It’s much worse than this. The burden of proof on people attempting to publish studies showing that work cannot be replicated is extremely high. Often many-fold more experiments and controls are required to show that it isn’t simply a failure on the part of the group attempting to repeat the experiment. Frequently these sorts of papers must offer an alternative hypothesis to explain both the original and new results as well. These sorts of studies are very difficult and time consuming, and can’t be given to junior graduate students who haven’t already proven themselves to be capable experimentalists. Thus to do something like this you need to assign one or more very capable senior students/postdoctoral workers, which costs money and time and takes away from original research.
My 3 year old 15" Dell M4400 has a really nice 1http://apple.slashdot.org/story/12/06/11/1757240/apple-news-from-wwdc-and-iphone-5-rumors#900x1200 display, but looking at their lineup now I don't think you can get anything bigger than 1080p, which means you lose out on a fair bit of vertical resolution. 1366x768 in the same size really doesn't cut it.
Not to mention that home X-ray sources have improved dramatically over the last few decades. I think if you've got enough cash Rigaku or Bruker will sell you single or dual wavelength rotating anode sources that would be totally fine for routine protein x-ray crystallography on nicely diffracting samples. Not all protein crystallography needs a synchrotron, since a lot of times people are just doing ligand soaks to try to find small molecule binding modes in protein active sites.
Let's be serious. Google/Motorola is not innocent: http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/health-17825580
The atmosphere in mobile patents is terrible. Apple, Google/Motorola, and Microsoft are going to fight over this for years to come. Until there is some sanity and these companies start cross-licensing for reasonable costs this is going to continue, and it's pretty silly to claim that one of these companies is just the victim. They all have large enough legal departments to know how this game works.
Also, windows phone runs really really well on middling hardware. The Nokia 710 is sold periodically by T-mobile for as little at $250 without a contract, and it is a vastly superior phone to most andriod phones in the same price range. Windows Phone is not a perfect OS but a generation of MS hate has really clouded people's ability to look at their products objectively.
And lets be honest, Nokia wasn't going to survive by going the way they were going. They made a bet that they could team up with MS and produce phones people wanted to buy because if they hadn't they'd still be on the RIM path. This is very clearly visible in the bets that Nokia is making on inexpensive phones (Lumia 610) for developing markets. Not everyone wants to pay $800 for a phone off-contract.
Yes. Clearly Amazon is trying to compete with Apple by stripping out some of the features and specs of the iPad to deliver a less expensive device. It's not intended to be a perfect facsimile of the iPad, just a device which can offer a somewhat similar experience for substantially less money. People will expect less out of a $200 device than they do out of a $500 device, and Amazon is hoping that they cut costs in the right places to make a device that people will buy.
The problem with electrolytic hydrogen is that electricity is expensive, not that the process is inefficient.
Well more accurately, it is both expensive and inefficient. The best catalysts (the ones which operate at the lowest overpotential) are often expensive iridium oxides. Catalysts made from more abundant elements tend to require a higher applied voltage, which reduces the efficiency of the system. That said, if you're burning natural gas to make electricity to split hydrogen from water, you're much better off steam reforming the methane directly to hydrogen in terms of efficiency.
Carbon in the form of petrochemicals that has been under the ground for several million years is no longer part of the carbon cycle. Reintroducing it to the atmosphere has serious dangers associated with it.
Where v is your speed, c is the speed of light, t is the time that passes for someone at rest, and t' is the time that passes for you. If you plug a number in for the speed, say 30 kilometers meters per second (67k miles per hour) You would still be talking about a very small difference. Driving in your car at 80 Miles per hour would make the bottom of the fraction about equal to 1, meaning you wouldn't see any detectable difference.
Are you sure about this? The registration servers came up at 10:30pm the night before release, and I jumped online directly onto the Mountain Server "Kel'Thuzad." On launch day, there were only 5 mountain servers online, and in fact population problems didn't start until the day after launch when people started getting their coppies. New servers weren't brough up for days, as database and worldserver lag spiked on many many servers. My server was down for 16hours of maintainance recently, but that didn't stop it from going down for approximatly 4 hours both subsequent days at prime time.
Except their bittorrent system sucked pretty hard for anyone on an asynchronous connection because it offered to ability to reduce upload speeds. If I have a cable connection that runs at 384k/4000k, and I'm uploading at 48K per second to other peers, there is going to be very little upstream bandwidth left to properly maintain a decent download speed. Not only that, but uploading at the full speed that your connection permits seriously increases latencies and makes other internet use almost impossible.
The last patch was minor, and wasn't pushed by their bittorrent system. I hope they improve it for future (larger) patches.
You know, I'm not sure about them playing Xvids and Divxs. I think it all depends on the bitrate. When my movies started losing sync was when I upgraded from Win95 (400Mhz P2) to WinXP (1.6A)
I had always thought that the largest problem with back-lit LCDs was the fact that the blacks were never dark enough. Companies would claim absurd contrast ratios by jacking up the maximum brightness, but it never had the effect of just making the black parts of the screen look dark enough.
Unless you're looking at those mini-sized motherboards, I haven't seen a motherboard with less then 3 PCI slots in a while. Your NIC, Sound, and Firewire/USB is all integrated. That is 3 cards you don't have to have. If you nic dies? Add a PCI nic. Someone seems stuck in 1994.
I had a harddrive that was supposed to do that too, but instead I lost all my data. I suspect that the brain has mechanisms for coping with certain amounts and types of damage, but rarely will they save you from anything near-catastrophic.
Not quite dead. http://www.intel.com/labs/features/hw10041.htm
Intel has plenty of dollars devoted to research. They certainly didn't sacrifice the P4 in favor of the Itanium. Intel's engineers started to run into problems scaleing past 3Ghz that they hadn't forseen, and as a result they're in a bit of a tight spot with regard to how to handle the next year until they can produce a replacement chip. It is a bit premature to be pronoucing Intel dead just yet. The P-M is still the best low-power chip around, and intel is working. They'll be down a bit for most of 2005, but AMD probably won't be able to scale their current architectures much farther anyways. 2005 will probably just be a slow year.
Slashdot Mirror
It’s much worse than this. The burden of proof on people attempting to publish studies showing that work cannot be replicated is extremely high. Often many-fold more experiments and controls are required to show that it isn’t simply a failure on the part of the group attempting to repeat the experiment. Frequently these sorts of papers must offer an alternative hypothesis to explain both the original and new results as well. These sorts of studies are very difficult and time consuming, and can’t be given to junior graduate students who haven’t already proven themselves to be capable experimentalists. Thus to do something like this you need to assign one or more very capable senior students/postdoctoral workers, which costs money and time and takes away from original research.
Their market share was in free-fall well before the Microsoft deal. Their own OS wasn't selling smartphones.
My 3 year old 15" Dell M4400 has a really nice 1http://apple.slashdot.org/story/12/06/11/1757240/apple-news-from-wwdc-and-iphone-5-rumors#900x1200 display, but looking at their lineup now I don't think you can get anything bigger than 1080p, which means you lose out on a fair bit of vertical resolution. 1366x768 in the same size really doesn't cut it.
Not to mention that home X-ray sources have improved dramatically over the last few decades. I think if you've got enough cash Rigaku or Bruker will sell you single or dual wavelength rotating anode sources that would be totally fine for routine protein x-ray crystallography on nicely diffracting samples. Not all protein crystallography needs a synchrotron, since a lot of times people are just doing ligand soaks to try to find small molecule binding modes in protein active sites.
Let's be serious. Google/Motorola is not innocent: http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/health-17825580 The atmosphere in mobile patents is terrible. Apple, Google/Motorola, and Microsoft are going to fight over this for years to come. Until there is some sanity and these companies start cross-licensing for reasonable costs this is going to continue, and it's pretty silly to claim that one of these companies is just the victim. They all have large enough legal departments to know how this game works.
See this discussion of the same paper on In the Pipeline, a blog devoted to organic chemistry and drug discovery. http://pipeline.corante.com/archives/2012/03/29/sloppy_science.php
Also, windows phone runs really really well on middling hardware. The Nokia 710 is sold periodically by T-mobile for as little at $250 without a contract, and it is a vastly superior phone to most andriod phones in the same price range. Windows Phone is not a perfect OS but a generation of MS hate has really clouded people's ability to look at their products objectively. And lets be honest, Nokia wasn't going to survive by going the way they were going. They made a bet that they could team up with MS and produce phones people wanted to buy because if they hadn't they'd still be on the RIM path. This is very clearly visible in the bets that Nokia is making on inexpensive phones (Lumia 610) for developing markets. Not everyone wants to pay $800 for a phone off-contract.
Yes. Clearly Amazon is trying to compete with Apple by stripping out some of the features and specs of the iPad to deliver a less expensive device. It's not intended to be a perfect facsimile of the iPad, just a device which can offer a somewhat similar experience for substantially less money. People will expect less out of a $200 device than they do out of a $500 device, and Amazon is hoping that they cut costs in the right places to make a device that people will buy.
The problem with electrolytic hydrogen is that electricity is expensive, not that the process is inefficient.
Well more accurately, it is both expensive and inefficient. The best catalysts (the ones which operate at the lowest overpotential) are often expensive iridium oxides. Catalysts made from more abundant elements tend to require a higher applied voltage, which reduces the efficiency of the system. That said, if you're burning natural gas to make electricity to split hydrogen from water, you're much better off steam reforming the methane directly to hydrogen in terms of efficiency.
Yes, H2+O2 -> H20 But in your engine, you're going to have more then that. H2+O2+N2+CO2+bits of lubricant -> H20 + NO + CO + CO2 + etc
Carbon in the form of petrochemicals that has been under the ground for several million years is no longer part of the carbon cycle. Reintroducing it to the atmosphere has serious dangers associated with it.
t' = t / (sqrt(1-(v^2/c^2)))
Where v is your speed, c is the speed of light, t is the time that passes for someone at rest, and t' is the time that passes for you. If you plug a number in for the speed, say 30 kilometers meters per second (67k miles per hour) You would still be talking about a very small difference. Driving in your car at 80 Miles per hour would make the bottom of the fraction about equal to 1, meaning you wouldn't see any detectable difference.
Are you sure about this? The registration servers came up at 10:30pm the night before release, and I jumped online directly onto the Mountain Server "Kel'Thuzad." On launch day, there were only 5 mountain servers online, and in fact population problems didn't start until the day after launch when people started getting their coppies. New servers weren't brough up for days, as database and worldserver lag spiked on many many servers.
My server was down for 16hours of maintainance recently, but that didn't stop it from going down for approximatly 4 hours both subsequent days at prime time.
No, that's blizzard's fault. It crashes occasionally for most windows users too.
Except their bittorrent system sucked pretty hard for anyone on an asynchronous connection because it offered to ability to reduce upload speeds. If I have a cable connection that runs at 384k/4000k, and I'm uploading at 48K per second to other peers, there is going to be very little upstream bandwidth left to properly maintain a decent download speed. Not only that, but uploading at the full speed that your connection permits seriously increases latencies and makes other internet use almost impossible.
The last patch was minor, and wasn't pushed by their bittorrent system. I hope they improve it for future (larger) patches.
You know, I'm not sure about them playing Xvids and Divxs. I think it all depends on the bitrate. When my movies started losing sync was when I upgraded from Win95 (400Mhz P2) to WinXP (1.6A)
We have a Korean cliche? This must be new.
Or worse..
EA!
I had always thought that the largest problem with back-lit LCDs was the fact that the blacks were never dark enough. Companies would claim absurd contrast ratios by jacking up the maximum brightness, but it never had the effect of just making the black parts of the screen look dark enough.
I'm also pretty sure that no one could do anything about it if the U.S. built a base and claimed to own 10 miles in every direction around it.
I think google is banking on the fact that most email is just text, which is incredibly easy to compress.
I completely agree. The grandparent should stuff his children back into the womb from whence they came!
Unless you're looking at those mini-sized motherboards, I haven't seen a motherboard with less then 3 PCI slots in a while. Your NIC, Sound, and Firewire/USB is all integrated. That is 3 cards you don't have to have. If you nic dies? Add a PCI nic. Someone seems stuck in 1994.
I had a harddrive that was supposed to do that too, but instead I lost all my data.
I suspect that the brain has mechanisms for coping with certain amounts and types of damage, but rarely will they save you from anything near-catastrophic.
Not quite dead.
http://www.intel.com/labs/features/hw10041.htm
Intel has plenty of dollars devoted to research. They certainly didn't sacrifice the P4 in favor of the Itanium. Intel's engineers started to run into problems scaleing past 3Ghz that they hadn't forseen, and as a result they're in a bit of a tight spot with regard to how to handle the next year until they can produce a replacement chip. It is a bit premature to be pronoucing Intel dead just yet. The P-M is still the best low-power chip around, and intel is working. They'll be down a bit for most of 2005, but AMD probably won't be able to scale their current architectures much farther anyways. 2005 will probably just be a slow year.