About time someone stated the obvious. A corporation exists for one purpose only - to make money for its owners. It does not exist to provide a wonderful experience for its employees (though that may help the bottom line) nor does it exist to engage in any socially noble causes.
It would be nice if the people complaining about shell, exxon, etc all took THEIR MONEY and started THEIR FIRM to make THEIR PRODUCT that OTHER PEOPLE WANTED TO BUY. Go right ahead, nobody is stopping you. Compete. Invest in
these alternative energy sources and bring a profitable product to market.
Though somehow I suspect these same people would rather tax anyone making above $XYZ to finance a government project to figure this all out. After all, we know how good they are at managing large projects, minimizing waste and turning a profit. Surely its worth taking some of that rich guys money to pay for it right?
And thats what all this whining amounts to: THEFT. Whether it is from the shareholder through reduced dividends and shareholder equity or directly through your 1040. Enviroguy wants your money.
then yes, 12MP is enough. You can make a 'good enough' 4x5 or 4x6 print that the average joe will be ok with it, that is assuming they even print it (seperate issue of the coming digital loss of life history).
But when you consider the way the sensors work, pixels are alternating single colors based on a mask. Then in hardware all that is interperolated to generate the 'real' image. So saying 12mp is not the same as what most people think of - that each pixel can record any color and luminosity.
Actually probably more important than low light sensitivity would be a further increase to usable dynamic range so as to prevent hilights from being blasted out and shadows becoming blocky. People still insist on taking photos of images which contain a near impossible dynamic range so this will be way more appreciated than taking pictures of the birthday cake with no flash.
As we saw in 2007 and 2008, the spot price of oil and natural gas are quite capable of rising dramatically when supplies are tight and perception is that they will fail to meet demand. If, as has been proposed for a few decades, we have seen 'peak' oil, this situation will continue. As it does, alternatives become econommically viable and firms will exploit this. None of these technologies with the possible exception of fusion power require a national level of involvement.
The 'economy' didn't hit all these green energy projects, the plummeting price of oil did. Few, if any, of these projectcs are remotely competitive with oil/nat gas under $75 and in many cases still higher - and even with substantial subsidies and tax breaks.
As we saw with ethanol, energy 'policy' is just another boondoggle of lobbyists and special interest groups seeking government funds so they can make some bucks. Wind, solar, clean coal and so on all live off the government teat to one degree or another. Would they even exist without those tax breaks and direct funding?
Obama ran on a certain platform and this includes not only his direct actions (ie, signing an EO) but also goes down to his top cabinet and staff.
Is it too much to expect that the new regime in DC would know what the boss claims to have stood for? They rejected this FOI request using a portion of an EO that most people would view as not aligned with Obama's intents. As the staffer who made this decision - and I'm assuming a "career" employee at the agency in question and not a political appointee - would you risk running afoul of your new boss like this? Or would you bounce it up the line until you had a more authoritative answer?
I don't think its probable this was a case of omission but more likely an intentional act by the Obama administration. The USTR is not a huge agency but it is a very political one. The appropriate action at this point is for the requester to write directly to the US Trade Rep. and request the decision be overturned. If they refuse then it will be clearly a case of the Obama administration running on one thing and doing (or failing to) another.
No, but keep in mind both CERN and Fermilab have giant collaborations with members from all of the world making important contributions.
One of the primary reasons I want Fermilab to find (or rule out) a SM Higgs is so that the community here in the US continutes to get funding. Unlike a lot of other government supported projects, one can't just turn the spigot on and off for physics research. It takes years/decades to train not just theorists but the experimentalists too and those industries which support their technological innovations.
Bill, that is. And yes, its his fault. Check out EO 12958 from 4/17/95:
Section 1.1. Definitions. For purposes of this order:
(a) "National security" means the national defense or foreign relations of the United States. (l) "Damage to the national security" means harm to the national defense or foreign relations of the United States from the unauthorized disclosure of information, to include the sensitivity, value, and utility of that information.
So if the Street were all one way (hypothetically) then the counterparts are the otherway.
The genesis of this debacle lies as much with the buy side - pension funds, mutual funds, etc who were willing to buy anything so long as they got a pickup of 15-25bp over the comparable treasuries. In effect, they asked for this stuff and they got it.
As to VaR - its a great way to model relatively stable markets and to quantify short term risks of a large move based on recent historical returns, volatility and asset correlations. It's not meant to predict trends nor to quantify 'what if the market for X tanks every day for Y months'. Thats what managers and traders are for - to realize there has been some change, perhaps fundamental, which will have a long term negative effect on their positions and to take what action is necessary to reduce that risk. Instead, they froze.
And you are clearly naive if you don't see the very real concern that the police were a) trying to do this and b)believe they wouldn't make every opportunity of getting tapes.
There was nothing wrong with the summary. The police want to get the cameras installed. They tried and they failed.. this time.
for the heck of it I ran the first benchmark listed, Sunspider and got a time of 2475.4 vs their run of 2478.6 - like them I am running XP SP3. But I did this on an ancient AMD Sempron 3000+, not a quad-core Intel Core 2 running at 2.66GHz, with 4GB of RAM. Oh.. and I was playing tunes using Billy.
So either the benchmark is bogus or.. you all have something to look forward to as it seems Firefox 3.1b3pre (Shiretoko) kicks some ass!
ok I've spent a bit more time with this. As I said at the start, I am running in virtualbox, and that seems to be the problem. I got wireshark running and logged what happened when I tried to ping different hosts. When hitting mozilla.org and slashdot.org I was getting back dns server failure messages.
While there werent many notes on this I did see a few related to vbox. I then went in an manually set the dns server to a known good external server instead of whatever vbox dhcp is using and now it resolves.
I grabbed the beta on Sunday and installed in a virtual box last night. It seems to work well enough. Not liking IE, I wanted to download firefox from ftp.mozilla.org. No dice. Same for www.mozilla.org. I then downloaded Opera, no problems. Tried mozilla.org with Opera, again, unavailable. Then tried the ip address of ftp.mozilla.org and was able to connect and download and install firefox. It works fine, excpet as you might have guessed.. can't connect to mozilla.org. All other websites connect no problems.
I've searched around for other reports of this and found none, but its clearly happening to me. My regular desktop session has no problem with any of the mozilla.org sites.
er.. where do you get this stat of 'around 500 papers'? In what field(s)? Over what time period? As an example, Steven Weinberg, a nobel physicist has 211 papers listed in the SPIRES database. He got his PhD in 1957. This is not to say that SPIRES is the all encompassing authority on his published papers, but is is likely to be reasonably close.
Slashdot Mirror
About time someone stated the obvious. A corporation
exists for one purpose only - to make money for its
owners. It does not exist to provide a wonderful
experience for its employees (though that may help the
bottom line) nor does it exist to engage in any socially
noble causes.
It would be nice if the people complaining about shell,
exxon, etc all took THEIR MONEY and started THEIR FIRM to
make THEIR PRODUCT that OTHER PEOPLE WANTED TO BUY. Go
right ahead, nobody is stopping you. Compete. Invest in
these alternative energy sources and bring a profitable
product to market.
Though somehow I suspect these same people would rather
tax anyone making above $XYZ to finance a government
project to figure this all out. After all, we know how
good they are at managing large projects, minimizing waste
and turning a profit. Surely its worth taking some of
that rich guys money to pay for it right?
And thats what all this whining amounts to: THEFT. Whether
it is from the shareholder through reduced dividends and
shareholder equity or directly through your 1040. Enviroguy
wants your money.
then yes, 12MP is enough. You can make a 'good enough' 4x5
or 4x6 print that the average joe will be ok with it, that
is assuming they even print it (seperate issue of the coming
digital loss of life history).
But when you consider the way the sensors work, pixels are
alternating single colors based on a mask. Then in hardware
all that is interperolated to generate the 'real' image. So
saying 12mp is not the same as what most people think of -
that each pixel can record any color and luminosity.
Actually probably more important than low light sensitivity
would be a further increase to usable dynamic range so as
to prevent hilights from being blasted out and shadows
becoming blocky. People still insist on taking photos
of images which contain a near impossible dynamic range so
this will be way more appreciated than taking pictures of
the birthday cake with no flash.
Do you seriously think this was done without any White House knowledge?
And no, that policy shouldn't take ANY TIME to get everyone in line with it. If its a policy directive from the WH then it takes effect IMMEDIATELY.
So we had Bush Apologists and now we have Obama apologists.. conveniently trunctated to Obamapologists.
Stop listening to what he says and look at what he does (or does not).
As we saw in 2007 and 2008, the spot price of oil and natural gas are quite capable of rising dramatically when supplies are tight and perception is that they will fail to meet demand. If, as has been proposed for a few decades, we have seen 'peak' oil, this situation will continue. As it does, alternatives become econommically viable and firms will exploit this. None of these technologies with the possible exception of fusion power require a national level of involvement.
The 'economy' didn't hit all these green energy projects, the plummeting price of oil did. Few, if any, of these projectcs are remotely competitive with oil/nat gas under $75 and in many cases still higher - and even with substantial subsidies and tax breaks.
As we saw with ethanol, energy 'policy' is just another boondoggle of lobbyists and special interest groups seeking government funds so they can make some bucks. Wind, solar, clean coal and so on all live off the government teat to one degree or another. Would they even exist without those tax breaks and direct funding?
Obama ran on a certain platform and this includes not only his direct actions (ie, signing an EO) but also goes down to his top cabinet and staff.
Is it too much to expect that the new regime in DC would know what the boss claims to have stood for? They rejected this FOI request using a portion of an EO that most people would view as not aligned with Obama's intents. As the staffer who made this decision - and I'm assuming a "career" employee at the agency in question and not a political appointee - would you risk running afoul of your new boss like this? Or would you bounce it up the line until you had a more authoritative answer?
I don't think its probable this was a case of omission but more likely an intentional act by the Obama administration. The USTR is not a huge agency but it is a very political one. The appropriate action at this point is for the requester to write directly to the US Trade Rep. and request the decision be overturned. If they refuse then it will be clearly a case of the Obama administration running on one thing and doing (or failing to) another.
No, but keep in mind both CERN and Fermilab have giant collaborations with members from all of the world making important contributions.
One of the primary reasons I want Fermilab to find (or rule out) a SM Higgs is so that the community here in the US continutes to get funding. Unlike a lot of other government supported projects, one can't just turn the spigot on and off for physics research. It takes years/decades to train not just theorists but the experimentalists too and those industries which support their technological innovations.
There is far more to HEP than the Higgs but that is all the popular press cares to focus on or that you seem to pay attention to. Here is just one recent example: http://dorigo.wordpress.com/2009/03/13/cdf-discovers-a-new-hadron/
so? you can redact anything truly of 'security' nature.
oops.. left out:
So Clinton made it a 'national security issue' that we might somehow offend a foreign country ('harm foreign relations')
Great thing to let people hide all types of bad policy behind.
Way to go Obama! Open! Change! Guess amending the EO was too hard.
Bill, that is. And yes, its his fault. Check out EO 12958 from 4/17/95:
Section 1.1. Definitions. For purposes of this order:
(a) "National security" means the national defense or foreign relations of the United States.
(l) "Damage to the national security" means harm to the national defense or foreign relations of the United States from the unauthorized disclosure of information, to include the sensitivity, value, and utility of that information.
this sounds like a peference for high treble... probably related to hearing loss.
no it is not a 'free' quark. it can be produced as tsbar, tdbar or most likley tbbar as opposed to the more common ttbar pair.
it is just not produced as a ttbar pair, rather it is a tdbar, tsbar or more likley tbbar. Just in case the 'single' confuses anyone.
should be available cheap, put on the opera mobile browser
and you are all set to go.
and it was fun to make the operator have to deal with it... of course, nothing was better than shuffling your roommates program deck.
So if the Street were all one way (hypothetically) then the
counterparts are the otherway.
The genesis of this debacle lies as much with the buy side
- pension funds, mutual funds, etc who were willing to buy
anything so long as they got a pickup of 15-25bp over the
comparable treasuries. In effect, they asked for this
stuff and they got it.
As to VaR - its a great way to model relatively stable
markets and to quantify short term risks of a large move
based on recent historical returns, volatility and asset
correlations. It's not meant to predict trends nor to
quantify 'what if the market for X tanks every day for Y
months'. Thats what managers and traders are for - to
realize there has been some change, perhaps fundamental,
which will have a long term negative effect on their
positions and to take what action is necessary to reduce
that risk. Instead, they froze.
And you are clearly naive if you don't see the very real concern that the police were a) trying to do this and b)believe they wouldn't make every opportunity of getting tapes.
There was nothing wrong with the summary. The police want to get the cameras installed. They tried and they failed.. this time.
that has to rank as the all time most annoying monikers ever.
Quantum Diaries Survivor is perhaps the best blog on whats doing at Fermilab, though it is technically inclined, and is done by a member of CDF
for the heck of it I ran the first benchmark listed, Sunspider and got a time of 2475.4 vs their run of 2478.6 - like them I am running XP SP3. But I did this on an ancient AMD Sempron 3000+, not a quad-core Intel Core 2 running at 2.66GHz, with 4GB of RAM. Oh.. and I was playing tunes using Billy.
So either the benchmark is bogus or.. you all have something to look forward to as it seems Firefox 3.1b3pre (Shiretoko) kicks some ass!
ok I've spent a bit more time with this. As I said at the start, I am running in virtualbox, and that seems to be the problem. I got wireshark running and logged what happened when I tried to ping different hosts. When hitting mozilla.org and slashdot.org I was getting back dns server failure messages.
While there werent many notes on this I did see a few related to vbox. I then went in an manually set the dns server to a known good external server instead of whatever vbox dhcp is using and now it resolves.
I grabbed the beta on Sunday and installed in a virtual box last night. It seems to work well enough. Not liking IE, I wanted to download firefox from ftp.mozilla.org. No dice. Same for www.mozilla.org. I then downloaded Opera, no problems. Tried mozilla.org with Opera, again, unavailable. Then tried the ip address of ftp.mozilla.org and was able to connect and download and install firefox. It works fine, excpet as you might have guessed.. can't connect to mozilla.org. All other websites connect no problems.
I've searched around for other reports of this and found none, but its clearly happening to me. My regular desktop session has no problem with any of the mozilla.org sites.
typical of slashdot to jump to conclusions.. think it will get corrected?
I wonder what makes anyone think that this will stop at the UK border?
er.. where do you get this stat of 'around 500 papers'? In what field(s)? Over what time period? As an example, Steven Weinberg, a nobel physicist has 211 papers listed in the SPIRES database. He got his PhD in 1957. This is not to say that SPIRES is the all encompassing authority on his published papers, but is is likely to be reasonably close.