I'm lucky, I don't get enough calls or texts that I have to go that far. I turn that on between the late evening and morning, or when I'm at the movies, though.
I'm curious, why did volleyball obviate the need for a watch? I mean I can understand it making a watch inconvenient (although they come off, you know) but when I started playing hockey, I still needed to check when my break ended at work or whether I was late getting back to school from lunch.
Notification triage. A lot of people who apparently haven't figured out the Notification settings on their phones get a beep or a buzz every time there's an email or a Facebook message or an app update or whatever the fuck, and for those people being able to see what it was and dismiss it without pulling their phone out their pocket would be convenient.
Personally, I simply turned off notifications windows, sounds, and vibration for everything that doesn't require my immediate attention (SMS and phone calls). I look at my Notification list the next time I unlock my phone and deal with the trivial stuff then.
You'd have to drop the spy cameras in their pocket and then somehow plant evidence that they were actually using the cameras to cause leaks, yes, but that's all the help you're getting from me on this one. Enjoy ascending to management.
Wouldn't be the first time they used rumours to their own advantage. It's widely accepted that Apple seeded rumours of an "under-$1000" price point for the original iPad to make its actual $500 price look really, really good. I doubt it's a coincidence that HP and Microsoft's own tablet, the Slate 500, wound up costing $800 later that year. They surely hoped to undercut Apple's rumoured target price when they were doing the original design work.
Well if you've deliberately taken a concealed, disguised camera in to work it'd be easier for them to show mens rea and a lot harder for you to claim good faith if a bunch of photos of your super-secret workspace later showed up on Friendface.
Neowin asked Mozilla, the creator of Firefox, if it has any plans to end support for XP and Johnathan Nightingale, VP of Firefox at Mozilla stated, "We have no plans to discontinue support for our XP users."
Surely you'd just have the CPU/GPU/RAM in a single component, and then it could talk to the other peripherals through some sort of efficient bus? Not 4 pins, but maybe HDMI to the display and USB out to a hub in the backplate that then talked to the other peripherals.
1) User-friendly connectors and easy access paths use up volume. It's not a zero-sum game, but making a compact machine with user-serviceable components takes engineering effort, which means more R&D money.
2) You can reduce volume by using non-standard parts that fit more neatly together.
The first one means your GPU and CPU are more often than not a single component soldered directly on the motherboard, and the second one means that nobody has come up with a standardised monitor/hinge or even keyboard/trackpad design.
If Europa had a solid surface that'd almost be advisable, but you're not going to have glass to land on. You'll have a thin crust of radioactive ice over a warm lake of radioactive water.
It varies from person to person, seeing as every scale lists both sets of units. As someone who actually lives here I think I have a more sound perspective on how we measure things.
I could list the papers that constitute the "authority" on the issue, but I wouldn't know where to start, and we'd be here for years. In much the same way that you can use simple arithmetic without having to demonstrate its validity from axioms (and those axioms' validity for the problem at hand), I can quite reasonably defer to a body of scientific knowledge that would take man-centuries to recreate, unless presented evidence to the contrary.
The double helix was not a "suffient falsifiable hypothesis statement". The Higgs model was not a "sufficient falsifiable hypothesis statement". The atomic picture of matter was not a "sufficient falsifiable hypothesis statement". Science is about more than making neat little yes/no questions. Sometimes it's about making observations and throwing a model out there and seeing if it works. In Higgs' case, that might take decades.
Science must be falsifiable. That does not mean that every scientific statement must be originally presented as a falsifiable hypothesis.
Making back the difference is no good if the games you want aren't available on Android. Frankly the best tablet games are all aimed at tablet interfaces anyway.
In my experience good journals aren't about rejecting bad papers - once you get above a certain level in a subject each journal is sending its papers to the same reviewers - but that good journals reject unimportant papers. That's why things like publications in big-name journals are significant, they imply important work. Not, necessarily, correct work, but anyone who's unwilling to publish research that turns out to be wrong shouldn't be a scientist in the first place.
I can't say that I, personally deny any of those things, as I'm unqualified. However I have the sense to side with a broad spectrum of independent, competing researchers in a wide variety of fields with decades more experience than me whose work all points in a direction contrary to the argument your furthering.
You understand that you're basically calling for the elimination of explorational science, right? No more observational science, no more materialistically inventive science, no more methodologically inventive science, no more science but that which can be boiled down into a child's pat hypothesis-test-result-conclusions science lesson.
You're basically saying that we should obliterate science as a creative endeavour.
Slashdot Mirror
Why have you set your phone to give you immediate notifications about things you don't need to respond to immediately?
I'm lucky, I don't get enough calls or texts that I have to go that far. I turn that on between the late evening and morning, or when I'm at the movies, though.
I'm curious, why did volleyball obviate the need for a watch? I mean I can understand it making a watch inconvenient (although they come off, you know) but when I started playing hockey, I still needed to check when my break ended at work or whether I was late getting back to school from lunch.
The i-something generation being everyone who has owned a watch since batteries and self-winding mechanisms were invented?
Notification triage. A lot of people who apparently haven't figured out the Notification settings on their phones get a beep or a buzz every time there's an email or a Facebook message or an app update or whatever the fuck, and for those people being able to see what it was and dismiss it without pulling their phone out their pocket would be convenient.
Personally, I simply turned off notifications windows, sounds, and vibration for everything that doesn't require my immediate attention (SMS and phone calls). I look at my Notification list the next time I unlock my phone and deal with the trivial stuff then.
You'd have to drop the spy cameras in their pocket and then somehow plant evidence that they were actually using the cameras to cause leaks, yes, but that's all the help you're getting from me on this one. Enjoy ascending to management.
Wouldn't be the first time they used rumours to their own advantage. It's widely accepted that Apple seeded rumours of an "under-$1000" price point for the original iPad to make its actual $500 price look really, really good. I doubt it's a coincidence that HP and Microsoft's own tablet, the Slate 500, wound up costing $800 later that year. They surely hoped to undercut Apple's rumoured target price when they were doing the original design work.
Well if you've deliberately taken a concealed, disguised camera in to work it'd be easier for them to show mens rea and a lot harder for you to claim good faith if a bunch of photos of your super-secret workspace later showed up on Friendface.
From the fine article:
Neowin asked Mozilla, the creator of Firefox, if it has any plans to end support for XP and Johnathan Nightingale, VP of Firefox at Mozilla stated, "We have no plans to discontinue support for our XP users."
Surely you'd just have the CPU/GPU/RAM in a single component, and then it could talk to the other peripherals through some sort of efficient bus? Not 4 pins, but maybe HDMI to the display and USB out to a hub in the backplate that then talked to the other peripherals.
Size constraints, essentially.
1) User-friendly connectors and easy access paths use up volume. It's not a zero-sum game, but making a compact machine with user-serviceable components takes engineering effort, which means more R&D money.
2) You can reduce volume by using non-standard parts that fit more neatly together.
The first one means your GPU and CPU are more often than not a single component soldered directly on the motherboard, and the second one means that nobody has come up with a standardised monitor/hinge or even keyboard/trackpad design.
Nokia will sell you that. Admittedly it'll charge with a barrel plug rather than a USB cable but then it's a phone, not a computer peripheral.
They're collaborating with the Phonebloks guy. It's up there in the summary.
If Europa had a solid surface that'd almost be advisable, but you're not going to have glass to land on. You'll have a thin crust of radioactive ice over a warm lake of radioactive water.
It varies from person to person, seeing as every scale lists both sets of units. As someone who actually lives here I think I have a more sound perspective on how we measure things.
Yes, I defer to the best available evidence rather than picking an unsupported answer and hoping that dumb luck proves me right in the future.
I could list the papers that constitute the "authority" on the issue, but I wouldn't know where to start, and we'd be here for years. In much the same way that you can use simple arithmetic without having to demonstrate its validity from axioms (and those axioms' validity for the problem at hand), I can quite reasonably defer to a body of scientific knowledge that would take man-centuries to recreate, unless presented evidence to the contrary.
The double helix was not a "suffient falsifiable hypothesis statement". The Higgs model was not a "sufficient falsifiable hypothesis statement". The atomic picture of matter was not a "sufficient falsifiable hypothesis statement". Science is about more than making neat little yes/no questions. Sometimes it's about making observations and throwing a model out there and seeing if it works. In Higgs' case, that might take decades.
Science must be falsifiable. That does not mean that every scientific statement must be originally presented as a falsifiable hypothesis.
Non-fraudulent but incorrect papers are also retracted, although it clearly needs to happen more often.
Making back the difference is no good if the games you want aren't available on Android. Frankly the best tablet games are all aimed at tablet interfaces anyway.
No kidding, I genuinely did not know this was on sale. I was impressed that they were doing such big updates while it was still in testing.
So what you're saying is that the sky is blue because air is coloured a very pale shade of blue.
In my experience good journals aren't about rejecting bad papers - once you get above a certain level in a subject each journal is sending its papers to the same reviewers - but that good journals reject unimportant papers. That's why things like publications in big-name journals are significant, they imply important work. Not, necessarily, correct work, but anyone who's unwilling to publish research that turns out to be wrong shouldn't be a scientist in the first place.
I can't say that I, personally deny any of those things, as I'm unqualified. However I have the sense to side with a broad spectrum of independent, competing researchers in a wide variety of fields with decades more experience than me whose work all points in a direction contrary to the argument your furthering.
You understand that you're basically calling for the elimination of explorational science, right? No more observational science, no more materialistically inventive science, no more methodologically inventive science, no more science but that which can be boiled down into a child's pat hypothesis-test-result-conclusions science lesson.
You're basically saying that we should obliterate science as a creative endeavour.