I'm not a lawyer and I don't speak Norwegian so I can't read the court document to find out exactly what happened.
I am, however, an electronic trading specialist and I've also been a trader at a big American investment bank (one that didn't go bust, by the way, despite my best efforts).
...snip...
Thanks very much. Rinse, lather, repeat.
I am not an electronic trading specialist, and I've never been a trader at a big American investment bank (but we're equal in that I've not made one go bust, by the way, but I managed it by giving it no effort at all).
I have, however, found a bug in one of your algorithms. Lathering after rinsing doesn't work so well.
Thanks for your answer, but I don't understand, why wouldn't two wings provide twice the lift of a single wing (provided they are far enough apart not to interfere etc)?
Clearly if they are not providing twice the lift then they are not far enough apart to not interfere;)
I often read short (and sometimes not so short) sentences right-to-left (backwards) if my eyes happen to be to the right as I scan down from above. This is how I read your post, initially.
I didn't notice you'd done anything unusual until I paused to consider why your post was scored +5 Funny.
My feeling about Slashdot is that the submissions (and posts) should be heavy on links to references (such as Wikipedia where appropriate).
And that descriptions of terms can therefore be left out since this isn't print, and we may as well save the space (and mental bandwidth) since we have this handy new hyperlink feature.
Unfortunately far too many submissions are just the leading paragraph of the story copy/pasted, and painfully obviously not meant for this audience. Why these are even accepted (or, god forbid, not rewritten by the editors) is incomprehensible to me.
And slightly more apropos of the article: by random coincidence I've just received, while typing the above, an IM from a not-particularly-technical friend of mine who is telling me she's watching the back-catalog of Lost on Netflix instant-view. The long tail indeed.
You did a lot of typing in your post. I think perhaps you could have saved a lot of it in your quest to enlightenment if you'd have chosen a text field on a different web page. May I suggest http://google.com/ and the phrase "earth sun l2"? The first link even has a very descriptive map. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lagrangian_point
They get a bonus for knowing the land. They get a bonus for not identifying themselves as combatants. They get a bonus for being able to accurately identify their enemies, who are loud and obvious. They get a bonus for being sneaky.
Been playing a bit too much Dawn of War 2 lately have we?
Both gnome and KDE have had centralized password management as a standard feature for some time. I don't know whether they predate or postdate the OSX implementation; but they are there.
I'd be willing to wager they 'postdate' Keychain, as it came with "System 8.6" in 1999. And the functionality existed in many functions of the OS in the form of PowerTalk (shared printers, network shares, e-mail, etc) starting in the early 90s before it was split off and made directly available to 3rd Party applications.
Incidentally, Keychain has been Free (as in beer) and Open Source (as in APSL) for 'some time' now. It would be cool to see the various Unix-y distros pick it up too. Though the implementation might be a little crufty, having descended from an in house Apple project from the early 90s.
It surprises me no one has suggested him in this discussion, and perhaps there's a reason I'm unaware of that he wouldn't fit the position, and who know's if he'd take the job, but I can't think of anyone more suited than EFF Co-Founder Mitch Kapor.
Mitchell David Kapor (born November 1, 1950) is the founder of Lotus Development Corporation and the designer of Lotus 1-2-3, the "killer application" often credited with making the personal computer ubiquitous in the business world in the 1980s. He is known as an entrepreneur, investor, social activist, and philanthropist.
No, discussion is not better here than most other places. Sure, there are often a few informed people around, but far from always. Most science debates show that the average slashdotter doesn't have the slightest idea about what science is, for example. [...]
I don't care what the average slashdotter thinks as I don't read their posts.
Slashdot's strength is its, albeit flawed, moderation system.
The parent describes the point I was making, but apparently needed to be more explicit for the sake of the grandparent.
It's not that 90,000 years is the same as a few months. I was simply pointing out that as our communication speed has increased on a constant size globe we've seen dramatic changes in our civilization. It is interesting to ponder what it would be like when communication speed is the constant, and the volume of space is expanded.
There are alot of posts saying "Well it's still not faster than the speed of light, so it's still useless for a pan-galactic civilization".
If your two options are: A) communicate at the speed of light, or B) don't communicate...
I think it's reasonable to assume you'd find some communication, no matter how slow, useful.
We've gotten so accustomed to (what is to our senses) instantaneous communication it's easy to forget that empires existed across much of our globe when the fastest method of communication was a sailing ship.
We've seen our 'world' shrink a great deal in the past few hundred years. Is it so hard to imagine it growing again?
I don't know what's worse: That I was going to reply with a link to the Gone in 60 Seconds Quote that uses the phrase, or that someone had already outdone me.
From the summary:
Inventor Dean Kamen previews the extraordinary prosthetic arm he's developing at the request of the Department of Defense, to help the 1,600 "kids" who've come back from Iraq without an arm (and the two dozen who've lost both arms). Kamen's commitment to using technology to solve problems, and his respect for the human spirit, have never been more clear than in this deeply moving clip. http://www.ted.com/index.php/talks/view/id/82
I really hope that this isn't truly a "new" discovery.
It's not. This guy was an amateur looking at the problem a decade ago. Geez, not THAT guy again. His observations on what causes that stuff are spot on, but his proposed solutions show a complete inability to understand the concept of scaling as it applies to traffic. He notes that by keeping a larger interval in front of him, the "wave" disappears. Well no shit. Doing that simulates a small pocket of uncongested freeway. This pocket is created at the (small) expense of the cars behind him. You can't have everyone leave a larger interval because that would require the road to be carrying fewer cars. The waves are caused by too many cars too close together. no amount of driving "tricks" is going to increase the car-to-car interval without actually reducing traffic density.
Commendable effort, but it's further proof of what my father (an engineer) has always said about engineers "Never ask an engineer to solve a problem outside his area of expertise. You'll get the most plausible sounding wrong answer you've ever heard." To respond to your specific claim:
You can't have everyone leave a larger interval because that would require the road to be carrying fewer cars.
The goal is not traffic density (cars per mile of roadway, f'ex) but rather traffic throughput (cars per hour).
If you double following distance you reduce density by half*. If you were to continue at the same speed you'd also cut throughput by half. But if the extra following distance avoids propagating perturbations that would cause slowdowns your average speed may well more than double thereby increasing throughput.
And it may not, but your claim is insufficient to show increased following distance is counterproductive to throughput (never mind safety concerns).
* Since horses are all frictionless spheres, naturally cars must have zero length.
P.S. The linked site is truly one of the classics of the internet. I believe it's been posted on slashdot before. And then presumably duped a couple times for good measure.
The full text is actually very short so I encourage you to read its entirety.
It has three main points:
First to amend the 1934 Communications Act to include some policies which state that "to maintain the freedom to use for lawful purposes broadband telecommunications networks, including the Internet, without unreasonable interference from or discrimination by network operators" is a good thing. And similar statements.
Second to require the FCC to assess various things such as how harmful the restrictions providers apply to a user's network connection are. F'ex Comcast forging 'reset' packets to break BitTorrent.
Third to require the FCC to hold multiple summits on the topic, include a wide range of input (including on the internet as well as live events), and report the results to congress.
I actually think it's a reasonable conservative step forward on what is an extremely complicated issue. I'm for it.
I don't understand why you felt it necessary to link to the Klingon wikipedia entry on slashdot. I would have thought Clowns would be more deserving of such in this setting.
It's relevant if an acre of potatoes yields less than four times as much ethanol as an acre of corn.
It's common to see ethanol yield numbers quoted in gallons per acre for a particular crop (for example: Corn vs Switchgrass).
I'd fill this post out with quoted numbers, but google spews forth a flood of varying opinions and I don't have the patience to dig up the more reputable links at the moment.
Slashdot Mirror
I'm not a lawyer and I don't speak Norwegian so I can't read the court document to find out exactly what happened.
I am, however, an electronic trading specialist and I've also been a trader at a big American investment bank (one that didn't go bust, by the way, despite my best efforts).
Thanks very much. Rinse, lather, repeat.
I am not an electronic trading specialist, and I've never been a trader at a big American investment bank (but we're equal in that I've not made one go bust, by the way, but I managed it by giving it no effort at all).
I have, however, found a bug in one of your algorithms. Lathering after rinsing doesn't work so well.
You don't need everything out of EVE. There's more than enough that a small slice can be quite satisfying.
Thanks for your answer, but I don't understand, why wouldn't two wings provide twice the lift of a single wing (provided they are far enough apart not to interfere etc)?
Clearly if they are not providing twice the lift then they are not far enough apart to not interfere ;)
You mean like this?
Did anyone else catch the Metal Gear sound track, and the 'alert' sound when a sensor was triggered?
I often read short (and sometimes not so short) sentences right-to-left (backwards) if my eyes happen to be to the right as I scan down from above. This is how I read your post, initially.
I didn't notice you'd done anything unusual until I paused to consider why your post was scored +5 Funny.
My feeling about Slashdot is that the submissions (and posts) should be heavy on links to references (such as Wikipedia where appropriate).
And that descriptions of terms can therefore be left out since this isn't print, and we may as well save the space (and mental bandwidth) since we have this handy new hyperlink feature.
Unfortunately far too many submissions are just the leading paragraph of the story copy/pasted, and painfully obviously not meant for this audience. Why these are even accepted (or, god forbid, not rewritten by the editors) is incomprehensible to me.
And slightly more apropos of the article: by random coincidence I've just received, while typing the above, an IM from a not-particularly-technical friend of mine who is telling me she's watching the back-catalog of Lost on Netflix instant-view. The long tail indeed.
You can see one stage of the STS Emergency Egress system demonstrated in this video at about 1:30.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zZFwwGx8dLU
You did a lot of typing in your post. I think perhaps you could have saved a lot of it in your quest to enlightenment if you'd have chosen a text field on a different web page. May I suggest http://google.com/ and the phrase "earth sun l2"? The first link even has a very descriptive map. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lagrangian_point
You sir, seem like someone who would benefit from viewing a hi-speed video of a hummingbird hovering...
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=l3XT6qoNMMQ
I still don't know why some people feel that the short version of Apple Macintosh needs to be typed all uppercase (MAC).
But now you've got me really confused by only capitalizing the acronym for Media Access Control.
They get a bonus for knowing the land. They get a bonus for not identifying themselves as combatants. They get a bonus for being able to accurately identify their enemies, who are loud and obvious. They get a bonus for being sneaky.
Been playing a bit too much Dawn of War 2 lately have we?
You abandoned your blog because you had nothing interesting to say? ... I wish more people would do that.
Both gnome and KDE have had centralized password management as a standard feature for some time. I don't know whether they predate or postdate the OSX implementation; but they are there.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Apple_Keychain
I'd be willing to wager they 'postdate' Keychain, as it came with "System 8.6" in 1999. And the functionality existed in many functions of the OS in the form of PowerTalk (shared printers, network shares, e-mail, etc) starting in the early 90s before it was split off and made directly available to 3rd Party applications.
Incidentally, Keychain has been Free (as in beer) and Open Source (as in APSL) for 'some time' now. It would be cool to see the various Unix-y distros pick it up too. Though the implementation might be a little crufty, having descended from an in house Apple project from the early 90s.
It surprises me no one has suggested him in this discussion, and perhaps there's a reason I'm unaware of that he wouldn't fit the position, and who know's if he'd take the job, but I can't think of anyone more suited than EFF Co-Founder Mitch Kapor.
Mitchell David Kapor (born November 1, 1950) is the founder of Lotus Development Corporation and the designer of Lotus 1-2-3, the "killer application" often credited with making the personal computer ubiquitous in the business world in the 1980s. He is known as an entrepreneur, investor, social activist, and philanthropist.
No, discussion is not better here than most other places. Sure, there are often a few informed people around, but far from always. Most science debates show that the average slashdotter doesn't have the slightest idea about what science is, for example. [...]
I don't care what the average slashdotter thinks as I don't read their posts.
Slashdot's strength is its, albeit flawed, moderation system.
The parent describes the point I was making, but apparently needed to be more explicit for the sake of the grandparent.
It's not that 90,000 years is the same as a few months. I was simply pointing out that as our communication speed has increased on a constant size globe we've seen dramatic changes in our civilization. It is interesting to ponder what it would be like when communication speed is the constant, and the volume of space is expanded.
There are alot of posts saying "Well it's still not faster than the speed of light, so it's still useless for a pan-galactic civilization".
If your two options are: A) communicate at the speed of light, or B) don't communicate...
I think it's reasonable to assume you'd find some communication, no matter how slow, useful.
We've gotten so accustomed to (what is to our senses) instantaneous communication it's easy to forget that empires existed across much of our globe when the fastest method of communication was a sailing ship.
We've seen our 'world' shrink a great deal in the past few hundred years. Is it so hard to imagine it growing again?
I don't know what's worse: That I was going to reply with a link to the Gone in 60 Seconds Quote that uses the phrase, or that someone had already outdone me.
dammit. "Use 'em or lose 'em" indeed! My mod points had to disappear just before I read this post.
As the saying goes: Mod Parent Up.
4 in 2004
2 in 1994
1 in 1981
Lower, but roughly doubling each decade and accelerating.
It's not. This guy was an amateur looking at the problem a decade ago. Geez, not THAT guy again. His observations on what causes that stuff are spot on, but his proposed solutions show a complete inability to understand the concept of scaling as it applies to traffic. He notes that by keeping a larger interval in front of him, the "wave" disappears. Well no shit. Doing that simulates a small pocket of uncongested freeway. This pocket is created at the (small) expense of the cars behind him. You can't have everyone leave a larger interval because that would require the road to be carrying fewer cars. The waves are caused by too many cars too close together. no amount of driving "tricks" is going to increase the car-to-car interval without actually reducing traffic density.
Commendable effort, but it's further proof of what my father (an engineer) has always said about engineers "Never ask an engineer to solve a problem outside his area of expertise. You'll get the most plausible sounding wrong answer you've ever heard." To respond to your specific claim:
The goal is not traffic density (cars per mile of roadway, f'ex) but rather traffic throughput (cars per hour).
If you double following distance you reduce density by half*. If you were to continue at the same speed you'd also cut throughput by half. But if the extra following distance avoids propagating perturbations that would cause slowdowns your average speed may well more than double thereby increasing throughput.
And it may not, but your claim is insufficient to show increased following distance is counterproductive to throughput (never mind safety concerns).
* Since horses are all frictionless spheres, naturally cars must have zero length.
P.S. The linked site is truly one of the classics of the internet. I believe it's been posted on slashdot before. And then presumably duped a couple times for good measure.
You can follow the progress of the bill at opencongress.org.
The full text is actually very short so I encourage you to read its entirety.
It has three main points:
First to amend the 1934 Communications Act to include some policies which state that "to maintain the freedom to use for lawful purposes broadband telecommunications networks, including the Internet, without unreasonable interference from or discrimination by network operators" is a good thing. And similar statements.
Second to require the FCC to assess various things such as how harmful the restrictions providers apply to a user's network connection are. F'ex Comcast forging 'reset' packets to break BitTorrent.
Third to require the FCC to hold multiple summits on the topic, include a wide range of input (including on the internet as well as live events), and report the results to congress.
I actually think it's a reasonable conservative step forward on what is an extremely complicated issue. I'm for it.
I don't understand why you felt it necessary to link to the Klingon wikipedia entry on slashdot. I would have thought Clowns would be more deserving of such in this setting.
It's relevant if an acre of potatoes yields less than four times as much ethanol as an acre of corn.
It's common to see ethanol yield numbers quoted in gallons per acre for a particular crop (for example: Corn vs Switchgrass).
I'd fill this post out with quoted numbers, but google spews forth a flood of varying opinions and I don't have the patience to dig up the more reputable links at the moment.