-herring at the same time unfortunately. I'm not saying that life is fair.
Yes, we do have excellent scientists, lawyers etc. But every other country has even more of them. And here I mean percentage. As I said in my previous post *only* 8% of citizens have university diploma. In other countries its more than triple that.
As for the constant number of diplomas - you are right, there is no written law regarding that. The problem is the unwritten one existing in the minds of profs. Let's take civil engineering (that's construction of buildings) for example. My home city has about 180K of citizens. 2 or possibly 3 civil engineering firms (can't recall the right term) exist here. Most of the profs work in one. There is no real competition between those firms (I know this first hand). The best interest of the profs is to keep numbers of new engineers very low. That is, to eliminate future competition. Moreover, when students graduate, they usually get a job in one of those firms. The fact that there is a chamber (or society) of civil engineers doesn't help. They are artificially keeping the supply of new engineers low through their profs on colleges. That's a conflict of interest and circulus viciousus. It's the same in any other branch like science, law, medicine and other high paying job.
It's not easy to describe the problem in such a few sentences. You really have to experience it on your own skin to really understand it. I can go on with this but my English doesn't let me go any further.
-a
Certanly not.
So you are now seeing "educated" and "uneducated" immigrants. And educated are, well, educated. So what's your point?
Concerning well educated manual workers; let's observe these points, shall we?:
1. Any money earned in a western country is good. Cost of living in Ukraine is low.
2. Surgeon from Ukraine will almost never got the same job in western country.
3. Very strict immigration laws.
These three points easly explain your observation.
I live in Portugal and we get a load of imigrants from Ukrania an several other countries of the area, trying to earn some money. They mostly end up in the construction business, but they're all college graduates, management, economy, engineering. And they're well-formed people.
Off course they are. The other 98.9% of people are at home. The lucky and exceptional ones are the ones you're seeing.
>let the dropouts drop out...
Sure. They do that in Croatia all right. 8% of population has university diploma.
It goes like this. Primary and high school are OK, and very small percent has problems with them.
University is a world on its own. On about half of them (science,law,medicine etc.) there is drop-out rate of 70% on the first year alone!
On my college first year started with 90 students of EE. Little less then 30 managed to get to second year. Moreover, on the ship-building study, about 100 students entered the first year. About 5 got their diplomas after 4 (or even more) years. That's really devastating to yourself if you know that you are not in that top bracket. Did I mention that average number of studying is more than 7 years?
Most of the profs say something like this: "You obviously can't solve this (say math) problem. You are better off shoveling new roads or something like that." And they tell it straight in your face with 30+ people watching. At the same time minister of science claims on TV that we have to get more students with university education. He fails to mention that no matter how many students you have on the first year, there is about the const number of diplomas waiting for const number of students.
And that isn't fair.
You are right. You said what I did not in my previous oversimplified post.
Based on a study, 3/4 of American managers understands free time as "relaxation to do their job better afterwards". It's a cultural thing because in UK only 2.3% said something similar. Almost 1/4 of UK managers said that in their free time they want to forget about their job. They want their life to be separated from work like drawers. Managers in the UK work 20h/week less then American managers. American culture demands strong work ethics, individual success and work on yourself, so the work is considered like a tool to reach those goals.
In my Sociology 101 book I found some interesting facts.
When they are at home, blue collar workers don't do anything. They usually watch TV and do small tasks. Thats because their work is so physically hard that they are exhausted when they arrive at home.
White collar workers when at home usually do some hobby unrelated to their actual work. They do some sport or any other hobby.
Managers (or the upper class) usually do the same job when they come home. In a way they do the same job the whole day. That is because their work is not physically demanding so they can work the whole day.
Saying the game is terrible because it lacked resolution at the end is done by those who would have complained between installments of the Lord of the Rings trilogy. It's not a complete series, it's part of a longer story.
You are somewhat right, but people said pretty much the same when Matrix reloaded was released. Revolutions was released year after, and I found resolution at the end somewhat disappointing. So your analogy with LOTR isn't completely valid.
No it doesn't. It looks really nice.
It's subjective thing you know...
1)He created original trilogy. Those movies are one of the best movies ever.
;)
2)He destroyed it with Special Edition.
3)Then he created three crappy prequels*. (worst movies ever).
And now the conclusion:
Thats helluva lot of determinination and hard work. He deserves it.
* I never saw episode iii, but judging from i and ii, I'm almost certanly right
by Euro NCAP is only at three stars.
Check out the whole "supermini" list.
Well, you are familiar with some older photographers who call RAW files negatives simply because of mental inertia. What happens when they die out and are replaced by photographers who never held a true negative in their hands? If you see my point, it would be awkward for younger photographers to call RAWs by the name of negatives. It would also be funny if we would call "a gun" by the name of, say "flaming crossbow".
You are right, there are similarities but IMO the differences are too great:
* a RAW file isn't negative, it doesn't have to be inverted (the main feature of a negative)
* If one calls RAW files "negatives", by analogy he is supposed to call "developed" files positives which is ridiculous
* film is film and file is file
* pc isn't a electronic typewriter, it goes beyond that.
In other words, I think we are better off calling things with their real/objective names then recycling old names.
RAW files are used only *by* professionals and they really *do* know what digital photography is all about; so calling new digital format with archaic/absolete/wrong name which is aimed at professionals doesn't make sense.
"Negative" is only for the older folks who buy point-and-shoot cameras and don't really need DNG/RAW files.
-s
Who modded this up?
This format is about putting all RAW files under one (DNG) format.
Eg. Nikon has NEF, Canon has CRW, Olympus has xxx, adsf has yyy....
Isn't it better to have one open/standard format which all manufacturers support/endorse?
If you are skeptical read this.
[The Islamic fundamentalists] willingly raise their children to hate non-Muslims so violently that they will strap bombs on themslves to make a statement.
Maybe yes, maybe no. But one thing is certain, if invaders bomb/kill all your innocent family including your 7 years old daughter whose birthday you celebrated yesterday, would you die to avenge them?
I would.