and if we missed 4 legit client emails a day... that would be lost business, and that's just unacceptable no matter how you look at it.
Well... how much money would it take to have the staff necessary to do the filtering manually (at a better rate - even humans are fallible), and how much would the potential business loss cost you? Assuming that the business was very profitable, and that the senders wouldn't call or send a follow-up email of course.
Putting RFID chips on your shoes is nothing new. All of the local races down here use ChampionChip timing, unless they're really small. Have done for years, too. There's a local company, Run-Far who times most of the races as well - you run over mats at the start, finish, and useful places in the middle. Works pretty well.
Well let me tell you a true story in college we were reading Tess of the Durbivills (SP?) and the professor was a big fan of microanalysisation of the book. So we took the hole semester analyzing every paragraph and sometimes every sentence in a chapter. When every little bit has a meaning then the hole point of the major story is loss. Because there is so much depth that the major story lost all meaning.
Hmm. You'd make a better impression - and I wouldn't mention this except that we're discussing college level English courses - if you used the word whole instead of its homonym hole.
Just a pedantic thought. Now we can cue the masses who will undoubtedly point out a typo that I made, keeping the chain alive...
As for your original point, I would say that the kind of analysis that you're talking about can be both useful and enlightening. However, I do agree that it will not help you understand the subject matter - it is useful instead to understand the author's art of writing. Both that kind of analysis and the holistic subjective analysis of the work have their places, although they are often confused, even by teachers.
These are just the ways I've actually had teachers ensure that students read the material. I could probably think of a dozen more if say, oh I don't know...it was MY JOB. What exactly are we paying teachers for if they can't solve this fairly simple problem?
My dad's a professor at UT-D, so I can take a quick stab at this. What you're probably not paying them for is the amount of time it takes to grade all of those papers, to the level that you're requesting. After all, you're talking about the teacher reading, comprehending, and uniquely marking a couple of hundred papers for every one that the student has to do. All of this typically done on their own time. Some teachers may want to dontate their evenings to this kind of project. Others may work for schools that can offer the kind of grading support that they need (although in that case its harder for them to answer the student's questions about comments on their paper, no?). But most are trying to do a reasonable job for a reasonable salary, and still have a life at the end of it. Just like most of us are.
I often found that I understood the work better than classmates who had only read the work. No one has been able to convince me yet that it's somehow more valuable to slug through Nietzsche word by word, one of the most misunderstood philosophers of all time, without at least first getting some idea of what he was saying first.
In a low level class, you may be right. Still, you're never going to get a "+4 Insightful" on any of your papers either - at least, not a legitimate one. Sometimes (although I will concede pretty rarely) going into a work like that without too many preconceived notions will allow you to make a leap of understanding of your own - the difference between being able to pass a test on how to drive a stick, and how to drive one in San Francisco without worrying about it. Of course, that depends if your reason for taking philosophy is to get an understanding, or to get an A. And that's another discussion entirely.
Canadians have sort of the best of both worlds: they have socialized medicine at home, and are right next door to a capitalist medicine system if they want to use that. If socialized medicine was the only choice, and people couldn't go over the to US for treatment if they chose to, that might make at least some people less happy with the arrangement.
This is true in many countries. Even in the UK, my homeland, you have the National Health there providing free care - if you need it. Yes, you'll wait for non-critical procedures. Then again, if you need something right now, you'll almost always get it, no questions asked. A lot of bitching comes from people who don't understand why they have to wait 3 weeks to get their ingrown toenail removed when there are priority cases in front of them.
But if you can afford it, and want to - and many do - you can always go to the private doctor of your choice. You can buy health insurance - or not, as you choose - to help you pay for it. The NHS is there as a very functional safety net, but its far from mandatory.
For example, I don't expect my father to be a 'fat her', and I'm quite happy with the fact that my wardrobe doesn't literally ward my robes, and that my cupboards aren't actually boards supporting cups.
I loved the "Fat her" example. Your other two, however, seem a little odd - considering that a wardrobe does indeed keep your clothes protected from harm, and there are probably some horizontal boards supporting cups in your cupboards... Admittedly that's not all they do, but they're still a lot closer to their sources than your first example.
I'm just thankful that when I go out for happy hour, I'm not really chowing down on the rear end of a rooster...
What happens with one of Real's tunes doesn't work on the iPod? Possibly after new iPod software is released, even if its not trying to break the Real hack. I'll tell you what - Apple will get a tech support call. Whether or not its their fault, they're now paying (support costs money) for a problem that they had nothing to do with. Worse, the reputation of their offerings could potentially suffer.
I highly recommend TopoFusion. No relationship other than a very satisfied customer. I got the free version, but paid the very reasonable $40 within a couple of days. Really good software and a very responsive developer.
...who wonders why their firewall/network stack architecture would require an inbound port to be open for an application to work (unless it's a server program)? I know that under *nix systems there is the Loopback device (lo) for "sudo" network traffic that is only ment to be from the localhost to the localhost. Does MS Windows not have this? If they have this, why would they block traffic on it by default?
Actually (at least in 2003 and XPsp1) the Loopback device is not installed by default. Its awful. That also means that if your network adapter goes down (ie: you unplug from a dhcp network and don't autoconfigure as a backup) you can lose your TCP/IP stack.
This is less of a problem than it used to be since XP will, by default, assign you an automatic address if you're unplugged. Not having the loopback adapter installed by default (when its readily available) is, IMO, pretty inexcusible.
For one thing, its necessary for servers to do things like good PPTP/NAT routing.
You appear not to be familiar with the term "instant runoff." Our Green Party candidate for Secretary of State last time advocated it, so I've read up a little.
I think that there's a better idea myself. How about this - everybody votes once. Once someone is elimanated from consideration, they can grant their votes to another, presumably stronger candidate. After all, if you vote for someone in a represtntative democracy, aren't you saying that you trust them to make serious decisions for you? This choice could even be stated before the election to help sway voters (although it wouldn't have to be).
Here's another possibility: everybody gets one vote. You can use it for or against a candidate. Therefore, the "Anybody but Bush" folk can just vote "Bush -1". That way, you'd encourage people to be just a little less inflammatory. Also, someone could win with 5% of the vote if the other candidates were hated enough to go negative. Weird, but worth thinking about IMO.
According to "Infinity Welcomes Careful Drivers", yes but they will be banned because they make things boring. The point of no return comes when you get goalies who exactly fill the goal.
Although IIRC then even that won't work for Scotland, who will still manage to lose 2-0.
Yeah then please explain to me why each countries media only focusses on their own athletes and on how many medals they will win. It is just a giant ego contest.
From what I've seen, nowhere else comes close to doing this as much as the USA does. If an American doesn't stand a good chance of winning, chances are there'll be no coverage at all. That's an exaggeration, but honestly not much of one. Very sad.
there's no need to allow hummers to, say, downtown any more than there is need to allow 12 wheelers to pass straight through a crowded downtown(if you want a truck don't fucking drive it like a hot hatch).
I suppose that you also extensive taxing of support electricity-hogging cutting CPUs, RAID cards, high capacity hard drives for home PCs, etc? Just because its not your thing doesn't mean that it needs to be attacked.
You know, I was interested in this when I read the blurb. Still am. But I can't help being put off when the first thing that I check out, this page from SciAm, starts out with the following sentence:
"Skeletal muscle accounts for more than a third of an average healthy 30-year-old's body mass, but its cells are unlike most human tissues."
Think about that. Thirty five percent of your body is unlike the other sixty five percent. I'd hazard a guess that that would be a true statement for almost any given discrete subset of your body. Its not like its saying that a few small cells (1%) responsible for your conditioning and are unlike the rest of your body. Your muscles are useful, yes, but hardly unique.
I truly don't understand why the government allows such large cars/trucks share the road with small/midsize cars.
Your reply:
I'm in favor of the government dictating proper licensing for specific car sizes, yes.
Hmm. You know, I am too. In fact, I agree with what you're saying for the most part. But that didn't actually have anything to do with keeping them separated on the roads, which is pretty damned unworkable, and which is what I was talking about.
I think if you read further, you'll clearly discover that I'm calling into question wether the author is the Record, or if this came from a public news source.
Considering that all of the others are really similar, and the original poster said that this was the "best he had found", better than anything on Google News, etc, I would imagine that a certain amount of effort had been put into it by that particular organization. It may or may not be true, but it seems the most likely explanation.
Maybe the real answer is to get these SUVs and minivans off the road, and establish weight and bumper-height limits for cars.
Hmm. Since the solar car veered across the highway into oncoming traffic and hit a minivan, I don't really see how your suggestions would help. I mean, he could have just as easily (and fatally) hit the side of a building. His car was unsafe in an accident, period. Besides, why is it the minivan's fault that this guy got tossed into his lane? I personally feel bad for both drivers, but possibly more so for the minivan driver. He didn't do anything wrong, and now has to live with the fact that he was in an accident in which the other driver died. Somehow, I don't think that's very easy to live with, although thankfully I don't know first-hand.
According to TFA, it was a Chrysler minivan. So I'm not sure how getting rid of HUMMERs would have made a damned bit of difference. Besides, he lost control of the car to the point that it went into oncoming traffic - it could have been a barricade, or a ditch, and the outcome might have been the same. Those cars don't have to meet the current federal safety regs, you know.
I truly don't understand why the government allows such large cars/trucks share the road with small/midsize cars.
And you're in favor of the government dictating car size, to the point of needing separate road systems (otherwise, good luck getting any deliveries of anything) for minivans and small cars? Wow. Personally, I think the government has enough stuff going on right now, maybe even a bit too much in some areas...
And for those of you who point out that information wants to be free, I'd say that the information itself is free. After all, there are innumerable places where you can get the facts of the case. If you want someone else to analyze the facts and call others to present testimony, that's available too, as copied above.
For a fee. Which is perfectly alright - these "value added" services cost money.
What? Not worth it? But you claim that it is "The most detailed story I've read about this." Sounds like the Record managed to add value to me...
Actually, I misspoke - "usable" burstable power. I don't really consider any anerobic effort to be very useful when you're going to be relying on continuous power generation to stay aloft (and, by extension, alive). But I wasn't clear.
Hmm. When it comes to power produced on a bicycle, there's one obvious place to look...
http://www.lancearmstrong.com/faq.html points out that Lance produces around 250 watts during an endurance ride (2-4 hours). For sustainable travel, I think that we can comfortably state that most potential helicopter pilots will not be in better shape than Lance.
His burstable power is around 600W, but there's no point in being able to get yourself 30 meters up off the ground and then need to take a break for a minute...
But if you're upsampling from AAC or MP3 or whatever, that's just extra computation that isn't required. Why not just use the underlying format?
Because "wire format" is generally a good thing. This way, if there's a new client format that comes out, only client software needs to change. Having the WAP do all sorts of different conversions means that you'd be having to flash it repeatedly to change formats. Or, alternately, have a lot more memory onboard and still flash it when a new format becomes popular. It also means that its performance is dependent on all of those codecs, instead of keeping it very simple - right now, as a hardware device, they can be pretty confident that it works any time that its sent lossless AAC. The will want to keep it as simple as possible for just that reason.
Now an important question to ask at this point is: Can someone figure out how to make the second question moot? IOW, if the Airport Express is powerful enough to handle the decryption and decoding of ALS smoothly, why can't it do the same with MP3 or ogg or any other format?
Why would you want to move from a lossless format to a lossy format? Its not like transcoding to lossles is very expensive, computationally...
Slashdot Mirror
Yes, but not for another 27 years or so - just before the holoQuBe comes out in fact. So I wouldn't worry about it.
and if we missed 4 legit client emails a day... that would be lost business, and that's just unacceptable no matter how you look at it.
Well... how much money would it take to have the staff necessary to do the filtering manually (at a better rate - even humans are fallible), and how much would the potential business loss cost you? Assuming that the business was very profitable, and that the senders wouldn't call or send a follow-up email of course.
Putting RFID chips on your shoes is nothing new. All of the local races down here use ChampionChip timing, unless they're really small. Have done for years, too. There's a local company, Run-Far who times most of the races as well - you run over mats at the start, finish, and useful places in the middle. Works pretty well.
Well let me tell you a true story in college we were reading Tess of the Durbivills (SP?) and the professor was a big fan of microanalysisation of the book. So we took the hole semester analyzing every paragraph and sometimes every sentence in a chapter. When every little bit has a meaning then the hole point of the major story is loss. Because there is so much depth that the major story lost all meaning.
Hmm. You'd make a better impression - and I wouldn't mention this except that we're discussing college level English courses - if you used the word whole instead of its homonym hole.
Just a pedantic thought. Now we can cue the masses who will undoubtedly point out a typo that I made, keeping the chain alive...
As for your original point, I would say that the kind of analysis that you're talking about can be both useful and enlightening. However, I do agree that it will not help you understand the subject matter - it is useful instead to understand the author's art of writing. Both that kind of analysis and the holistic subjective analysis of the work have their places, although they are often confused, even by teachers.
Just MHO of course.
These are just the ways I've actually had teachers ensure that students read the material. I could probably think of a dozen more if say, oh I don't know...it was MY JOB. What exactly are we paying teachers for if they can't solve this fairly simple problem?
My dad's a professor at UT-D, so I can take a quick stab at this. What you're probably not paying them for is the amount of time it takes to grade all of those papers, to the level that you're requesting. After all, you're talking about the teacher reading, comprehending, and uniquely marking a couple of hundred papers for every one that the student has to do. All of this typically done on their own time. Some teachers may want to dontate their evenings to this kind of project. Others may work for schools that can offer the kind of grading support that they need (although in that case its harder for them to answer the student's questions about comments on their paper, no?). But most are trying to do a reasonable job for a reasonable salary, and still have a life at the end of it. Just like most of us are.
I often found that I understood the work better than classmates who had only read the work. No one has been able to convince me yet that it's somehow more valuable to slug through Nietzsche word by word, one of the most misunderstood philosophers of all time, without at least first getting some idea of what he was saying first.
In a low level class, you may be right. Still, you're never going to get a "+4 Insightful" on any of your papers either - at least, not a legitimate one. Sometimes (although I will concede pretty rarely) going into a work like that without too many preconceived notions will allow you to make a leap of understanding of your own - the difference between being able to pass a test on how to drive a stick, and how to drive one in San Francisco without worrying about it. Of course, that depends if your reason for taking philosophy is to get an understanding, or to get an A. And that's another discussion entirely.
Canadians have sort of the best of both worlds: they have socialized medicine at home, and are right next door to a capitalist medicine system if they want to use that. If socialized medicine was the only choice, and people couldn't go over the to US for treatment if they chose to, that might make at least some people less happy with the arrangement.
This is true in many countries. Even in the UK, my homeland, you have the National Health there providing free care - if you need it. Yes, you'll wait for non-critical procedures. Then again, if you need something right now, you'll almost always get it, no questions asked. A lot of bitching comes from people who don't understand why they have to wait 3 weeks to get their ingrown toenail removed when there are priority cases in front of them.
But if you can afford it, and want to - and many do - you can always go to the private doctor of your choice. You can buy health insurance - or not, as you choose - to help you pay for it. The NHS is there as a very functional safety net, but its far from mandatory.
For example, I don't expect my father to be a 'fat her', and I'm quite happy with the fact that my wardrobe doesn't literally ward my robes, and that my cupboards aren't actually boards supporting cups.
I loved the "Fat her" example. Your other two, however, seem a little odd - considering that a wardrobe does indeed keep your clothes protected from harm, and there are probably some horizontal boards supporting cups in your cupboards... Admittedly that's not all they do, but they're still a lot closer to their sources than your first example.
I'm just thankful that when I go out for happy hour, I'm not really chowing down on the rear end of a rooster...
What happens with one of Real's tunes doesn't work on the iPod? Possibly after new iPod software is released, even if its not trying to break the Real hack. I'll tell you what - Apple will get a tech support call. Whether or not its their fault, they're now paying (support costs money) for a problem that they had nothing to do with. Worse, the reputation of their offerings could potentially suffer.
That's why they're complaining.
I highly recommend TopoFusion. No relationship other than a very satisfied customer. I got the free version, but paid the very reasonable $40 within a couple of days. Really good software and a very responsive developer.
...who wonders why their firewall/network stack architecture would require an inbound port to be open for an application to work (unless it's a server program)? I know that under *nix systems there is the Loopback device (lo) for "sudo" network traffic that is only ment to be from the localhost to the localhost. Does MS Windows not have this? If they have this, why would they block traffic on it by default?
Actually (at least in 2003 and XPsp1) the Loopback device is not installed by default. Its awful. That also means that if your network adapter goes down (ie: you unplug from a dhcp network and don't autoconfigure as a backup) you can lose your TCP/IP stack.
This is less of a problem than it used to be since XP will, by default, assign you an automatic address if you're unplugged. Not having the loopback adapter installed by default (when its readily available) is, IMO, pretty inexcusible.
For one thing, its necessary for servers to do things like good PPTP/NAT routing.
You appear not to be familiar with the term "instant runoff." Our Green Party candidate for Secretary of State last time advocated it, so I've read up a little.
I think that there's a better idea myself. How about this - everybody votes once. Once someone is elimanated from consideration, they can grant their votes to another, presumably stronger candidate. After all, if you vote for someone in a represtntative democracy, aren't you saying that you trust them to make serious decisions for you? This choice could even be stated before the election to help sway voters (although it wouldn't have to be).
Here's another possibility: everybody gets one vote. You can use it for or against a candidate. Therefore, the "Anybody but Bush" folk can just vote "Bush -1". That way, you'd encourage people to be just a little less inflammatory. Also, someone could win with 5% of the vote if the other candidates were hated enough to go negative. Weird, but worth thinking about IMO.
According to "Infinity Welcomes Careful Drivers", yes but they will be banned because they make things boring. The point of no return comes when you get goalies who exactly fill the goal.
Although IIRC then even that won't work for Scotland, who will still manage to lose 2-0.
Yeah then please explain to me why each countries media only focusses on their own athletes and on how many medals they will win. It is just a giant ego contest.
From what I've seen, nowhere else comes close to doing this as much as the USA does. If an American doesn't stand a good chance of winning, chances are there'll be no coverage at all. That's an exaggeration, but honestly not much of one. Very sad.
there's no need to allow hummers to, say, downtown any more than there is need to allow 12 wheelers to pass straight through a crowded downtown(if you want a truck don't fucking drive it like a hot hatch).
I suppose that you also extensive taxing of support electricity-hogging cutting CPUs, RAID cards, high capacity hard drives for home PCs, etc? Just because its not your thing doesn't mean that it needs to be attacked.
You know, I was interested in this when I read the blurb. Still am. But I can't help being put off when the first thing that I check out, this page from SciAm, starts out with the following sentence:
"Skeletal muscle accounts for more than a third of an average healthy 30-year-old's body mass, but its cells are unlike most human tissues."
Think about that. Thirty five percent of your body is unlike the other sixty five percent. I'd hazard a guess that that would be a true statement for almost any given discrete subset of your body. Its not like its saying that a few small cells (1%) responsible for your conditioning and are unlike the rest of your body. Your muscles are useful, yes, but hardly unique.
Ah, but you have to fill inches...
Original comment I responded to:
I truly don't understand why the government allows such large cars/trucks share the road with small/midsize cars.
Your reply:
I'm in favor of the government dictating proper licensing for specific car sizes, yes.
Hmm. You know, I am too. In fact, I agree with what you're saying for the most part. But that didn't actually have anything to do with keeping them separated on the roads, which is pretty damned unworkable, and which is what I was talking about.
I think if you read further, you'll clearly discover that I'm calling into question wether the author is the Record, or if this came from a public news source.
Considering that all of the others are really similar, and the original poster said that this was the "best he had found", better than anything on Google News, etc, I would imagine that a certain amount of effort had been put into it by that particular organization. It may or may not be true, but it seems the most likely explanation.
Maybe the real answer is to get these SUVs and minivans off the road, and establish weight and bumper-height limits for cars.
Hmm. Since the solar car veered across the highway into oncoming traffic and hit a minivan, I don't really see how your suggestions would help. I mean, he could have just as easily (and fatally) hit the side of a building. His car was unsafe in an accident, period. Besides, why is it the minivan's fault that this guy got tossed into his lane? I personally feel bad for both drivers, but possibly more so for the minivan driver. He didn't do anything wrong, and now has to live with the fact that he was in an accident in which the other driver died. Somehow, I don't think that's very easy to live with, although thankfully I don't know first-hand.
According to TFA, it was a Chrysler minivan. So I'm not sure how getting rid of HUMMERs would have made a damned bit of difference. Besides, he lost control of the car to the point that it went into oncoming traffic - it could have been a barricade, or a ditch, and the outcome might have been the same. Those cars don't have to meet the current federal safety regs, you know.
I truly don't understand why the government allows such large cars/trucks share the road with small/midsize cars.
And you're in favor of the government dictating car size, to the point of needing separate road systems (otherwise, good luck getting any deliveries of anything) for minivans and small cars? Wow. Personally, I think the government has enough stuff going on right now, maybe even a bit too much in some areas...
And for those of you who point out that information wants to be free, I'd say that the information itself is free. After all, there are innumerable places where you can get the facts of the case. If you want someone else to analyze the facts and call others to present testimony, that's available too, as copied above.
For a fee. Which is perfectly alright - these "value added" services cost money.
What? Not worth it? But you claim that it is "The most detailed story I've read about this." Sounds like the Record managed to add value to me...
Actually, I misspoke - "usable" burstable power. I don't really consider any anerobic effort to be very useful when you're going to be relying on continuous power generation to stay aloft (and, by extension, alive). But I wasn't clear.
Hmm. When it comes to power produced on a bicycle, there's one obvious place to look...
http://www.lancearmstrong.com/faq.html points out that Lance produces around 250 watts during an endurance ride (2-4 hours). For sustainable travel, I think that we can comfortably state that most potential helicopter pilots will not be in better shape than Lance.
His burstable power is around 600W, but there's no point in being able to get yourself 30 meters up off the ground and then need to take a break for a minute...
But if you're upsampling from AAC or MP3 or whatever, that's just extra computation that isn't required. Why not just use the underlying format?
Because "wire format" is generally a good thing. This way, if there's a new client format that comes out, only client software needs to change. Having the WAP do all sorts of different conversions means that you'd be having to flash it repeatedly to change formats. Or, alternately, have a lot more memory onboard and still flash it when a new format becomes popular. It also means that its performance is dependent on all of those codecs, instead of keeping it very simple - right now, as a hardware device, they can be pretty confident that it works any time that its sent lossless AAC. The will want to keep it as simple as possible for just that reason.
Now an important question to ask at this point is: Can someone figure out how to make the second question moot? IOW, if the Airport Express is powerful enough to handle the decryption and decoding of ALS smoothly, why can't it do the same with MP3 or ogg or any other format?
Why would you want to move from a lossless format to a lossy format? Its not like transcoding to lossles is very expensive, computationally...
"In the EU, you can assume that most people on the road actually do know how to drive. "
When did Belgium leave the EU?
Heh... even so, to compare 'em to the drivers in the 'States? Wrecks over here tend towards the large and dramatic. Just like the cars.