This is a symptom of the flawed patent system in America. It has lead to a lack of competition. Now instead of many companies driving technological innovation, there are a small number of big companies and patent trolls intent on holding it up for ransom. So far the resistance to the same sort of patent death spiral in Europe gives them a chance to make this attempt they are making work. But if the megacorp's and patent troll's political bribes (sorry I meant to say lobbying) work over there, they will be screwed too. So here's to Europe, may she reign supreme in technology. Too bad the ship seems to be sinking over here.
Yeah, but that was my point. It gets done, but it isn't fun. So it gets done slower than new stuff is added. But this is entirely due to human nature. nu. So the amount of errors tends to increase if only for that reason. But look on the bright side: Once we know everything the proof reading and correcting will catch up. Waddayagonnado? I am still grateful for Wikipedia. Without it whenever we wanted to look up cougar on Google we'd only get listings of mature porn. At least we can go to Wikipedia and look for what we really want to find out (except late at night heh heh heh... know what I mean Vern?). It's nice to find info on a subject without having to wade through pages of advertising links.
Before that, I think the problem is that writing an article is easy/fun. Proofreading an article is boring/tedious. The idea of the crowd sourcing is that the crowd can correct the errors. But this only works if people are willing to help correct the errors. And people are notorious for not doing hard tedious work for nothing. So as Wikipedia grows from people doing the fun stuff, so do the errors. Too bad there isn't a big enough carrot to hold out in front of the people editing.
Close... what else are Thais famous for... think about it... tourists who like the Thai closets better than their American closets. Now you should be able to figure out the riddle... even though it has nothing to do with Thailand.
Oh fuck please. One foot or so of crumple as compared to 4 or 5 feet in a regular car. That is a huge difference in energy dissipation. And if you can't figure that out, it is pointless saying anything more to you. You either can't or don't want to get it.
The way I learned it, a statistically significant difference between two measurements definitely relates to the noise (if I'm understanding what you mean by noise). If the 'noise' causes a mean value to have a deviation for a given confidence (always happens unless you get exactly the same measurement on each sample... and then I would suspect the sampling technique), for you to tell if there really is a statistically significant difference between the two measurements, the difference needs to be greater than the deviation. Reason being is that if it falls within the deviation for that confidence level, it is falls under the curve of what counts for the mean value. i.e. you expect to have values on either side of the mean that you have said represents the mean, statistically. I may not be saying that clearly, but hopefully you get my drift.
Heck, a few decades ago kids were still playing with the mercury from broken thermometers here. Now the nanny state liberals tell us oooooooo mercury is bad for you. Bah! It never affected me. Now, why is a raven like a writing desk?
This is why the west will never catch up with China. They are so forward thinking and innovative they have had their kids playing with Cadmium, Lead, and other heavy metals for years now. How can we possibly compete?
I just checked and that is bullshit. It is not apples to apples. You are comparing a decent internet service like I was quoting above, to a package of the worst service you can buy. Something most people would do without rather than waste their money.
The bundle you quote only has 2 Mb/s download. And the TV is equivalent to basic cable and NO long distance or voice mail or anything else on the phone. You want to compare apples to apples? I used the 'build your own' tool to create a realistic bundle with a 12 Mb/s download speed. And unless you call them direct you can only get satellite TV in the package, something that many don't or can't use (the Fibe TV is more).
Bell Satellite TV with the programming including stations like the space channel (scifi), discovery, national geographic, etc.): $56.84
Bell 12 Mb/s Fibe Internet (like what I was talking about above): $43.95
Bell phone package that includes voice mail (but doesn't come with long distance... but it does come with a 12 month contract):$29.92
Bell unlimited Canada long distance plan (which comes with U.S. no choice)(BTW long distance is not included in any of their phone plans):$29.92
Activation fee for the TV: $29.92
Total Monthly Fee for a realistic package not a shill quoted one = $162.61
So you must be astroturfing for Bell. Nice try, shill. Try listing something that people would actually want to pay for and not the Judas goat package.
Horse crap. Toronto starting building a system like this in 2001. A large portion of the downtown including almost the entire financial district has been using this technique since 2004. It's called Deep Water Lake Cooling and takes 4 degree Celsius water from a point 5 km offshore and 83 metres deep in Lake Ontario. The water is treated first and much of it goes to the municipal water system directly, but some is diverted to the closed loop heat exchangers used in the cooling system and then on to the municipal water supply so that there is no waste heat transmitted back to the lake. All the buildings connect to this heat exchanger. Toronto has 2.5 million people and the financial district is around 20 square blocks. There are at least 140 buildings on the system now, including most if not all of the up to 80 story sky scrapers that occupy the core of the area. It is the largest system of its kind in the world. It has a capacity (PDF File) to cool 29,000,000 square feet (about 2.7 million sq metres) of office space. And if that doesn't beat all, it was mentioned on Slashdot in 2004.
Remember this is in Canada's largest city. 2.5 million people in the city alone. 5.5 million in the metro area (yeah I know it's not the biggest city in the world, but it is a big city especially by North American standards... 4th or 5th largest in N.A.). This size of place they should have higher speeds. But the Canadian companies tend to gouge customers without any improving service in proportion (yes they improve, but relative to how much they screw you).
No it isn't. For one the test was mostly show. Without accelerometers a crash test is of limited value. But visually, the car holds together but it is so rigid the passengers would have to take almost the full force of the acceleration of the impact. There is no real crumple which is what helps reduce the G forces on the passengers in bigger nosed cars if they crash. Even the windshield of the Smart Car crashed in the test lab didn't break. And when they crashed a Smart Car into concrete at 70 mph the driver's door still functioned. Given that the door basically starts at the front of the car, this thing didn't crumple hardly at all. As unscientific as the tests in that video are even the presenters noted this (I transcribed a short excerpt on it):
The downside of the shells rigidity is that there is a greater potential for the crash forces to be transmitted through to the passengers. Ideally you ought to slow them down as slowly as possible.
If the people have to take the acceleration of a crash at any sort of speed, they will die. But maybe the resale value of the car would still be good. Personally I wouldn't feel comfortable riding in one at any sort of highway speed. But what am I saying??? I ride a motorbike. Never mind... I still wouldn't feel comfortable.
before they start going back to their old habits of repression and ignoring their customers
Not necessarily. Read the summary. All of Bell's customers are now on usage based billing. Here is a summary of a couple of the 'fib' plans (fibre optic network) so you can judge for yourself.
The fastest package is 25Gb/s at $75 per month ($35 for the first year, then it goes up), and has a 125 GB cap. Overage costs $1/GB unless you pay ahead of time for "insurance" at $5/40GB (and similarly 10/80GB and 15/120 GB bucks). Upload is 7 Mb/s.
Their 12Mb/s package is 12 Gb/s at $54 per month ($44/month for the first year), with a 50 GB cap. Overage is $1.50/GB up to $80 each month. Upload is 1Mb/s but if you pay $5 you can get 7 Mb/s. Same download "insurance" as all the other plans including the fastest package already mentioned.
So they are not altruistic. If you download a lot you pay for it. You can make up your own mind if they are reasonable or whether you think they are or aren't still repressing their customers. Personally the 12 Gb/s plan's 50GB cap is pretty bloody low if you ask me. Ridiculous really. But then again bell also has their own IPTV service and pay per view which competes with other services like Netflix. So go figure. The big three regional monopolies do the same thing (Bell, Telus, Rogers).
On the other hand, services like Netflix are far more limited in Canada, and really not of much value. This is mainly because of archaic 'culture protecting' laws (limit foreign networks and shows and enforce certain percentage of 'Canadian content' by hours of broadcast time) and laws allowing the three regional monopolies, Bell, Rogers, and Telus to buy sole distribution rights to foreign (mostly American) shows in Canada. These severely limit what people can download legally or without having technical ability above the average user. So Canadians have been hamstrung us in many other ways in terms of telecommunications and so the need for high caps is somewhat diminished.
And to rub salt into the wound, it is cold for long periods of the year so it isn't surprising that Canadians are near or are the top internet users in the world. So the telecom companies know they dig and still get money. And since the big three dominate so much, they can call the shots and walk over anyone they please will little push back from the Canadian Radio-Television and Telecommunications Commission (many of whose board members either have worked previously for the big three, or where they often end up when they leave the CRTC).
Regardless, it is well established that more people are reaching their 70s and 80s than ever before. Something like 10%. Not only that, but people are healthier longer into their old age than ever before too. And the baby boomers are only just starting to hit that demographic, so they they aren't skewing it. If anything, because of their numbers they probably are making this figure smaller than if the age groups were evenly distributed. Prior to 1960 only 5% made up the population in that age range. So infant mortality does not explain everything. Plus remember that antibiotics (penicillin) was not mass produced until after WWII, so infections that we don't think about now were lethal. Polio vaccine wasn't invented till the 50s. Cancer treatment was no where near what it is now. Heart disease was far higher. People smoked like chimneys, partly because the tobacco companies paid doctors to tell the public it was good for them. And here is the kicker: scientists were not immune. They didn't have naturally longer lifespans than anyone else, so it was the exception rather than the rule to live past 65 in 1960. Even for scientists.
I think this is likely a good part of the reason. In the northern hemisphere where most of the programmers are (since that is where most people live), the days are getting noticeably shorter and colder. A lot of people suffer to some degree by seasonal affected disorder making them more lethargic than normal. Then combine that in some businesses where they are trying to get code related to consumer goods out for black Friday and Christmas season in general. Sleepy overworked programmers, sleepy overworked testers...
And you were so high you didn't figure out that only criminals and drug freaks encrypt their emails, so if the cops thought you were worth the time and money you set your email up as a beacon for them to hone in on; being probably one of a very few number of encrypted emails sent in America.
You will find as you get older/old that your generation was the best. Whether it's true or not. Maybe the trouble with the boomers is that there were so many of them at once, and given that North America works on money, their buying power made them able to dictate the terms a lot more than previous or following generations. But we all live/lived in the glory years from our own perspective. It is part and parcel with the fact that no matter how old our bodies get, our brains for the most part still feel 21. I think for the most part, it is the younger generations that force older generations to act old. Fortunately lately, the one thing we can start thanking the boomers for as we ourselves age, is that they aren't taking to the attitude as much any more.
Come ON people! In 1900 the average life expectancy of a male in the U.S.A. was only 46 years for Pete's sake. No wonder on average most of the 'BIG' work was done before age 40. In 1940 life expectancy was 60 years, and in 1960 it was 66. Considering that even 50 years ago, as people approached these ages many were in nowhere near as good good health as people are today when approaching end of life, so they likely weren't productive at anything in the last few years (back then smoking was advertised as good for your health... heavy bacon and eggs was a 'healthy' breakfast, exercise was not part of the urban or the new 'drive everywhere' suburban vocabulary, etc etc. etc.).
Now we have a life expectancy of over 80 years old in some countries like Canada and some Western European countries. Heck even in the U.S. with it's criticized health care system the average age is over 77.5. And to top it off, people are in much, much better health all the way to within a couple of years of the end. I see people who are in their 70s now-a-days who like folks who were in their 60s or younger a few decades ago. Mind you there are still people living unhealthy life styles, but they are the ones who are keeping the life expectancy averages lower than they could be (i.e. they die earlier than they should).
For a good example of how modern health care keeps us "younger" as we age, look at the Afghan girl (in a Pakistani refugee camp) that was on the iconic front cover of National Geographic in 1984. And then how she looked in 2002. When she was maybe 13, 14, or 15 she captured the worlds attention with her stunning eyes and the photo became one of the most viewed in the world. They went back in 2002 to find her. She had gone back to Afghanistan and had 4 children (one had died by then... life expectancy...) and even though they figured she was between 26 and 29 then (even she wasn't sure) she looked like a 45 or 50 year old woman, maybe older in Europe or North America. Interestingly and sadly, the average life expectancy in Afghanistan today is the same as what it was in America in 1900. Think about it.
So this whole notion of looking back and making judgements about what we should expect our productive ages to be is utter horseshit. Because of advances in medicine, better food, and better life style in general, the only way to determine when someone is less productive is when they are less productive. To arbitrarily say that after 50 you aren't able to think anymore is something that someone who doesn't think to begin with would say. No matter how old they are. We live far longer, and healthier lives. Therefore our productive years are far longer. That is the bottom line.
Slashdot Mirror
Manditory +1 Insightful Required Here
This is a symptom of the flawed patent system in America. It has lead to a lack of competition. Now instead of many companies driving technological innovation, there are a small number of big companies and patent trolls intent on holding it up for ransom. So far the resistance to the same sort of patent death spiral in Europe gives them a chance to make this attempt they are making work. But if the megacorp's and patent troll's political bribes (sorry I meant to say lobbying) work over there, they will be screwed too. So here's to Europe, may she reign supreme in technology. Too bad the ship seems to be sinking over here.
Yeah, but that was my point. It gets done, but it isn't fun. So it gets done slower than new stuff is added. But this is entirely due to human nature. nu. So the amount of errors tends to increase if only for that reason. But look on the bright side: Once we know everything the proof reading and correcting will catch up. Waddayagonnado? I am still grateful for Wikipedia. Without it whenever we wanted to look up cougar on Google we'd only get listings of mature porn. At least we can go to Wikipedia and look for what we really want to find out (except late at night heh heh heh... know what I mean Vern?). It's nice to find info on a subject without having to wade through pages of advertising links.
Before that, I think the problem is that writing an article is easy/fun. Proofreading an article is boring/tedious. The idea of the crowd sourcing is that the crowd can correct the errors. But this only works if people are willing to help correct the errors. And people are notorious for not doing hard tedious work for nothing. So as Wikipedia grows from people doing the fun stuff, so do the errors. Too bad there isn't a big enough carrot to hold out in front of the people editing.
Close ... what else are Thais famous for... think about it... tourists who like the Thai closets better than their American closets. Now you should be able to figure out the riddle... even though it has nothing to do with Thailand.
Yes yes, but ask yourself this: What do you get when you cross a rooster with peanut butter?
Oh fuck please. One foot or so of crumple as compared to 4 or 5 feet in a regular car. That is a huge difference in energy dissipation. And if you can't figure that out, it is pointless saying anything more to you. You either can't or don't want to get it.
I reread your post again... never mind, we're saying the same thing... I think.
The way I learned it, a statistically significant difference between two measurements definitely relates to the noise (if I'm understanding what you mean by noise). If the 'noise' causes a mean value to have a deviation for a given confidence (always happens unless you get exactly the same measurement on each sample... and then I would suspect the sampling technique), for you to tell if there really is a statistically significant difference between the two measurements, the difference needs to be greater than the deviation. Reason being is that if it falls within the deviation for that confidence level, it is falls under the curve of what counts for the mean value. i.e. you expect to have values on either side of the mean that you have said represents the mean, statistically. I may not be saying that clearly, but hopefully you get my drift.
Heck, a few decades ago kids were still playing with the mercury from broken thermometers here. Now the nanny state liberals tell us oooooooo mercury is bad for you. Bah! It never affected me. Now, why is a raven like a writing desk?
This is why the west will never catch up with China. They are so forward thinking and innovative they have had their kids playing with Cadmium, Lead, and other heavy metals for years now. How can we possibly compete?
I just checked and that is bullshit. It is not apples to apples. You are comparing a decent internet service like I was quoting above, to a package of the worst service you can buy. Something most people would do without rather than waste their money.
The bundle you quote only has 2 Mb/s download. And the TV is equivalent to basic cable and NO long distance or voice mail or anything else on the phone. You want to compare apples to apples? I used the 'build your own' tool to create a realistic bundle with a 12 Mb/s download speed. And unless you call them direct you can only get satellite TV in the package, something that many don't or can't use (the Fibe TV is more).
Total Monthly Fee for a realistic package not a shill quoted one = $162.61
So you must be astroturfing for Bell. Nice try, shill. Try listing something that people would actually want to pay for and not the Judas goat package.
Horse crap. Toronto starting building a system like this in 2001. A large portion of the downtown including almost the entire financial district has been using this technique since 2004. It's called Deep Water Lake Cooling and takes 4 degree Celsius water from a point 5 km offshore and 83 metres deep in Lake Ontario. The water is treated first and much of it goes to the municipal water system directly, but some is diverted to the closed loop heat exchangers used in the cooling system and then on to the municipal water supply so that there is no waste heat transmitted back to the lake. All the buildings connect to this heat exchanger. Toronto has 2.5 million people and the financial district is around 20 square blocks. There are at least 140 buildings on the system now, including most if not all of the up to 80 story sky scrapers that occupy the core of the area. It is the largest system of its kind in the world. It has a capacity (PDF File) to cool 29,000,000 square feet (about 2.7 million sq metres) of office space. And if that doesn't beat all, it was mentioned on Slashdot in 2004.
And in a contract.
Remember this is in Canada's largest city. 2.5 million people in the city alone. 5.5 million in the metro area (yeah I know it's not the biggest city in the world, but it is a big city especially by North American standards... 4th or 5th largest in N.A.). This size of place they should have higher speeds. But the Canadian companies tend to gouge customers without any improving service in proportion (yes they improve, but relative to how much they screw you).
Sorry... s/fastest package is 25Gb\/s/fastest package is 25Mb\/s/
My bad... you're right. 25 Mb/s. Gah!
No it isn't. For one the test was mostly show. Without accelerometers a crash test is of limited value. But visually, the car holds together but it is so rigid the passengers would have to take almost the full force of the acceleration of the impact. There is no real crumple which is what helps reduce the G forces on the passengers in bigger nosed cars if they crash. Even the windshield of the Smart Car crashed in the test lab didn't break. And when they crashed a Smart Car into concrete at 70 mph the driver's door still functioned. Given that the door basically starts at the front of the car, this thing didn't crumple hardly at all. As unscientific as the tests in that video are even the presenters noted this (I transcribed a short excerpt on it):
The downside of the shells rigidity is that there is a greater potential for the crash forces to be transmitted through to the passengers. Ideally you ought to slow them down as slowly as possible.
If the people have to take the acceleration of a crash at any sort of speed, they will die. But maybe the resale value of the car would still be good. Personally I wouldn't feel comfortable riding in one at any sort of highway speed. But what am I saying??? I ride a motorbike. Never mind... I still wouldn't feel comfortable.
Not necessarily. Read the summary. All of Bell's customers are now on usage based billing. Here is a summary of a couple of the 'fib' plans (fibre optic network) so you can judge for yourself.
The fastest package is 25Gb/s at $75 per month ($35 for the first year, then it goes up), and has a 125 GB cap. Overage costs $1/GB unless you pay ahead of time for "insurance" at $5/40GB (and similarly 10/80GB and 15/120 GB bucks). Upload is 7 Mb/s.
Their 12Mb/s package is 12 Gb/s at $54 per month ($44/month for the first year), with a 50 GB cap. Overage is $1.50/GB up to $80 each month. Upload is 1Mb/s but if you pay $5 you can get 7 Mb/s. Same download "insurance" as all the other plans including the fastest package already mentioned.
So they are not altruistic. If you download a lot you pay for it. You can make up your own mind if they are reasonable or whether you think they are or aren't still repressing their customers. Personally the 12 Gb/s plan's 50GB cap is pretty bloody low if you ask me. Ridiculous really. But then again bell also has their own IPTV service and pay per view which competes with other services like Netflix. So go figure. The big three regional monopolies do the same thing (Bell, Telus, Rogers).
On the other hand, services like Netflix are far more limited in Canada, and really not of much value. This is mainly because of archaic 'culture protecting' laws (limit foreign networks and shows and enforce certain percentage of 'Canadian content' by hours of broadcast time) and laws allowing the three regional monopolies, Bell, Rogers, and Telus to buy sole distribution rights to foreign (mostly American) shows in Canada. These severely limit what people can download legally or without having technical ability above the average user. So Canadians have been hamstrung us in many other ways in terms of telecommunications and so the need for high caps is somewhat diminished.
And to rub salt into the wound, it is cold for long periods of the year so it isn't surprising that Canadians are near or are the top internet users in the world. So the telecom companies know they dig and still get money. And since the big three dominate so much, they can call the shots and walk over anyone they please will little push back from the Canadian Radio-Television and Telecommunications Commission (many of whose board members either have worked previously for the big three, or where they often end up when they leave the CRTC).
Regardless, it is well established that more people are reaching their 70s and 80s than ever before. Something like 10%. Not only that, but people are healthier longer into their old age than ever before too. And the baby boomers are only just starting to hit that demographic, so they they aren't skewing it. If anything, because of their numbers they probably are making this figure smaller than if the age groups were evenly distributed. Prior to 1960 only 5% made up the population in that age range. So infant mortality does not explain everything. Plus remember that antibiotics (penicillin) was not mass produced until after WWII, so infections that we don't think about now were lethal. Polio vaccine wasn't invented till the 50s. Cancer treatment was no where near what it is now. Heart disease was far higher. People smoked like chimneys, partly because the tobacco companies paid doctors to tell the public it was good for them. And here is the kicker: scientists were not immune. They didn't have naturally longer lifespans than anyone else, so it was the exception rather than the rule to live past 65 in 1960. Even for scientists.
I think this is likely a good part of the reason. In the northern hemisphere where most of the programmers are (since that is where most people live), the days are getting noticeably shorter and colder. A lot of people suffer to some degree by seasonal affected disorder making them more lethargic than normal. Then combine that in some businesses where they are trying to get code related to consumer goods out for black Friday and Christmas season in general. Sleepy overworked programmers, sleepy overworked testers...
But did he say, "All your base are belong to us"?
And you were so high you didn't figure out that only criminals and drug freaks encrypt their emails, so if the cops thought you were worth the time and money you set your email up as a beacon for them to hone in on; being probably one of a very few number of encrypted emails sent in America.
You will find as you get older/old that your generation was the best. Whether it's true or not. Maybe the trouble with the boomers is that there were so many of them at once, and given that North America works on money, their buying power made them able to dictate the terms a lot more than previous or following generations. But we all live/lived in the glory years from our own perspective. It is part and parcel with the fact that no matter how old our bodies get, our brains for the most part still feel 21. I think for the most part, it is the younger generations that force older generations to act old. Fortunately lately, the one thing we can start thanking the boomers for as we ourselves age, is that they aren't taking to the attitude as much any more.
Come ON people! In 1900 the average life expectancy of a male in the U.S.A. was only 46 years for Pete's sake. No wonder on average most of the 'BIG' work was done before age 40. In 1940 life expectancy was 60 years, and in 1960 it was 66. Considering that even 50 years ago, as people approached these ages many were in nowhere near as good good health as people are today when approaching end of life, so they likely weren't productive at anything in the last few years (back then smoking was advertised as good for your health... heavy bacon and eggs was a 'healthy' breakfast, exercise was not part of the urban or the new 'drive everywhere' suburban vocabulary, etc etc. etc.).
Now we have a life expectancy of over 80 years old in some countries like Canada and some Western European countries. Heck even in the U.S. with it's criticized health care system the average age is over 77.5. And to top it off, people are in much, much better health all the way to within a couple of years of the end. I see people who are in their 70s now-a-days who like folks who were in their 60s or younger a few decades ago. Mind you there are still people living unhealthy life styles, but they are the ones who are keeping the life expectancy averages lower than they could be (i.e. they die earlier than they should).
For a good example of how modern health care keeps us "younger" as we age, look at the Afghan girl (in a Pakistani refugee camp) that was on the iconic front cover of National Geographic in 1984. And then how she looked in 2002. When she was maybe 13, 14, or 15 she captured the worlds attention with her stunning eyes and the photo became one of the most viewed in the world. They went back in 2002 to find her. She had gone back to Afghanistan and had 4 children (one had died by then... life expectancy...) and even though they figured she was between 26 and 29 then (even she wasn't sure) she looked like a 45 or 50 year old woman, maybe older in Europe or North America. Interestingly and sadly, the average life expectancy in Afghanistan today is the same as what it was in America in 1900. Think about it.
So this whole notion of looking back and making judgements about what we should expect our productive ages to be is utter horseshit. Because of advances in medicine, better food, and better life style in general, the only way to determine when someone is less productive is when they are less productive. To arbitrarily say that after 50 you aren't able to think anymore is something that someone who doesn't think to begin with would say. No matter how old they are. We live far longer, and healthier lives. Therefore our productive years are far longer. That is the bottom line.