Maybe I'm completely off here, but I'd say this is sort of the soft, short-bus version of government fighting for (or at least trying to advance) net neutrality. In this case, the prospective non-neutral area isn't ISP-based. (By extension, it's also not Telcos carrying on about their business rights, either -- which probably goes a very long way to explain why government officials might speak on behalf of the consumers.)
Yeah, I know. The guy's a whackjob, and any "manifesto" that includes the word "froggies" is going to go down in infamy. Not arguing it. Ever. At all.
Still, though, froggies do need thinking about, if not with a pipe-bomb vest. Amphibian declines and extinctions nowadays are horrific. Chytrid's toll throughout so many areas is no joke.
That's not negative versus positive reinforcement. That's punishment vs. positive reinforcement. It's not as though they're playing a siren 24/7 and offering people an hour of peace for every time they wheel the recycling bin to the curb. Positive reinforcement adds something to the environment to encourage repetition of a given behavior, while negative removes something from the environment to encourage repetition of a given behavior. Punishment is meant specifically to discourage repetition of a given behavior.
When it comes to civic involvement, positive reinforcement is generally more useful than negative reinforcement is. Installation of 24/7 sirens is generally considered counterproductive for municipal budgets and property values (to say nothing of taxes).
"Or they could design the train so that people could drive their cars onto it and park.
It'd kill the airlines in a week."
I was thinking the exact same thing. I'd never fly or drive more than 300 miles again and I'd actually take a train for the first time in my life.
This would also help electric cars because you no longer need a car that can drive 400 miles on a tank of gas and be refilled in 5 minutes.
1) Drive electric car 20-50 miles to train
2) drive electric car onto train
3) leave car and go to quarters for sleeping, eating, etc
4) get back in car and depart train to destination
only problem I see is that a boxcar is only about 10 feet wide while a large SUV is closer to 20 feet long so you couldn't drive vehicles on there the easiest way which would be sideways, they'd have to go lengthway like the train. I'm afraid by the time you loaded hundreds of vehicles on the train most people could have already arrived by plane.
Mind you, Amtrak's Auto Train has been pulling this off for a while, albeit in the limited sense of one route departing each terminus once daily. Were they to add more trains (which itself might not necessarily be practical, considering the way rail traffic observes prioritized access and spacing along a given stretch of track -- but if the departures are 11 hours apart, that'd be OK, wouldn't it? Theoretically, at least?) or more routes (like, say, outside Chicago to San Antonio, or to San Fran or Seattle), Auto Trains could prove extremely popular.
Since there's only one route (Lorton, VA to/from Sanford, FL), the transit to either station to travel on the train can vary quite a bit -- I used the Auto Train to move from SW PA to Tampa last summer, and I had roughly a 2.5-3 hour run from my original hometown to Lorton. Were I moving from just outside of the DC beltway, I would've of course used considerably less fuel (not even driving a hybrid, me) for my trip.
Could indeed be worse, then. This could've been a subplot about chips being injected into John Turturro's buttcheek, ostensibly by the part of the Constructicons' gestalt that formed Devastator's testicles.
Please believe me when I say BP isn't exactly lining up along every shore to take care of what's quite possibly about to make landfall.
Believe me, BP still needs to pay dearly -- but which would you rather do, wait until they get off their rears to mitigate the disaster, quite possibly permitting an awful lot of damage in the process, or step in to try to ensure its mitigation? Should people simply sit on their hands and wait for BP, or should they do what they can?
Me, I'm collecting toothbrushes and old bedsheets, to start. Sorry if that doesn't play into your plans!
There are two ways of looking at what to do -- proximate and ultimate.
In the proximate sense, one thing to do is volunteer time or supplies if you're in an affected area. I'm in Florida -- in my area, I know right now of Suncoast Seabird Sanctuary ( http://www.seabirdsanctuary.com/uploads/oil.pdf ) and Audubon Florida ( http://audubonoffloridanews.org/ ), which are each asking for volunteers, money, and/or supplies. Other organizations may be looking for help -- help if you can, spread the word even if you can't.
In the ultimate sense, it's hard not to become reactionary to things like this. Clearly there's a need for some serious prevention, and however that comes about, it must. There are boycotts, letter writing campaigns, and the like, and while they may seem awfully pedestrian, the first step in each is something that's been needed for an exquisitely long time -- awareness. People don't tend to realize that the oceans are just downstream from everyone -- for example, just how many people do you think recognize the oil spill that dribbles into the Gulf every year from runoff into the Mississippi watershed? It's once people start to realize what's happening, what's important, and where changes need to happen that movement toward change occurs. Oil being the trigger word that it is these days, it's hard to say whether or not ocean health is foremost in people's minds. Building awareness -- even inland! -- is about getting it there.
I don't know what the key is. Maybe it's kids asking whether the animals they love seeing at the aquarium are going to be lost because of the oil spill. Maybe it's fishermen who lose their livelihoods because their fisheries are either contaminated or outright destroyed. Maybe it's people who worked in tourism and sports industries that previously thrived on healthy beaches and coastal waters. Whatever that key is, some catalysis needs to happen soon, and it needs to start with people simply caring enough to understand and do something, wherever they are, however they can. Too much is at stake.
Since this is BP's third major catastrophe in 5 years, I would not be surprised if they lose their license to operate.
Loaded to the gills with failsafes... but this time, they missed a gill!
Would BP really stand to lose their license to operate? Has that happened to anyone before? Just thinking about it makes me think David and Goliath on a scale not seen... well, ever, really.
Things frequently do not add up in general because corporations pay firms to make sure the full details don't hit the press, especially when the public is still angry about the event in question.
Speaking as someone who lives less than an hour away from Florida's Gulf coast, I can say there's quite a bit of anger among many people here, including my colleagues and I -- who, admittedly, do not study rocks. At our level, precise failure modes of equipment are interesting details -- right up there with O-rings in ice water, even -- but we tend to stop at whether or not the issue was indeed preventable. If, indeed, prevention was possible but not pursued, exact failure modes are only gravy. This is time for blame. Yes, really. "Shit happens" would be a fabulously fatuous defense for anyone working on or owning an oil rig that fails in this manner. (I really do wonder if anyone tries a more flowery phrasing of that for the hearings that I have no doubt will eventuate.)
While it is indeed important to remember those people who died on the rig, considering the lost livelihoods and environmental destruction at hand is of perhaps deeper importance. Fishing communities stand to be ruined by either dead or unsafe fisheries. Beaches may be closed for quite some time until they can be cleaned. Endangered wildlife may suffer some dramatic losses thanks to this failure -- some local monitoring agencies are suggesting that whole cohorts of sea turtle nests may be lost because of the effects of the spill. Please pardon me if I have some trouble giving a royal rat's ass exactly what mechanism didn't do its job -- what I recognize is that something cut out that shouldn't have, in a piece of equipment that is owned by a corporation that doesn't have a stellar record for environmentally sound equipment, resulting in an environmental catastrophe that has a lot of people -- my colleagues and I included -- trying to help however we can to minimize the destruction this failure stands to cause.
While I really, truly do wish that I could simply "chew it over at the lunch break," the honest truth is, I don't care about the mechanics of oil drilling -- nor should I. That's your job, and quite frankly, I'll bet that looking into ways of preventing this kind of thing from happening is also in no small part a consideration of your job, too. Insisting that people are making snap judgments because they don't know exactly what happened is really splitting hairs at the scale I'm working in, but not so much yours, I'll grant -- but kindly quit expecting anyone to flaunt a degree in Geology/Geophysics/insert-description-here before they can call bullshit when they see it.
Not so much, I imagine. Those are a lot more effective with small spills already on the surface... this time, it's moving up from below, where it can cover a wider area as it rises. Skimmers and floats can help, but they're not a prominent solution for something this large. It's like putting a band-aid on a severed artery.
Aside from which, how about the safety of the intermediates in this degradation process? A bacterium enjoying the bounty doesn't automatically produce a safe result in that which was consumed, does it?
Accidents happen. You'd be as quick with the "Thanks BP" if it were an Exxon or Shell or whatever rig.
This is a catastrophe and all current rigs need to be fully inspected before another one happens (and it will).
The kicker, I think, is that the damn things weren't already up for these kinds of inspections long before now. It's a pipe, drilled into the seabed, with a metal/concrete structure extending above the surface of the water and holding the pipe upright. It's also in a hurricane zone. Saying that they need to be inspected now is nice and all, but it's nothing short of criminal that they weren't taken care of well before the spill happened. They could have been inspected, should have been inspected, and I will happily bet you dollars to donuts that what PM could have been done within BP's resources was not done at all.
'The Spirit of Berlin' is also an autonomous car equipped with GPS navigation, scores of cameras, lasers and scanners that enable it to drive by itself. And should the technology-packed vehicle have a major bug, there's still an old fashioned way of stopping it. Two big external emergency buttons at the rear of the car allow people outside to shut down all systems.
Else the Spirit of Berlin might start looking like the Spirit of Dresden fairly quickly... but if the thing ends up out of control, what the hell good will buttons outside the thing do? Are they expecting someone to chase it?
That man has quite a bit of class, and as one actress (Kim Cattrall?) noted, he is indeed a renaissance man. I wish him well. He has earned both deep respect and a well-deserved retirement.
If they know the language they're teaching, does that really matter?
Granted, they may have to scan everything anyway -- it could even be a function of departmental policies -- but they should know what they're doing enough to recognize what students are doing. Scanning for plagiarism is an imperfect tool, but just a tool nonetheless. Not everything needs to be pushed to the dean's office, primarily for the reason you're giving.
My main exposure to this whole system is scanning student writing, and that particular system will generate false and true flags all the time. (Works cited lists tend to raise percentages quite a bit.) It's intended to be an extra line of defense when you can't necessarily see everyone's work on your own to compare it -- not to set off everyone who uses a strictly constrained code language.
Yes, simply because they're using automated software which is 100% incapable of critical thinking like what you just demonstrated.
And apparently, the professors are just as incapable of those thought processes.
This is why I left the IT field and went with horticulture - less bullshit from "professionals" with no common sense.
If they're pegging every single flag, then sure. If they're going back and looking at what the system spits out -- which I imagine they are -- they can tell what is and isn't plagiarized. Really. A report may come back saying that 85% of the text of the code is from a single source, in the order given -- and that's not plagiarism? If I were a TA for that course, I'd be having words with a student -- moreso than I would if someone's report came back saying that 5% came from here, 2% came from there, 15% came from over there...
Don't knock the professors out of hand. True, there's a yutz in every crowd, but they're often doing the best they can -- especially now that students have become far more militant about demanding the grades they want rather than working for them. Grade inflation isn't a myth, and it's frequently not the faculty's idea. When it comes down to it, though, the administrations involved will tend to lean more strongly toward whatever gets them less noise -- and if that means quieting down students who are complaining about their grades, then so be it. Same goes for students complaining about getting told about academic dishonesty.
Some of it does come down to copyright protection, yes. Some of it comes down to other important items, though -- up to and including wanting the students to do their own damn work.
I haven't dealt with this stuff in terms of CS courses and code, so how I speak on this is somewhat OT, but my university uses a similar system to check student writing. One student liberally copied text and ideas from her textbook on the subject in question. I will have students literally copy and paste all over the place, frequently from websites that are dirt wrong, just to pad out their papers. I have had students copy and paste from their (electronically distributed) lab instructions when they need to write up their methods for lab reports. Occasionally I will have students who will turn in the same paper, but with the idea that switching the order of the very same sentences within a given paragraph will make their work original. My personal favorites, though, and the ones the automated system won't catch, are the ones who will copy and paste the answers I send them to questions they e-mail me. Interestingly, it's as though I shouldn't notice those -- but when the student can't construct anything resembling "subject-verb-object" anywhere else in their paper, then they start writing in my style... Yeah. All this leads to one exquisitely unhappy TA who is all too happy to rain down hellfire and brimstone on the twerps. Really -- and it's so much worse because it is not isolated.
To be fair, the system does cough up a lot of false positives -- there are indeed only so many ways of describing the same procedure performed by some 120 people in the database at the same time -- so many that we frequently refrain from allowing students to see what their "plagiarism percentage" is once their papers come back from the scan. Still, we go through and check each and every report just to be sure that what's getting picked up is (or isn't) plagiarism. It's just that even after giving students the benefit of the doubt, we still have to fry several students.
So... instead of hiring more auditors for this year, they could have put a few megabucks toward some infrastructure improvements. Else that's a government contribution to recovering job losses...
Because, of course, IT manufacturers and professionals don't necessarily need the money, either. (Albeit there wouldn't be as many needed, which might leave some extra government money for someone else to use...)
"This kind of system may soon lead to handheld devices capable of diagnosing a wide range of disease in minutes, using only a small sample of blood."
Okay, so in the Bayesian sense, what's the false positive rate/posterior probability on all of those diseases? Testing everyone for the same battery might not be the best thing in the world.
Slashdot Mirror
Maybe I'm completely off here, but I'd say this is sort of the soft, short-bus version of government fighting for (or at least trying to advance) net neutrality. In this case, the prospective non-neutral area isn't ISP-based. (By extension, it's also not Telcos carrying on about their business rights, either -- which probably goes a very long way to explain why government officials might speak on behalf of the consumers.)
Yeah, I know. The guy's a whackjob, and any "manifesto" that includes the word "froggies" is going to go down in infamy. Not arguing it. Ever. At all.
Still, though, froggies do need thinking about, if not with a pipe-bomb vest. Amphibian declines and extinctions nowadays are horrific. Chytrid's toll throughout so many areas is no joke.
Not so far off from the truth -- turns out the guy pitched a series a few years ago and it got shot down.
Somewhat off-topic and pedantic, but...
That's not negative versus positive reinforcement. That's punishment vs. positive reinforcement. It's not as though they're playing a siren 24/7 and offering people an hour of peace for every time they wheel the recycling bin to the curb. Positive reinforcement adds something to the environment to encourage repetition of a given behavior, while negative removes something from the environment to encourage repetition of a given behavior. Punishment is meant specifically to discourage repetition of a given behavior.
When it comes to civic involvement, positive reinforcement is generally more useful than negative reinforcement is. Installation of 24/7 sirens is generally considered counterproductive for municipal budgets and property values (to say nothing of taxes).
"Or they could design the train so that people could drive their cars onto it and park.
It'd kill the airlines in a week."
I was thinking the exact same thing. I'd never fly or drive more than 300 miles again and I'd actually take a train for the first time in my life.
This would also help electric cars because you no longer need a car that can drive 400 miles on a tank of gas and be refilled in 5 minutes.
1) Drive electric car 20-50 miles to train
2) drive electric car onto train
3) leave car and go to quarters for sleeping, eating, etc
4) get back in car and depart train to destination
only problem I see is that a boxcar is only about 10 feet wide while a large SUV is closer to 20 feet long so you couldn't drive vehicles on there the easiest way which would be sideways, they'd have to go lengthway like the train. I'm afraid by the time you loaded hundreds of vehicles on the train most people could have already arrived by plane.
Mind you, Amtrak's Auto Train has been pulling this off for a while, albeit in the limited sense of one route departing each terminus once daily. Were they to add more trains (which itself might not necessarily be practical, considering the way rail traffic observes prioritized access and spacing along a given stretch of track -- but if the departures are 11 hours apart, that'd be OK, wouldn't it? Theoretically, at least?) or more routes (like, say, outside Chicago to San Antonio, or to San Fran or Seattle), Auto Trains could prove extremely popular.
Since there's only one route (Lorton, VA to/from Sanford, FL), the transit to either station to travel on the train can vary quite a bit -- I used the Auto Train to move from SW PA to Tampa last summer, and I had roughly a 2.5-3 hour run from my original hometown to Lorton. Were I moving from just outside of the DC beltway, I would've of course used considerably less fuel (not even driving a hybrid, me) for my trip.
Could indeed be worse, then. This could've been a subplot about chips being injected into John Turturro's buttcheek, ostensibly by the part of the Constructicons' gestalt that formed Devastator's testicles.
Please believe me when I say BP isn't exactly lining up along every shore to take care of what's quite possibly about to make landfall.
Believe me, BP still needs to pay dearly -- but which would you rather do, wait until they get off their rears to mitigate the disaster, quite possibly permitting an awful lot of damage in the process, or step in to try to ensure its mitigation? Should people simply sit on their hands and wait for BP, or should they do what they can?
Me, I'm collecting toothbrushes and old bedsheets, to start. Sorry if that doesn't play into your plans!
There are two ways of looking at what to do -- proximate and ultimate.
In the proximate sense, one thing to do is volunteer time or supplies if you're in an affected area. I'm in Florida -- in my area, I know right now of Suncoast Seabird Sanctuary ( http://www.seabirdsanctuary.com/uploads/oil.pdf ) and Audubon Florida ( http://audubonoffloridanews.org/ ), which are each asking for volunteers, money, and/or supplies. Other organizations may be looking for help -- help if you can, spread the word even if you can't.
In the ultimate sense, it's hard not to become reactionary to things like this. Clearly there's a need for some serious prevention, and however that comes about, it must. There are boycotts, letter writing campaigns, and the like, and while they may seem awfully pedestrian, the first step in each is something that's been needed for an exquisitely long time -- awareness. People don't tend to realize that the oceans are just downstream from everyone -- for example, just how many people do you think recognize the oil spill that dribbles into the Gulf every year from runoff into the Mississippi watershed? It's once people start to realize what's happening, what's important, and where changes need to happen that movement toward change occurs. Oil being the trigger word that it is these days, it's hard to say whether or not ocean health is foremost in people's minds. Building awareness -- even inland! -- is about getting it there.
I don't know what the key is. Maybe it's kids asking whether the animals they love seeing at the aquarium are going to be lost because of the oil spill. Maybe it's fishermen who lose their livelihoods because their fisheries are either contaminated or outright destroyed. Maybe it's people who worked in tourism and sports industries that previously thrived on healthy beaches and coastal waters. Whatever that key is, some catalysis needs to happen soon, and it needs to start with people simply caring enough to understand and do something, wherever they are, however they can. Too much is at stake.
Since this is BP's third major catastrophe in 5 years, I would not be surprised if they lose their license to operate.
Loaded to the gills with failsafes... but this time, they missed a gill!
Would BP really stand to lose their license to operate? Has that happened to anyone before? Just thinking about it makes me think David and Goliath on a scale not seen... well, ever, really.
Things frequently do not add up in general because corporations pay firms to make sure the full details don't hit the press, especially when the public is still angry about the event in question.
Speaking as someone who lives less than an hour away from Florida's Gulf coast, I can say there's quite a bit of anger among many people here, including my colleagues and I -- who, admittedly, do not study rocks. At our level, precise failure modes of equipment are interesting details -- right up there with O-rings in ice water, even -- but we tend to stop at whether or not the issue was indeed preventable. If, indeed, prevention was possible but not pursued, exact failure modes are only gravy. This is time for blame. Yes, really. "Shit happens" would be a fabulously fatuous defense for anyone working on or owning an oil rig that fails in this manner. (I really do wonder if anyone tries a more flowery phrasing of that for the hearings that I have no doubt will eventuate.)
While it is indeed important to remember those people who died on the rig, considering the lost livelihoods and environmental destruction at hand is of perhaps deeper importance. Fishing communities stand to be ruined by either dead or unsafe fisheries. Beaches may be closed for quite some time until they can be cleaned. Endangered wildlife may suffer some dramatic losses thanks to this failure -- some local monitoring agencies are suggesting that whole cohorts of sea turtle nests may be lost because of the effects of the spill. Please pardon me if I have some trouble giving a royal rat's ass exactly what mechanism didn't do its job -- what I recognize is that something cut out that shouldn't have, in a piece of equipment that is owned by a corporation that doesn't have a stellar record for environmentally sound equipment, resulting in an environmental catastrophe that has a lot of people -- my colleagues and I included -- trying to help however we can to minimize the destruction this failure stands to cause.
While I really, truly do wish that I could simply "chew it over at the lunch break," the honest truth is, I don't care about the mechanics of oil drilling -- nor should I. That's your job, and quite frankly, I'll bet that looking into ways of preventing this kind of thing from happening is also in no small part a consideration of your job, too. Insisting that people are making snap judgments because they don't know exactly what happened is really splitting hairs at the scale I'm working in, but not so much yours, I'll grant -- but kindly quit expecting anyone to flaunt a degree in Geology/Geophysics/insert-description-here before they can call bullshit when they see it.
Not so much, I imagine. Those are a lot more effective with small spills already on the surface... this time, it's moving up from below, where it can cover a wider area as it rises. Skimmers and floats can help, but they're not a prominent solution for something this large. It's like putting a band-aid on a severed artery.
Aside from which, how about the safety of the intermediates in this degradation process? A bacterium enjoying the bounty doesn't automatically produce a safe result in that which was consumed, does it?
Accidents happen. You'd be as quick with the "Thanks BP" if it were an Exxon or Shell or whatever rig.
This is a catastrophe and all current rigs need to be fully inspected before another one happens (and it will).
The kicker, I think, is that the damn things weren't already up for these kinds of inspections long before now. It's a pipe, drilled into the seabed, with a metal/concrete structure extending above the surface of the water and holding the pipe upright. It's also in a hurricane zone. Saying that they need to be inspected now is nice and all, but it's nothing short of criminal that they weren't taken care of well before the spill happened. They could have been inspected, should have been inspected, and I will happily bet you dollars to donuts that what PM could have been done within BP's resources was not done at all.
So, yeah. Thanks, BP.
'The Spirit of Berlin' is also an autonomous car equipped with GPS navigation, scores of cameras, lasers and scanners that enable it to drive by itself. And should the technology-packed vehicle have a major bug, there's still an old fashioned way of stopping it. Two big external emergency buttons at the rear of the car allow people outside to shut down all systems.
Else the Spirit of Berlin might start looking like the Spirit of Dresden fairly quickly... but if the thing ends up out of control, what the hell good will buttons outside the thing do? Are they expecting someone to chase it?
Indeed. Bless his soul. (And Jimmy Doohan's!)
That man has quite a bit of class, and as one actress (Kim Cattrall?) noted, he is indeed a renaissance man. I wish him well. He has earned both deep respect and a well-deserved retirement.
If they know the language they're teaching, does that really matter?
Granted, they may have to scan everything anyway -- it could even be a function of departmental policies -- but they should know what they're doing enough to recognize what students are doing. Scanning for plagiarism is an imperfect tool, but just a tool nonetheless. Not everything needs to be pushed to the dean's office, primarily for the reason you're giving.
My main exposure to this whole system is scanning student writing, and that particular system will generate false and true flags all the time. (Works cited lists tend to raise percentages quite a bit.) It's intended to be an extra line of defense when you can't necessarily see everyone's work on your own to compare it -- not to set off everyone who uses a strictly constrained code language.
"Would this flag me as a cheater?"
Yes, simply because they're using automated software which is 100% incapable of critical thinking like what you just demonstrated.
And apparently, the professors are just as incapable of those thought processes.
This is why I left the IT field and went with horticulture - less bullshit from "professionals" with no common sense.
If they're pegging every single flag, then sure. If they're going back and looking at what the system spits out -- which I imagine they are -- they can tell what is and isn't plagiarized. Really. A report may come back saying that 85% of the text of the code is from a single source, in the order given -- and that's not plagiarism? If I were a TA for that course, I'd be having words with a student -- moreso than I would if someone's report came back saying that 5% came from here, 2% came from there, 15% came from over there...
Don't knock the professors out of hand. True, there's a yutz in every crowd, but they're often doing the best they can -- especially now that students have become far more militant about demanding the grades they want rather than working for them. Grade inflation isn't a myth, and it's frequently not the faculty's idea. When it comes down to it, though, the administrations involved will tend to lean more strongly toward whatever gets them less noise -- and if that means quieting down students who are complaining about their grades, then so be it. Same goes for students complaining about getting told about academic dishonesty.
Some of it does come down to copyright protection, yes. Some of it comes down to other important items, though -- up to and including wanting the students to do their own damn work.
I haven't dealt with this stuff in terms of CS courses and code, so how I speak on this is somewhat OT, but my university uses a similar system to check student writing. One student liberally copied text and ideas from her textbook on the subject in question. I will have students literally copy and paste all over the place, frequently from websites that are dirt wrong, just to pad out their papers. I have had students copy and paste from their (electronically distributed) lab instructions when they need to write up their methods for lab reports. Occasionally I will have students who will turn in the same paper, but with the idea that switching the order of the very same sentences within a given paragraph will make their work original. My personal favorites, though, and the ones the automated system won't catch, are the ones who will copy and paste the answers I send them to questions they e-mail me. Interestingly, it's as though I shouldn't notice those -- but when the student can't construct anything resembling "subject-verb-object" anywhere else in their paper, then they start writing in my style... Yeah. All this leads to one exquisitely unhappy TA who is all too happy to rain down hellfire and brimstone on the twerps. Really -- and it's so much worse because it is not isolated.
To be fair, the system does cough up a lot of false positives -- there are indeed only so many ways of describing the same procedure performed by some 120 people in the database at the same time -- so many that we frequently refrain from allowing students to see what their "plagiarism percentage" is once their papers come back from the scan. Still, we go through and check each and every report just to be sure that what's getting picked up is (or isn't) plagiarism. It's just that even after giving students the benefit of the doubt, we still have to fry several students.
And carrot juice is murder.
It's not a "self-incrimination" clause, it is a clause against being a witness against yourself in a criminal case.
excerpt from the Fifth Amendment:
"nor shall be compelled in any criminal case to be a witness against himself"
Doesn't that "against" count as the "self-incrimination" part?
Anne McCaffrey wasn't happy enough with sending out Jay Katz just to hound the fans that posted dragonrider drawings...! Moreta save us all!
So... instead of hiring more auditors for this year, they could have put a few megabucks toward some infrastructure improvements. Else that's a government contribution to recovering job losses...
Because, of course, IT manufacturers and professionals don't necessarily need the money, either. (Albeit there wouldn't be as many needed, which might leave some extra government money for someone else to use...)
Since you can't be trusted to RTFA...
"This kind of system may soon lead to handheld devices capable of diagnosing a wide range of disease in minutes, using only a small sample of blood."
Okay, so in the Bayesian sense, what's the false positive rate/posterior probability on all of those diseases? Testing everyone for the same battery might not be the best thing in the world.
Who is Glenn Beck and what is his party?
Bless you, sir.