Well there's your problem. Live is not Gaussian, and assuming it is can lead to cataclysmic failure.
Could they have not used a more robust distrubution, such as Student's t with 4 degrees of freedom (a distribution that seems to serve well in the real world), or perhaps even Cauchy?
Of course, these distributions would lead to more conservative trading practises, not good for one's career during an extended bull run.
If you follow bad advice, it could cost you a lot.
Not only are few slashdot readers lawyers (although I'm sure many like to think they are), but proper advice will depend on the jurisdiction. The law in Oregon is not the same as the law in Manitoba.
It's dumb putting vertical farms in the middle of a large city. Land is too precious there. It's not as if the surface of the earth is covered by skyscrapers (vertically developed urban area). My back-of-the-envelope calculation puts it at about.01% of the land area of the earth.
Such farms - if they are to exist at all - would best be placed at the outskirts of large cities to reduce transportation costs.
Never took to those seaside malts. Too... medicinal. I'll get my iodine from table salt, thanks.
Give me those highland malts, with their hints of heather and peat and sheep dung. I can hear the pipes now, and see the kilts flapping in the breeze.
Accchhh. Cancel that last bit.
Re:The Zen of First Post
on
The Zen of SOA
·
· Score: 4, Insightful
Gosh it would have been nice if someone had defined SOA in the actual posting, and maybe put in a sentence or two on what it's all about. Just throw a bone to those of us not "in the know".
I'm reminded of a former employee of where I work who used the most esoteric and abbreviated language possible, and then showed utter contempt towards those who asked him to clarify.
I watched the final episode on the "Ceeb" and thought it was disjointed and incoherent. Now I know why.
Changing the topic a bit, I find the new Dr. Who series to be overly sentimental, even maudlin. I prefer good ol' space opera without all the tears. Give me "Annihilate them!" over "I'll miss you, Doctor." any day.
Damn rights you should question the project. The first thing out of your mouth when answering The Question is that you would talk to people - especially the end users - to find out the business case for the project, and to critique its objectives. On some projects, your recommendation might be that the company buy software, change the objectives of the project, or not do the project at all. The last thing a good manager needs are a bunch of automatons who just follow orders. We have computers for that.
Businesses are in business, and they seek programmers who are the same. In general they do not want "academic types" with their heads in the clouds, but practical people with their feet on the ground. People who like making money.
To answer The Question, you want to include sound software engineering principles, such as reviews with users, code reviews, automated testing, design patterns, early and regular releases, and early documentation. You especially want to emphasize communication with the end users at every stage.
The actual methodology you mention is not nearly as important as the fact that you have a methodology.
It's possible that you run into a interviewer who doesn't like the methodologies you mention, and so will refuse to hire you. Maybe he's someone who thinks these practises are all a bunch of hokum. But you probably don't want to work for those companies anyway.
Given a software project such as (briefly
describe a project the candidate might typically be asked to handle),
how would you do it? What steps would you take?
We then let them speak. Everytime they stop speaking, we say "And then
what would you do?"
The Question is terrific for evaluating a person's approach
to software development. For example:
Do they question the necessity of the project, or do they
assume that managment is always right?
What software engineering
practices do they mention?
To what extend do they involve the user?
Do they think that once the software is released, the project is over?
For the more popular streams of mathematical research I agree, and this is what keeps mathematics on its feet.
But there are many branches of mathematics of which there are only a few people in the world doing work, and many papers have little impact and thus are not carefully scrutinized after publication. And occasionally some proofs are so tedious or complex that perhaps no one outside of the author really understands them.
Furthermore some journals, departmental technical reports, and most conference papers are only loosely peer reviewed, and some not at all. I do peer review myself, and thus have a skeptical attitude of the process to right all wrongs.
I agree that mathematics would be tedious if every proof was machine-verifiably rigorous. I'm not really criticizing the practise, since I do the same myself.
In text books the mathematics is usually high quality, even when some steps are glossed over. In journal papers, however, things can get much looser. Indeed, my guess is that there are quite a few inadequate or incorrect proofs.
One of the criticisms of mathematics is that mathematicians claim truth and rigour, yet in practise their proofs are often quite sloppy. In other words, most proofs are convincing rather than rigorous. Thus some have suggested that mathematics is made up of opinions rather than logically true assertions.
Some "scholars" from the humanities have used this to suggest we develop a postmodern, liberatory mathematics, freed from the tyranny of logical proof, and thus from the oppressive hegemony of the modern militaristic patriarchy.
This project might help to stem such blather.
Although, as they say, you can't reason someone out of a position if they never reasoned themselves into it in the first place.
Funny, but I talked to a student from Venezuela last year who had a very different take on Chavez than you.
Perhaps he was mistaken. Perhaps student demonstrators were not fired on. Perhaps there are no food shortages. Perhaps everything is just swell in Venezuela.
Human Rights Watch is a highly credible organization. Despite being based in the U.S., they are often quite critical of it. The
allegation that they blackmail countries is absurd.
I think this is a mistake by Chavez.
Here's what Human Rights Watch has to say about Venezuela:
The Venezuelan government's expulsion of two Human Rights Watch staff underscores the Chávez administration's increasing intolerance of dissenting views, Human Rights Watch said today.
These computers will increase access to the internet in Venezuela. And there's nothing like the internet to encourage and facilitate dissenting views.
Fortran code for the RDS 500 always required a few lines of assembler to be mixed in. Strange but true.
It turns out that "Eror" meant that there was a syntax error in the Assembler.
I found this out using a binary search. I removed half the code from the deck and compiled it. If that still had the problem I repeated the process. If not, I tried the other half. Eventually I was down to a very small deck.
The Raytheon RDS 500's of the 1970's sometimes gave the following compiler error:
Eror
That was it. Nothing else. Couldn't even bother to spell the word properly. It meant that somewhere in your 10,000 cards(!) of Fortran there was an error. Over time I learned what to look for when this happened.
We were real programmers then. Didn't have these girly compilers that tell you exactly what and where the problem is.
I can't hear my clicker when the radio is on (Honda Accord). Specially when I'm going "na na na naaa na na naaaa na na THUNDER!".
Given that some car radios automatically increase in volume when the engines revving, why can't they have a clicker that automatically adapts to the sound level? And that gets really obvious when it's been on for more than 10 seconds?
Actually I do give the average Shmoe a lot of credit.
And if you think there's no integrity in the oil industry then you've never worked in it. Oil doesn't find and extract itself. It takes massive skill and chutzpah to do what they do. I have a lot of respect for the oil industry.
Slashdot Mirror
Gaussian Copula Model
Well there's your problem. Live is not Gaussian, and assuming it is can lead to cataclysmic failure.
Could they have not used a more robust distrubution, such as Student's t with 4 degrees of freedom (a distribution that seems to serve well in the real world), or perhaps even Cauchy?
Of course, these distributions would lead to more conservative trading practises, not good for one's career during an extended bull run.
If you follow bad advice, it could cost you a lot.
Not only are few slashdot readers lawyers (although I'm sure many like to think they are), but proper advice will depend on the jurisdiction. The law in Oregon is not the same as the law in Manitoba.
No kidding. I wonder why the author of the post is asking advice from slashdot readers, when he or she should be talking to a lawyer.
It's dumb putting vertical farms in the middle of a large city. Land is too precious there. It's not as if the surface of the earth is covered by skyscrapers (vertically developed urban area). My back-of-the-envelope calculation puts it at about .01% of the land area of the earth.
Such farms - if they are to exist at all - would best be placed at the outskirts of large cities to reduce transportation costs.
Never took to those seaside malts. Too ... medicinal. I'll get my iodine from table salt, thanks.
Give me those highland malts, with their hints of heather and peat and sheep dung. I can hear the pipes now, and see the kilts flapping in the breeze.
Accchhh. Cancel that last bit.
Gosh it would have been nice if someone had defined SOA in the actual posting, and maybe put in a sentence or two on what it's all about. Just throw a bone to those of us not "in the know".
I'm reminded of a former employee of where I work who used the most esoteric and abbreviated language possible, and then showed utter contempt towards those who asked him to clarify.
Rob Enderl's wikipedia history is entertaining, going from long and critical to short and sweet in one revision.
As is often case for controversial subjects, the Wikipedia history tells a better story than current entry itself.
I watched the final episode on the "Ceeb" and thought it was disjointed and incoherent. Now I know why.
Changing the topic a bit, I find the new Dr. Who series to be overly sentimental, even maudlin. I prefer good ol' space opera without all the tears. Give me "Annihilate them!" over "I'll miss you, Doctor." any day.
This puts "This Is Spinal Tap" in a whole different light.
Damn rights you should question the project. The first thing out of your mouth when answering The Question is that you would talk to people - especially the end users - to find out the business case for the project, and to critique its objectives. On some projects, your recommendation might be that the company buy software, change the objectives of the project, or not do the project at all. The last thing a good manager needs are a bunch of automatons who just follow orders. We have computers for that.
Businesses are in business, and they seek programmers who are the same. In general they do not want "academic types" with their heads in the clouds, but practical people with their feet on the ground. People who like making money.
To answer The Question, you want to include sound software engineering principles, such as reviews with users, code reviews, automated testing, design patterns, early and regular releases, and early documentation. You especially want to emphasize communication with the end users at every stage. The actual methodology you mention is not nearly as important as the fact that you have a methodology.
It's possible that you run into a interviewer who doesn't like the methodologies you mention, and so will refuse to hire you. Maybe he's someone who thinks these practises are all a bunch of hokum. But you probably don't want to work for those companies anyway.
The question is this:
Given a software project such as (briefly describe a project the candidate might typically be asked to handle), how would you do it? What steps would you take?
We then let them speak. Everytime they stop speaking, we say "And then what would you do?"
The Question is terrific for evaluating a person's approach to software development. For example:
and so on.
is the same length as this...
For the more popular streams of mathematical research I agree, and this is what keeps mathematics on its feet.
But there are many branches of mathematics of which there are only a few people in the world doing work, and many papers have little impact and thus are not carefully scrutinized after publication. And occasionally some proofs are so tedious or complex that perhaps no one outside of the author really understands them.
Furthermore some journals, departmental technical reports, and most conference papers are only loosely peer reviewed, and some not at all. I do peer review myself, and thus have a skeptical attitude of the process to right all wrongs.
I agree that mathematics would be tedious if every proof was machine-verifiably rigorous. I'm not really criticizing the practise, since I do the same myself.
In text books the mathematics is usually high quality, even when some steps are glossed over. In journal papers, however, things can get much looser. Indeed, my guess is that there are quite a few inadequate or incorrect proofs.
One of the criticisms of mathematics is that mathematicians claim truth and rigour, yet in practise their proofs are often quite sloppy. In other words, most proofs are convincing rather than rigorous. Thus some have suggested that mathematics is made up of opinions rather than logically true assertions.
Some "scholars" from the humanities have used this to suggest we develop a postmodern, liberatory mathematics, freed from the tyranny of logical proof, and thus from the oppressive hegemony of the modern militaristic patriarchy.
This project might help to stem such blather. Although, as they say, you can't reason someone out of a position if they never reasoned themselves into it in the first place.
Funny, but I talked to a student from Venezuela last year who had a very different take on Chavez than you.
Perhaps he was mistaken. Perhaps student demonstrators were not fired on. Perhaps there are no food shortages. Perhaps everything is just swell in Venezuela.
Human Rights Watch is a highly credible organization. Despite being based in the U.S., they are often quite critical of it. The allegation that they blackmail countries is absurd.
So either they're lying or you are. I pick you.
These computers will increase access to the internet in Venezuela. And there's nothing like the internet to encourage and facilitate dissenting views.
Just what I need. Errors messages that read "You know what you did."
Fortran code for the RDS 500 always required a few lines of assembler to be mixed in. Strange but true.
It turns out that "Eror" meant that there was a syntax error in the Assembler.
I found this out using a binary search. I removed half the code from the deck and compiled it. If that still had the problem I repeated the process. If not, I tried the other half. Eventually I was down to a very small deck.
Malt scotch heals all wounds. This fact isn't emphasized enough in computer science classes, I think.
That was it. Nothing else. Couldn't even bother to spell the word properly. It meant that somewhere in your 10,000 cards(!) of Fortran there was an error. Over time I learned what to look for when this happened.
We were real programmers then. Didn't have these girly compilers that tell you exactly what and where the problem is.
I'm legally blind, so those flashing lights don't help much. I have to drive by sound.
I can't hear my clicker when the radio is on (Honda Accord). Specially when I'm going "na na na naaa na na naaaa na na THUNDER!".
Given that some car radios automatically increase in volume when the engines revving, why can't they have a clicker that automatically adapts to the sound level? And that gets really obvious when it's been on for more than 10 seconds?
I gotta patent these ideas, I really do.
Actually I do give the average Shmoe a lot of credit.
And if you think there's no integrity in the oil industry then you've never worked in it. Oil doesn't find and extract itself. It takes massive skill and chutzpah to do what they do. I have a lot of respect for the oil industry.