Now that this is public knowledge, people can post any hate speech they want. "White men who aren't me suck!", for example. Or "women older than 1 are terrible people!"
Expecting to find positive results at a dilution of 1/1800 is not the homeopathic way. Positive results are diluted by approximately 10^-12 amidst the null results.
It's amusing how the telecoms can, when addressing consumers, really stress how important and amazing it is to have legitimately high bandwidth (e.g. Comcast telling me that I need at least 50 mbits downstream if more than one person lives in my home) and yet, when addressing regulators, say that most people don't need more than 4 mbits. Not surprising, but amusing.
Do they think that regulators don't see their ads?
do what is more interesting to you. You will have more fun, and enjoy it more, and therefore probably be better at it. If/when money becomes an issue, being good at something that you love leaves you well positioned to leverage it to make more money. Being mediocre at something that you don't care much about is unlikely to be very lucrative.
You can get valuable (demonstrable) experience by, for example, contributing to open-source projects. Showing that you're decent at programming is more important for most decent employers than showing that you've got any particular degree.
...whose principles actually seem pretty good to me. But I can imagine that people would start not-quite-graduating from college. Employers would realize that 7/8 of a college degree is almost as valuable as 8/8, and make accommodations for it.
Of course there are ways around this (tax based on the number of classes you took?), but it detracts from the notion's superficial elegance. The ways around this could probably also be gamed.
Please note that many of the "right-wingers" got elected by GERRYMANDERING THEIR DISTRICTS, which is why there's a hefty Republican majority in the House despite the fact that a respectable majority of overall House votes went to Democrats.
The American people are pretty much split right down the middle in terms of ideology (that respectably majority was respectable, not overwhelming). We are overwhelmingly in favor, however, of not shutting down government, of not having a dysfunctional congress, and of not playing childish hostage games with real consequences just to demonstrate displeasure with a passed law.
As they point out in the article, the tremendous bandwidth achieved does not include the logistics or time required to initially copy the data onto SD cards, and then back off of the cards upon reaching the destination. Still, beats a flock of parrots trained in Morse code.
I'm a reasonably savvy internet shopper, capable of looking at newegg, tigerdirect, searching with google, browsing "hot deals" fora at e.g. anandtech, etc... I don't buy a whole lot, but I've found hard drives several times, a video card (Radeon 4890), and a flatscreen TV for less at my local Best Buy than I could anywhere mail-order. Not trying to say they're universally awesome or anything, just saying personally, I've had no reason to complain, and in a non-trivial number of cases they've been the best option (though in all fairness, if I *did* need a cheap keyboard or something, I'd probably rather spend $20 and six minutes going to Best Buy---it's pretty much on my way home from work---rather than $10 and four days and the environmental impact of a personalized shipment to my door from NewEgg)
I guess I'm in the minority, but I've actually got a pretty positive outlook on them. Most of the time, I can find what I'm looking for there, and it's often at a price competitive with the best I can find online. I've had employees range from friendly-but-incompetent to moderately helpful, and never overly pushy. They've always been extremely accommodating about returns, or about refunding me money when they drop the price on something shortly after I buy it.
Maybe my local store is an exception, but if they were gone I would occasionally miss them.
Things like alcohol, tobacco, addictive drugs in general, gambling, sex, shopping, and video games - all these things *DO* chemically alter your brain!
Not because they add external chemicals to your brain (though some of them obviously do) but because they stimulate the release of neurotransmitters. All the activities I mentioned (and, as far as I know, anything that can be addictive) can activate reward centers in the brain. This can lead to addiction - your brain grows used to the release of these neurotransmitters, in their absence you crave their presence, etc...
While video games obviously don't inject chemicals into the body, they can stimulate the release of, for example, dopamine in the ventral tegmental area. Just because it comes from within your body doesn't mean it can't get you addicted.
Yes, I play video games. Yes, I'm a neuroscientist. No, this isn't my specific field, so don't take anything I say as particularly authoritative - I may well have gotten some things wrong.
I really like that the Bible quote that the Abyssinia Baptist Church (at which he is a pastor) has chosen as their tag line is "...my people are destroyed for the lack of knowledge"
http://www.virginiapreachers.com/richard_patrick.html
I'm probably missing something, but you can definitely have a fully-connected planar graph with four nodes. Make a triangle out of three, stick the fourth in the middle of the triangle and connect it out to the other three.
Without a doubt. This game (and its predecessor) have been entertaining me almost daily for the last several years. There's no deeper or more extensible turn-based strategy game that I've ever seen.
Absolute Zero was a great cinematic space combat game from, oh, ten years ago... It had, for its time, a whole lot of options - you could choose which vehicle to use to complete a level, how it was outfitted, etc... It also had several different characters that you could play as. There was one point where you blew up a giant alien mothership thing by crashing into its core (sacrificing that character) - I'm not sure if you had to do it that way, or if I just got tired of shooting at the damn thing, but it was the end of Wassem Bokai.
Lots of fun.
When I'm grading, the burden of communication is on the student. It is each student's job not just to know the answer, but to convince me that he or she knows it. No credit if this doesn't happen.
I used to be a lot more forgiving, but practical issues (stacks of quizzes a foot high) pushed me to reexamine my philosophy.
...but not today. Which climatologist do you think has more of an opportunity for fame and fortune: the one who adds yet another voice to the chorus of tens of thousands that have all pretty much agreed that we're doing very stupid things to the place we live, or the one who demonstrates convincingly that actually everything is okay, our activities really aren't adding an abominable amount of heat energy to the complex system that is our planet's climate, we don't need to worry about anything, and we can go on burning oil and clear-cutting rainforests and commuting alone in our Yukon Denalis?
Hmmm? Which one do you think is going to become famous in the scientific community for showing that we had it all wrong? More to the point, which one is going to receive an essentially infinite amount of funding from the oil, automotive, power-generation, etc. etc. etc. industries?
I think a big part of why things like rediculous and definately bother me is that they don't make any sense given the way words are put together. English obviously isn't a language like some, where you mostly make words by putting together other words, but it definitely incorporates a lot of this.
So, rediculous... diculous again? Like a dicule again? Huh? What's a dicule?
definately... I suppose definite has roots in "define"; so would definate be "sort of defined"? Then "definately" might mean, um, "maybe probably"? I dunno.
The point is, a lot of misspelled words require the reader (at least when the reader reads the way I do) to pause, do some kind of phonetic matching to figure out what real word the written word is supposed to be. It makes reading slower and more difficult. As anyone who doesn't like needless exertion should appreciate, that's no fun.
The company who fought them, and the consultant who helped out, are now in business together protecting other people from these sorts of attacks, making way more money than it cost to fight the attack.
Not only is Kipling correct, but in this case you mention it even made sense from a short-sighted cost/benefit point-of-veiw.
"The second point of interest is the driver support that currently favors Linux."...because some companies are starting to think about fooling around with Linux support? That's supposed to be better than the current support for Windows or Mac?
This has been one of the least-informative posts I've seen on Slashdot. The exposition gives very little information, the links are just "this is a good thing!", the little editorial commentoid is useless, and people are responding without really understanding what's going on.
No, I mean even worse than usual.
But, dig around, and it becomes a little more clear. This proposal aims to prevent the Federal Election Commission from having any power to regulate political advertising on the internet. This means that, contrary to all other advertising media, a candidate or party with deep pockets could spend an unlimited amount to buy opinion online. Think how far $5 million could go to, for example, influence Slashdot.
Is this really a good thing?
You may have to do some review as you go along, but there's really no reason not to do it this way. You'll appreciate the money you've (hopefully) saved up, you'll have a better idea about why you're in school (in terms of what your other options are), and pretty much all the concerns you might have (or at least that I and folks I know had) turn out to be non-issues. It is, from what I've heard, difficult to get into academic research after grad school if you take too much time off, but you're nowhere near making that decision yet.
Slashdot Mirror
Now that this is public knowledge, people can post any hate speech they want. "White men who aren't me suck!", for example. Or "women older than 1 are terrible people!"
Expecting to find positive results at a dilution of 1/1800 is not the homeopathic way. Positive results are diluted by approximately 10^-12 amidst the null results.
It's amusing how the telecoms can, when addressing consumers, really stress how important and amazing it is to have legitimately high bandwidth (e.g. Comcast telling me that I need at least 50 mbits downstream if more than one person lives in my home) and yet, when addressing regulators, say that most people don't need more than 4 mbits. Not surprising, but amusing. Do they think that regulators don't see their ads?
do what is more interesting to you. You will have more fun, and enjoy it more, and therefore probably be better at it. If/when money becomes an issue, being good at something that you love leaves you well positioned to leverage it to make more money. Being mediocre at something that you don't care much about is unlikely to be very lucrative. You can get valuable (demonstrable) experience by, for example, contributing to open-source projects. Showing that you're decent at programming is more important for most decent employers than showing that you've got any particular degree.
...whose principles actually seem pretty good to me. But I can imagine that people would start not-quite-graduating from college. Employers would realize that 7/8 of a college degree is almost as valuable as 8/8, and make accommodations for it. Of course there are ways around this (tax based on the number of classes you took?), but it detracts from the notion's superficial elegance. The ways around this could probably also be gamed.
Please note that many of the "right-wingers" got elected by GERRYMANDERING THEIR DISTRICTS, which is why there's a hefty Republican majority in the House despite the fact that a respectable majority of overall House votes went to Democrats. The American people are pretty much split right down the middle in terms of ideology (that respectably majority was respectable, not overwhelming). We are overwhelmingly in favor, however, of not shutting down government, of not having a dysfunctional congress, and of not playing childish hostage games with real consequences just to demonstrate displeasure with a passed law.
As they point out in the article, the tremendous bandwidth achieved does not include the logistics or time required to initially copy the data onto SD cards, and then back off of the cards upon reaching the destination. Still, beats a flock of parrots trained in Morse code.
Knives are freely and readily available in China. Why did none of the victims fight back and stab the perp?
Temperature, pressure, humidity, all under exquisite control and all potentially extreme.
Reading comments by internet posters about a story discussing bad grammar on the internet is truly delightful, from a certain point of view!
I'm a reasonably savvy internet shopper, capable of looking at newegg, tigerdirect, searching with google, browsing "hot deals" fora at e.g. anandtech, etc... I don't buy a whole lot, but I've found hard drives several times, a video card (Radeon 4890), and a flatscreen TV for less at my local Best Buy than I could anywhere mail-order. Not trying to say they're universally awesome or anything, just saying personally, I've had no reason to complain, and in a non-trivial number of cases they've been the best option (though in all fairness, if I *did* need a cheap keyboard or something, I'd probably rather spend $20 and six minutes going to Best Buy---it's pretty much on my way home from work---rather than $10 and four days and the environmental impact of a personalized shipment to my door from NewEgg)
I guess I'm in the minority, but I've actually got a pretty positive outlook on them. Most of the time, I can find what I'm looking for there, and it's often at a price competitive with the best I can find online. I've had employees range from friendly-but-incompetent to moderately helpful, and never overly pushy. They've always been extremely accommodating about returns, or about refunding me money when they drop the price on something shortly after I buy it. Maybe my local store is an exception, but if they were gone I would occasionally miss them.
Things like alcohol, tobacco, addictive drugs in general, gambling, sex, shopping, and video games - all these things *DO* chemically alter your brain! Not because they add external chemicals to your brain (though some of them obviously do) but because they stimulate the release of neurotransmitters. All the activities I mentioned (and, as far as I know, anything that can be addictive) can activate reward centers in the brain. This can lead to addiction - your brain grows used to the release of these neurotransmitters, in their absence you crave their presence, etc... While video games obviously don't inject chemicals into the body, they can stimulate the release of, for example, dopamine in the ventral tegmental area. Just because it comes from within your body doesn't mean it can't get you addicted. Yes, I play video games. Yes, I'm a neuroscientist. No, this isn't my specific field, so don't take anything I say as particularly authoritative - I may well have gotten some things wrong.
I really like that the Bible quote that the Abyssinia Baptist Church (at which he is a pastor) has chosen as their tag line is "...my people are destroyed for the lack of knowledge" http://www.virginiapreachers.com/richard_patrick.html
I'm probably missing something, but you can definitely have a fully-connected planar graph with four nodes. Make a triangle out of three, stick the fourth in the middle of the triangle and connect it out to the other three.
Without a doubt. This game (and its predecessor) have been entertaining me almost daily for the last several years. There's no deeper or more extensible turn-based strategy game that I've ever seen.
This probably got addressed already, but Apple only provides DRM-free versions of their operating system.
Absolute Zero was a great cinematic space combat game from, oh, ten years ago... It had, for its time, a whole lot of options - you could choose which vehicle to use to complete a level, how it was outfitted, etc... It also had several different characters that you could play as. There was one point where you blew up a giant alien mothership thing by crashing into its core (sacrificing that character) - I'm not sure if you had to do it that way, or if I just got tired of shooting at the damn thing, but it was the end of Wassem Bokai. Lots of fun.
When I'm grading, the burden of communication is on the student. It is each student's job not just to know the answer, but to convince me that he or she knows it. No credit if this doesn't happen.
I used to be a lot more forgiving, but practical issues (stacks of quizzes a foot high) pushed me to reexamine my philosophy.
...but not today. Which climatologist do you think has more of an opportunity for fame and fortune: the one who adds yet another voice to the chorus of tens of thousands that have all pretty much agreed that we're doing very stupid things to the place we live, or the one who demonstrates convincingly that actually everything is okay, our activities really aren't adding an abominable amount of heat energy to the complex system that is our planet's climate, we don't need to worry about anything, and we can go on burning oil and clear-cutting rainforests and commuting alone in our Yukon Denalis? Hmmm? Which one do you think is going to become famous in the scientific community for showing that we had it all wrong? More to the point, which one is going to receive an essentially infinite amount of funding from the oil, automotive, power-generation, etc. etc. etc. industries?
I think a big part of why things like rediculous and definately bother me is that they don't make any sense given the way words are put together. English obviously isn't a language like some, where you mostly make words by putting together other words, but it definitely incorporates a lot of this. So, rediculous... diculous again? Like a dicule again? Huh? What's a dicule? definately... I suppose definite has roots in "define"; so would definate be "sort of defined"? Then "definately" might mean, um, "maybe probably"? I dunno. The point is, a lot of misspelled words require the reader (at least when the reader reads the way I do) to pause, do some kind of phonetic matching to figure out what real word the written word is supposed to be. It makes reading slower and more difficult. As anyone who doesn't like needless exertion should appreciate, that's no fun.
The company who fought them, and the consultant who helped out, are now in business together protecting other people from these sorts of attacks, making way more money than it cost to fight the attack. Not only is Kipling correct, but in this case you mention it even made sense from a short-sighted cost/benefit point-of-veiw.
"The second point of interest is the driver support that currently favors Linux." ...because some companies are starting to think about fooling around with Linux support? That's supposed to be better than the current support for Windows or Mac?
This has been one of the least-informative posts I've seen on Slashdot. The exposition gives very little information, the links are just "this is a good thing!", the little editorial commentoid is useless, and people are responding without really understanding what's going on. No, I mean even worse than usual. But, dig around, and it becomes a little more clear. This proposal aims to prevent the Federal Election Commission from having any power to regulate political advertising on the internet. This means that, contrary to all other advertising media, a candidate or party with deep pockets could spend an unlimited amount to buy opinion online. Think how far $5 million could go to, for example, influence Slashdot. Is this really a good thing?
You may have to do some review as you go along, but there's really no reason not to do it this way. You'll appreciate the money you've (hopefully) saved up, you'll have a better idea about why you're in school (in terms of what your other options are), and pretty much all the concerns you might have (or at least that I and folks I know had) turn out to be non-issues. It is, from what I've heard, difficult to get into academic research after grad school if you take too much time off, but you're nowhere near making that decision yet.