Follows from the Peano axioms. Now, if you can trace the claim about peoples' mental abilties to something of similar fundamental value, then I'll accept it as proof. Otherwise, I'd also be happy with some empirical data backing it up.
My point is that we are not going to have a country with nothing but doctors, high-end engineers, programers, and tech people. Not everyone has the brainpower to do that.
Every wonder why there is more and more un/underemployment? It's because we can do more with less.
This claim is not supported by emprical evidence. Before the financial crisis, employment rates in the US were at a record high. Even now, the rate is still higher than it was during most of the 70s. If structural unemployment is rising (even that is hard to say), then it's because of more people entering the workforce (e.g., well-educated women) and not because of advances in technology.
According to the Failed State Index compiled by the Fund for Peace and Foreign Policy, Libera is on par with North Korea in terms of failedness, being ranked the 24th-worst in the world and put on a "alert" level.
Liberia is a failed state, ranking 174 (of 187 countries) in the Human Development Index. Probably, somebody has manipulated the admission exam for his own profit. Reminds me a bit of Robert Mugabe winning the lottery.
By the way did you notice that the efficiency of the two existing compressed air plants are 42 and 54%. That would mean that the daytime rate would have to be about twice the night time rate to break even.
Yesterday, one MWh of electricity at the European Energy Exchange (EEX) cost 25€ at 5am, but 53€ at 8pm. That's even more than a factor of two.
Notice that as solar becomes more prevalent there is more electricity being imported.at dawn and dusk and more surplus exported around noon. What if every country tried to do that?
Then someone will get rich by building energy storage plants and using them to profit from the price difference between day and night. Or probably not, because companies are already starting to do precisely that.
So Netflix is supposed to completely re-engineer their entire delivery system for their original content in order to help you make a point?
Nobody has to re-engineer anything. If Netflix were against DRM as claimed, a small additional download link on their website for paying subscribers would not be too much to ask for.
Is Netflix the right target though? What makes you think they want to have DRM in their product? The answer is, they don't. Netflix was forced by its content providers to use DRM.
I don't pretend to have an answer to this dilemma. The only really clear thing is that the laws of supply and demand aren't *statutory* laws, that can just be altered with a pen and a lot of hand-waving. They are fundamental natural laws, and well-intentioned attempts to manipulate markets (from student loans to price-control regimes) almost always trigger equal and opposite consequences.
There is an obvious alternative: if a free market doesn't provide the desired equilibrium, then stop sorting things out on a free market. In fact, many countries where education or healthcare are provided by government-run entities are quite successful at it, especially when compared to the US.
It seems like the EU, and Germany in particular, takes privacy much more seriously then the US. Even without encryption, it seems like it's harder for authorities to do casual snooping on email contents in the EU.
Actually, the opposite is true. In Germany, every e-mail provider with more than 10,000 customers has to maintain an eavesdropping infrastructure that essentially allows for warrantless snooping, which can be authorized by any prosecutor, and carried out by every police officer. The provider is gagged and is not even allowed to disclose the number of cases. I'd assume that other EU countries have similar laws.
Now the question becomes: what moron made this setting the default? Maybe a setting that can undetectably corrupt your data can be provided if appropriate warnings are given, but it sure as hell should never be the default. I would've thought that was obvious.
The guy who came up with this posted several updates to his blog.
And at least in this particular case, "no" is indeed the correct answer. Equations can never be a substitute for actual understanding. You can use equations to develop understanding by starting from an earlier point and transform the initial equation to establish a new fact. But where do you start with quantum mechanics? "Quantum states are being represented by rays in a complex Hilbert space"?
If anything, equations can be used to create an argumentum ad auctoritatem, and I'm not sure that this is a good thing.
I wonder how many n00bs never get that far, because they see how the leader of the community treats others and decide to go do something else instead. Maybe Linus does personally know the recipients of his infamous rants, but on a high-profile public forum not everyone watching might realise that.
I'd rather only have people who are mentally stable enough to withstand Linus's flames develop code for the Linux kernel. This is not about a small experimental project where nobody cares about stability, but one of the largest truly collaborative endeavors ever made by humankind, and billions of dollars in worldwide economic growth hinge on its future development. So I think it's right to expect a reasonable set of skills of people one can entrust with working on it. To give you some perspective, I'm pretty sure that the astronaut program performs stricter tests for mental stability than being able to take some guy's rants not too personal, especially when they are directed towards someone else.
If you walked into an office for a job interview, and the first thing you saw was some management type openly berating a subordinate, what tone would that set before you even started the discussion you were there for?
Oh, come on. Linus is not the boss of any of the people on LKML.
That scenario really isn't different from murder. In the US you could be tried for second degree murder for something like that.
No. You'd have to establish causation between the dumping of waste and the people getting cancer. Unless it's a very rare form of cancer that can only arise due to exposure of chemicals, there's no chance that this will happen.
That's why this announcement by Red Hat is so important, it means that RHEL/CentOS-based hosters are likely to make the switch to MariaDB when they upgrade their systems.
Meh. This is basically a renewal of the declaration of 2004 and nothing has happened since then. Talk is cheap, especially with a federal election a few months down the road. Instead, the Bundestag as Germany's main legislative body could do its job and change the law and end the patenting madness right now, at least on German soil.
There are examinations ongoing if the Telekom is using its market leader position for unfair practices, pecisely because of this.
Nice try. The head of the Federal Network Agency has recently been replaced by a party shill. Same guy who has now to explain a thing or two about how he secured a job for the ex-lover of one of Germany's top politicians of the Christian right.
Where you stop kicking? Things were pretty clear last presidential election, and still one of the 2 candidates that were assuring that everything will still be in the same way or worse were elected. If having the chance nothing was done, even when plenty of evidence of the trend, why you think it will be done next time?
Once you get to the general election, it is already too late. Start in the primaries by rallying behind a candidate that runs on a platform of freedom and civil rights. Do it on both sides of the aisle. Don't care about other stuff too much. If she's a democrat and supports copyright extension ad infinitum, so be it. If she's a republican and wants to slash Medicare, so be it. Do the same in races for congress, on the state level, etc. Even if your candidate doesn't end up winnng the general election, you'll raise visibility for your issue, which will change things for the better in the long run.
Many cognitive models might approach this by assuming the crow has a big table of "knowledge" that it can logically manipulate to deduce an answer: "stick can reach food from entrance to log," "I can get stick if I go over there," "I can move stick to entrance of log," => "I can reach food." This paper, however, proposes a much more general and simple model: the crow lives by the rule "I'll do whatever will maximize the number of different world states my world can be in 5 seconds from now." By this principle, the crow can reach a lot more states if it can move the stick (instead of the fewer states where the stick just sits in the same place on the ground), so it heads over towards the stick. Now it can reach a lot more states if it pokes the food out of the hole with the stick, so it does. And now, it can eat the tasty food.
But the cow could reach even more states if it broke the stick into thousand little pieces and scattered them all over the place. No tasty food here.
Slashdot Mirror
1+1=2 [citation needed]
Follows from the Peano axioms. Now, if you can trace the claim about peoples' mental abilties to something of similar fundamental value, then I'll accept it as proof. Otherwise, I'd also be happy with some empirical data backing it up.
My point is that we are not going to have a country with nothing but doctors, high-end engineers, programers, and tech people. Not everyone has the brainpower to do that.
[citation needed]
Every wonder why there is more and more un/underemployment? It's because we can do more with less.
This claim is not supported by emprical evidence. Before the financial crisis, employment rates in the US were at a record high. Even now, the rate is still higher than it was during most of the 70s. If structural unemployment is rising (even that is hard to say), then it's because of more people entering the workforce (e.g., well-educated women) and not because of advances in technology.
According to the Failed State Index compiled by the Fund for Peace and Foreign Policy, Libera is on par with North Korea in terms of failedness, being ranked the 24th-worst in the world and put on a "alert" level.
Liberia is a failed state, ranking 174 (of 187 countries) in the Human Development Index. Probably, somebody has manipulated the admission exam for his own profit. Reminds me a bit of Robert Mugabe winning the lottery.
By the way did you notice that the efficiency of the two existing compressed air plants are 42 and 54%. That would mean that the daytime rate would have to be about twice the night time rate to break even.
Yesterday, one MWh of electricity at the European Energy Exchange (EEX) cost 25€ at 5am, but 53€ at 8pm. That's even more than a factor of two.
Notice that as solar becomes more prevalent there is more electricity being imported.at dawn and dusk and more surplus exported around noon. What if every country tried to do that?
Then someone will get rich by building energy storage plants and using them to profit from the price difference between day and night. Or probably not, because companies are already starting to do precisely that.
So Netflix is supposed to completely re-engineer their entire delivery system for their original content in order to help you make a point?
Nobody has to re-engineer anything. If Netflix were against DRM as claimed, a small additional download link on their website for paying subscribers would not be too much to ask for.
DRM, in the virtual rental situation is acceptable, I'm not doing anything like purchasing the content, so they get to retain control.
This would only be justified if DRM-free buying options existed at the same time.
Is Netflix the right target though? What makes you think they want to have DRM in their product? The answer is, they don't. Netflix was forced by its content providers to use DRM.
So, "House of Cards" is DRM-free, I suppose?
I don't pretend to have an answer to this dilemma. The only really clear thing is that the laws of supply and demand aren't *statutory* laws, that can just be altered with a pen and a lot of hand-waving. They are fundamental natural laws, and well-intentioned attempts to manipulate markets (from student loans to price-control regimes) almost always trigger equal and opposite consequences.
There is an obvious alternative: if a free market doesn't provide the desired equilibrium, then stop sorting things out on a free market. In fact, many countries where education or healthcare are provided by government-run entities are quite successful at it, especially when compared to the US.
It seems like the EU, and Germany in particular, takes privacy much more seriously then the US. Even without encryption, it seems like it's harder for authorities to do casual snooping on email contents in the EU.
Actually, the opposite is true. In Germany, every e-mail provider with more than 10,000 customers has to maintain an eavesdropping infrastructure that essentially allows for warrantless snooping, which can be authorized by any prosecutor, and carried out by every police officer. The provider is gagged and is not even allowed to disclose the number of cases. I'd assume that other EU countries have similar laws.
Now the question becomes: what moron made this setting the default? Maybe a setting that can undetectably corrupt your data can be provided if appropriate warnings are given, but it sure as hell should never be the default. I would've thought that was obvious.
The guy who came up with this posted several updates to his blog.
1. The setting is not the default.
2. There is a warning when you change the settings in the web frontend.
3. Xerox's support staff was not aware of this problem and could not come up with a solution.
Betteridge's Law of Headlines says no.
And at least in this particular case, "no" is indeed the correct answer. Equations can never be a substitute for actual understanding. You can use equations to develop understanding by starting from an earlier point and transform the initial equation to establish a new fact. But where do you start with quantum mechanics? "Quantum states are being represented by rays in a complex Hilbert space"?
If anything, equations can be used to create an argumentum ad auctoritatem, and I'm not sure that this is a good thing.
I wonder how many n00bs never get that far, because they see how the leader of the community treats others and decide to go do something else instead. Maybe Linus does personally know the recipients of his infamous rants, but on a high-profile public forum not everyone watching might realise that.
I'd rather only have people who are mentally stable enough to withstand Linus's flames develop code for the Linux kernel. This is not about a small experimental project where nobody cares about stability, but one of the largest truly collaborative endeavors ever made by humankind, and billions of dollars in worldwide economic growth hinge on its future development. So I think it's right to expect a reasonable set of skills of people one can entrust with working on it. To give you some perspective, I'm pretty sure that the astronaut program performs stricter tests for mental stability than being able to take some guy's rants not too personal, especially when they are directed towards someone else.
If you walked into an office for a job interview, and the first thing you saw was some management type openly berating a subordinate, what tone would that set before you even started the discussion you were there for?
Oh, come on. Linus is not the boss of any of the people on LKML.
That scenario really isn't different from murder. In the US you could be tried for second degree murder for something like that.
No. You'd have to establish causation between the dumping of waste and the people getting cancer. Unless it's a very rare form of cancer that can only arise due to exposure of chemicals, there's no chance that this will happen.
I can see this ending up with the same fate as Diaspora, and for the same reason.
Mmh, the number of Diaspora users grew by almost 40% within the last 12 months, so it seems quite alive and well to me.
At least given the very appropriate banner ad I was being served along with this story.
That's why this announcement by Red Hat is so important, it means that RHEL/CentOS-based hosters are likely to make the switch to MariaDB when they upgrade their systems.
Bravo, Germany!
Meh. This is basically a renewal of the declaration of 2004 and nothing has happened since then. Talk is cheap, especially with a federal election a few months down the road. Instead, the Bundestag as Germany's main legislative body could do its job and change the law and end the patenting madness right now, at least on German soil.
There are examinations ongoing if the Telekom is using its market leader position for unfair practices, pecisely because of this.
Nice try. The head of the Federal Network Agency has recently been replaced by a party shill. Same guy who has now to explain a thing or two about how he secured a job for the ex-lover of one of Germany's top politicians of the Christian right.
Give the fucking kid a scholarship to college...
He's from Germany and therefore unlikely to face any tuition fees, so I doubt he'll need one.
I think your fix would be more reasonable if you cited examples of when liberal politicians ignored science to match their agendas.
Homeopathy.
Where you stop kicking? Things were pretty clear last presidential election, and still one of the 2 candidates that were assuring that everything will still be in the same way or worse were elected. If having the chance nothing was done, even when plenty of evidence of the trend, why you think it will be done next time?
Once you get to the general election, it is already too late. Start in the primaries by rallying behind a candidate that runs on a platform of freedom and civil rights. Do it on both sides of the aisle. Don't care about other stuff too much. If she's a democrat and supports copyright extension ad infinitum, so be it. If she's a republican and wants to slash Medicare, so be it. Do the same in races for congress, on the state level, etc. Even if your candidate doesn't end up winnng the general election, you'll raise visibility for your issue, which will change things for the better in the long run.
Many cognitive models might approach this by assuming the crow has a big table of "knowledge" that it can logically manipulate to deduce an answer: "stick can reach food from entrance to log," "I can get stick if I go over there," "I can move stick to entrance of log," => "I can reach food." This paper, however, proposes a much more general and simple model: the crow lives by the rule "I'll do whatever will maximize the number of different world states my world can be in 5 seconds from now." By this principle, the crow can reach a lot more states if it can move the stick (instead of the fewer states where the stick just sits in the same place on the ground), so it heads over towards the stick. Now it can reach a lot more states if it pokes the food out of the hole with the stick, so it does. And now, it can eat the tasty food.
But the cow could reach even more states if it broke the stick into thousand little pieces and scattered them all over the place. No tasty food here.