I honestly had no idea Bank of America actually existed. I thought it was another one of those made-up company names spammers use, like Prime Staadslotterij, Commercial Trust or Coventry Promotions. I mean, it doesn't even sound like a believable name.
It would be faster until some guy arrives 5 minutes later then everyone else and has to go through security and get on the plane,... "Sorry Sir, your row already boarded. Please see our Courtesy Office over in Terminal Z about rebooking for a later flight. Quite serious, Sir. Yes Sir, same to you too. No Sir, I do believe that act is anatomically impossible. Sir, you are aware of course that as a human you are mostly water? Now, do you want us to press the point that you have knowingly passed through security while being a liquid container greater than 100ml? No, I did not think so, Sir. Terminal Z? Over there, to the left and doen the hall for oh, twenty minutes or so. Bye Sir."
I have a pretty good amount of memory on my current machine - 2Gb - and I mostly just never close any applications, especially with the big ones like Gimp just reusing the already open instance when you open a new file. I suspect that preload would not actually be all that useful for me in practice; I'm still goign to enable it to see if I'm wrong, though.
If the TOS where to include some means for controlling publications which resulted from analysis of the data, then it might be more likely to succeed.
But in that case, would you want to go anywhere close to someone else's data, for the risk of "contaminating" your research and perhaps end up in a protracted brawl over discovery rights?
I mostly agree with everybody else: it's a neat idea but for a lot of people it's not going to fly.
The one area I think it could be good is for datasets that are already open and that are meant to be shared. In vision research, for instance, or in various fields in machine learning there's quite a lot of sort-of-standard test data sets created by various groups that can make it easier to compare models directly. Having all of those collected in one place would certainly make it easier to find and actually use them rather than reinventing the wheel once again.
But first, you don't show the actual experimental animal, especially when it's in the US. For security as well as PR reasons, few labs accept filming experiments directly. Second, no, the robot isn't balancing. Just getting the actual motor responses is plenty for now (as you guess, the actual feedback can't be done directly since the body and configuration isn't the same; you need to "translate" intention).
More seriously, learning a second language (if you do not know one already) is a great idea. "good enough" coders are a dime a dozen; you're not going to distinguish yourself in that area. The vast majority of coding-related jobs are in places where the code and the computer system is not the point, but just a support function for whatever the business is really about.
So, go for something different, a skill set that not everybody has, but that can be useful in your future company. A second language is good (if you're in the US, learning Spanish is not a bad idea). Learning economy, especially business-useful stuff like the basics of accounting is another good idea.
The only alternative is to publish in open access journals, which is fine in principle. However, for a cash-strapped lab, it can be hard to pay open access fees for several articles a year, even with NIH funding.
And that is before you factor in that Open Access journals that do require a fee usually have very lenient fee waivers for anybody who can't pay whatever fee they're asking.
So if economy and prudent use of your grant money is a consideration they you should choose open-access journals over for-profit ones.
I don't see how a major web development language, especially one made by Japanese designers, can go so long without adding comprehensive unicode support.
Ruby isn't a web development language. It's been used to write a web development framework, which isn't the same thing. And Japan has not picked up Unicode since it has some rather dumb issues with Japanese (missing characters and the like). You preferentially use other encodings.
Ruby is not a web development language. It is a general scripting language, like Perl or Python. You still seem to conflate the language with the specific use case of Rails - dynamic website scripting.
I use it heavily as my general scripting language; where I would have used Perl for small utilities, file munging or what have you before, I now use Ruby. Not because Perl is bad - it isn't - but Ruby really is in many respects Perl done right, with many of the benefits and without the syntactic quirkiness. Scaling just isn't a factor for most uses of a script language.
So go take a look at SciLab or other projects whose explicit goal is not compatibility with an existing closed system. Octave can by its very nature not innovate beyond what is possible within the restraints of compatibility (and for some inexplicable reason can't seem to drop gnuplot either, despite it being the cause of most of the remaining compatibility problems).
OSX is fine in many ways, but stability is not really a strong point. It is far too easy to bring down an important component (like the finder) and have to reboot, and many basic applications are rather flaky as well.
...it will obviously lead to better fuel economy and more reliable engines;) Man, does Toyota have a work-on-your-own-projects day like Google? Toyota is a very big company, with resources invested in a lot of areas that have nothing to do with car design. In addition, they've most likely seen the end of automobiles as a growth market coming and have been actively betting on robotics as the next big-ticket growth area within the next twenty years or so.
I think i'll invent a line of robots who's sole purpose is to whack you over the head with a cardboard tube if you kick them or other robots over, or just generally abuse technology for your own amusement. Then i'll release version 2 which features a crowbar instead of a cardboard tube. I'll make a fortune selling them as guards for kick-overable robots, vending machines, cars, and DVD's. It'll have a hard time protecting anything, being constantly mobbed by people dressed in tight leather straps, handcuffs and hoods with signs reading "Hurt me, I've been bad."
If port operation, airlines and television stations are a strategic resource, then so is much of the rest of commercial activity.
Would you not say that food supply is a strategic resource fully in line with ports? If so, Japan is completely justified in closing its markets for food imports that compete with their farmers. And isn't the internet a strategic resource by now? With the same reasoning as yours, stopping foreign influence on such important infrastructure in favour of domestic resources is sensible, even prudent.
Or is it only a strategic resource when it fits your agenda?
AFAIK, no outside (foreign) interests can own more than 49% of any Chinese enterprise - that way the Chinese retain the controlling interest of their companies.
In all fairness, the US does the same both formally (no non-us controlling ownership of any US airline) and informally, as when the US congress stopped the buyout of port operator company. And before anybody starts squealing about "national security", neither has anything to do with it. The port operator is not in control of anything security related, and foreign airlines fly in US airspace all the time but just aren't allowed to go between two US destinations.
IM is fine. IM is great. But IM only works when both are connected and both have time to reply. I prefer IM for short pings to people, quick exchanges or realtime issues. But email is much better for longer, more considered discussions, especially when the issues may take hours or days to figure out.
I would not use email to check if someone wants to catch lunch. And I would not use any kind of IM to discuss issues with the latest revision of a journal paper. As a guess, when you're 16 you have a lot of the former kinds of communication and very little of the latter. As you grow older the balance shifts. Both have their place.
Why not just have people use their driver's license every time?
Because a lot of people don't have driver's licenses here, and thus there is no standard ID card to read, nor is there any requirement that you actually own one. A fair amount of people will actually use their bankbook or similar document, and for signatures you'd use a hanko.
All in all, it is nifty, automatic, and relatively painless. Still waiting to discover the quirks It's right in the Ars review - it's hard link based, so it only works on the level of whole files. Any change anywhere in a file (like an email repo or database file) and the entire file needs to have a new copy. So for some users this will fill up the backup media with new copies of large files in a matter of days or weeks.
they'll figure out how important PCs are once they want to start designing those video games, cell phones, PDAs, etc.
The article is about the home market, not work. If you'd read it, they specifically point out that Japanese don't bring work home and thus don't have that reason to have a PC around. Separately, the article states that the upgrade cycle for companies has lengthened, as there is little need to replace working machines when the newer models do not offer anything needed.
"The Tsar Bomba qualifies as the single most powerful device ever utilized throughout the history of humanity." Except for, say, the aforementioned sun, The sun is not a device. You know, if we're going to be pedantic.
This article is BS - someone needs to maintain the machines, network, reset passwords, update software, maintain databases, train clusers, etc. IT is changing? Hmmph, the sun is coming up tomorrow, too. Do you think it takes twice as many workers to maintain twice as many machines? If one large organization like Google or Salesforce takes over a significant portion of, say one hundred individual IT department systems, do you think they'll need to hire as many people as worked at those departments? Or, with the large degree of automation they can do over a large set of machines, do they perhaps not need to hire a single new person?
Google maintains a very large number of redundant, cheap, standardized servers. When one of them breaks, you just unplug it and roll in a new one, which connects to the itnernal network, gets loaded with the OS and application code and gets to work, with little human intervention beyond getting plugged in. In fact, considering the number of machines they buy, the machine BIOSes are probably set up correctly for network boot right from the manufacturer. Do you think the guys uncrating machines and replacing broken ones get paid nearly as much as the guy at a small IT department that appraised, ordered and carefully set up individual servers at his company?
Someone throws something out there, and another scientist checks it, and bam, we learn something. Yep. We learn that "never hold the press conference until after peer review and acceptance of publication".
In other words, they'll specifically hold your bags back unless you pay for them to be handed over at the same time as those who have been paid for.
So why not skip the "which order" diversion. Set a time limit - two hours perhaps - and have you pay, oh, one dollar per ten minutes you want your bags earlier than that. You want your bags within the first ten minutes after landing you pay 12 dollars. You only got a fiver then the staff will be happy to let your bags stand in a corner for the hour or so you didn't pay.
Could extend this with a same-company service, where, if you're connecting to another flight by the same company you only need to pay that dollar charge, whereas if you're connecting to a competitor the price is five dollars per ten minutes.
And really, why stop there? You want to go to the bathroom in-flight? Make sure you bring change on board. Or perhaps a "seat guarantee" would be nice - the ticket you bought is a lottery one, and depending on how much you pay you get better or worse odds on actually getting on your flight in the concourse seat raffle. A premium charge - say three times list - will guarantee an actual seat in the flight you've paid for.
Slashdot Mirror
I honestly had no idea Bank of America actually existed. I thought it was another one of those made-up company names spammers use, like Prime Staadslotterij, Commercial Trust or Coventry Promotions. I mean, it doesn't even sound like a believable name.
I have a pretty good amount of memory on my current machine - 2Gb - and I mostly just never close any applications, especially with the big ones like Gimp just reusing the already open instance when you open a new file. I suspect that preload would not actually be all that useful for me in practice; I'm still goign to enable it to see if I'm wrong, though.
If the TOS where to include some means for controlling publications which resulted from analysis of the data, then it might be more likely to succeed.
But in that case, would you want to go anywhere close to someone else's data, for the risk of "contaminating" your research and perhaps end up in a protracted brawl over discovery rights?
I mostly agree with everybody else: it's a neat idea but for a lot of people it's not going to fly.
The one area I think it could be good is for datasets that are already open and that are meant to be shared. In vision research, for instance, or in various fields in machine learning there's quite a lot of sort-of-standard test data sets created by various groups that can make it easier to compare models directly. Having all of those collected in one place would certainly make it easier to find and actually use them rather than reinventing the wheel once again.
Not BS, and yes, it's being run in real time.
But first, you don't show the actual experimental animal, especially when it's in the US. For security as well as PR reasons, few labs accept filming experiments directly. Second, no, the robot isn't balancing. Just getting the actual motor responses is plenty for now (as you guess, the actual feedback can't be done directly since the body and configuration isn't the same; you need to "translate" intention).
More seriously, learning a second language (if you do not know one already) is a great idea. "good enough" coders are a dime a dozen; you're not going to distinguish yourself in that area. The vast majority of coding-related jobs are in places where the code and the computer system is not the point, but just a support function for whatever the business is really about.
So, go for something different, a skill set that not everybody has, but that can be useful in your future company. A second language is good (if you're in the US, learning Spanish is not a bad idea). Learning economy, especially business-useful stuff like the basics of accounting is another good idea.
The only alternative is to publish in open access journals, which is fine in principle. However, for a cash-strapped lab, it can be hard to pay open access fees for several articles a year, even with NIH funding.
You're in luck. As it turns out, Open Access journals are actually cheaper to publish in for the authors than for-profit journals, with most of them charging no author fees at all:
http://www.sennoma.net/main/archives/2007/12/if_it_wont_sink_in_maybe_we_ca.php
And that is before you factor in that Open Access journals that do require a fee usually have very lenient fee waivers for anybody who can't pay whatever fee they're asking.
So if economy and prudent use of your grant money is a consideration they you should choose open-access journals over for-profit ones.
I don't see how a major web development language, especially one made by Japanese designers, can go so long without adding comprehensive unicode support.
Ruby isn't a web development language. It's been used to write a web development framework, which isn't the same thing. And Japan has not picked up Unicode since it has some rather dumb issues with Japanese (missing characters and the like). You preferentially use other encodings.
Ruby is not a web development language. It is a general scripting language, like Perl or Python. You still seem to conflate the language with the specific use case of Rails - dynamic website scripting.
I use it heavily as my general scripting language; where I would have used Perl for small utilities, file munging or what have you before, I now use Ruby. Not because Perl is bad - it isn't - but Ruby really is in many respects Perl done right, with many of the benefits and without the syntactic quirkiness. Scaling just isn't a factor for most uses of a script language.
So go take a look at SciLab or other projects whose explicit goal is not compatibility with an existing closed system. Octave can by its very nature not innovate beyond what is possible within the restraints of compatibility (and for some inexplicable reason can't seem to drop gnuplot either, despite it being the cause of most of the remaining compatibility problems).
OSX is fine in many ways, but stability is not really a strong point. It is far too easy to bring down an important component (like the finder) and have to reboot, and many basic applications are rather flaky as well.
...it will obviously lead to better fuel economy and more reliable enginesI wrote about the i-1 on my blog; there's some pictures there that might be interesting.
http://janneinosaka.blogspot.com/2007/11/i-1.html
Ports, Airlines, etc ARE strategic resource.
If port operation, airlines and television stations are a strategic resource, then so is much of the rest of commercial activity.
Would you not say that food supply is a strategic resource fully in line with ports? If so, Japan is completely justified in closing its markets for food imports that compete with their farmers. And isn't the internet a strategic resource by now? With the same reasoning as yours, stopping foreign influence on such important infrastructure in favour of domestic resources is sensible, even prudent.
Or is it only a strategic resource when it fits your agenda?
AFAIK, no outside (foreign) interests can own more than 49% of any Chinese enterprise - that way the Chinese retain the controlling interest of their companies.
In all fairness, the US does the same both formally (no non-us controlling ownership of any US airline) and informally, as when the US congress stopped the buyout of port operator company. And before anybody starts squealing about "national security", neither has anything to do with it. The port operator is not in control of anything security related, and foreign airlines fly in US airspace all the time but just aren't allowed to go between two US destinations.
IM is fine. IM is great. But IM only works when both are connected and both have time to reply. I prefer IM for short pings to people, quick exchanges or realtime issues. But email is much better for longer, more considered discussions, especially when the issues may take hours or days to figure out.
I would not use email to check if someone wants to catch lunch. And I would not use any kind of IM to discuss issues with the latest revision of a journal paper. As a guess, when you're 16 you have a lot of the former kinds of communication and very little of the latter. As you grow older the balance shifts. Both have their place.
Why not just have people use their driver's license every time?
Because a lot of people don't have driver's licenses here, and thus there is no standard ID card to read, nor is there any requirement that you actually own one. A fair amount of people will actually use their bankbook or similar document, and for signatures you'd use a hanko.
they'll figure out how important PCs are once they want to start designing those video games, cell phones, PDAs, etc.
The article is about the home market, not work. If you'd read it, they specifically point out that Japanese don't bring work home and thus don't have that reason to have a PC around. Separately, the article states that the upgrade cycle for companies has lengthened, as there is little need to replace working machines when the newer models do not offer anything needed.
Google maintains a very large number of redundant, cheap, standardized servers. When one of them breaks, you just unplug it and roll in a new one, which connects to the itnernal network, gets loaded with the OS and application code and gets to work, with little human intervention beyond getting plugged in. In fact, considering the number of machines they buy, the machine BIOSes are probably set up correctly for network boot right from the manufacturer. Do you think the guys uncrating machines and replacing broken ones get paid nearly as much as the guy at a small IT department that appraised, ordered and carefully set up individual servers at his company?
Well, in how many fields could you expect to be paid high wages as an entry-level beginner, with little experience and no specialty?
In other words, they'll specifically hold your bags back unless you pay for them to be handed over at the same time as those who have been paid for.
So why not skip the "which order" diversion. Set a time limit - two hours perhaps - and have you pay, oh, one dollar per ten minutes you want your bags earlier than that. You want your bags within the first ten minutes after landing you pay 12 dollars. You only got a fiver then the staff will be happy to let your bags stand in a corner for the hour or so you didn't pay.
Could extend this with a same-company service, where, if you're connecting to another flight by the same company you only need to pay that dollar charge, whereas if you're connecting to a competitor the price is five dollars per ten minutes.
And really, why stop there? You want to go to the bathroom in-flight? Make sure you bring change on board. Or perhaps a "seat guarantee" would be nice - the ticket you bought is a lottery one, and depending on how much you pay you get better or worse odds on actually getting on your flight in the concourse seat raffle. A premium charge - say three times list - will guarantee an actual seat in the flight you've paid for.