It's not medical equipment unless it's covered in ugly, pink "medical grade" plastic and exposed polished stainless steel tubes. Also, it must have an impossible-to-clean membrane keypad. And cost four thousand dollars, and can only be rented for one thousand dollars a month.
Then and only then should the government pay for his rehabilitation tool.
Seems like a lot of effort. You can always use the c interface (which itself is weird, considering matlab's roots in fortran...) but then you'd have to learn c. Matlab is a tool for physicists and engineers, not computer scientists. They don't necessarily want to take the time to learn c, or they'd have done that. Some do, anyway, of course, but usually what they produce will be one off functions for a specific goal, not entire libraries suitable for sharing.
Frankly, even equally worrisome is that Matlab doesn't appear to take advantage of GPGPU yet. The concept has been around for over half a decade, and I'd have expected the MAtrix LABoratory to jump on the bandwagon quicker than most. It's a game changer in their core competency, after all.
No adds or subtracts, but 128 invocations of a mysterious square root function that doesn't involve adds, subtracts, or divisions.
Therefore the square root function is the problem, and the reason is that it is implemented as a ghastly huge lookup table. This program never gets loaded into memory, let alone has a chance to actually run.
It's possible that the different compression schemes still leave enough zeros in the right coefficients in the frequency domain to recognize a codec used one or two transcodes ago.
Also, if you're not transcoding to "motion bitmap" then you're going to lose quality every generation.
With disk space the way it is, (i.e. *cheap*) I don't know why people would even want a camera that records in a format that uses interframe compression.
I got a camera not long ago that still used DV tapes for this very reason: hdd and dvd all seemed to use codecs that would make editing frustrating, even though they had higher byte-capacity (and therefore vastly higher storage capacity due to the higher compression...)
A patent affects the manufacturer of a product. The camera manufacturers have to respect patents.
Copyright affects the distribution of a work, which doesn't belong to the manufacturer of the tools used to produce the work, and it also doesn't belong to the patent holder which the manufacturers licensed the right to use their patent in their manufacture.
Copy right belongs to the producer of a work. And only an explicit, mutual agreement among the three parties can cause it to be assigned otherwise.
If the law supports what YOU say, then the law is wrong.
I kind-of think "Lost" is the dumbed down version. A chance meeting five years ago might have relevance to the current storyline, but you don't find out about the five-year-old chance meeting until you're already in the middle of the story where it's relevant.
And lately, apparently, there's a whole flash-sideways thing going on that so far appears to be impossible to be relevant to anything in the actual story....
Heh. The thing you have to realize, is that Ticketmaster has never been "not evil." They've never even gotten any "not evil" on them accidentally. Bitching about ticketmaster is like the frog bitching about the scorpion in the classic fable.
People were asking for the passwords. People who may even have had the authority to have them. However the only person who Terry was certain legitimately represented the owners that he would be able to identify was the Mayor, to whom he gave the passwords.
How hard is this to understand? I guess very, since it seems Terry has had a difficult time explaining it, or assuming it was obvious.
They are considered uninsurable by their very nature.
Assuming that is true, it doesn't prove the point you're trying to make. Insurance companies love risk; it lets them charge higher premiums.
There are a few reasons why insurance companies wouldn't touch something.
One is over-regulation: If they're not allowed to charge the premiums necessary against some event, then they can't involve themselves in that market if they want to stay in business.
Another is that the risk is unknown, and they're afraid of charging too low a premium against the risk.
And finally, the risk might be so low that a reasonable premium is just not worth their time to bother. (this is probably the reason so few people have flood insurance: the premiums charged in low-risk areas should be vanishingly small and affordable, but the necessary overhead bumps them into the "unreasonable" levels from a property owner's point of view.)
None of those necessarily suggests that the thing they'd be insuring against is a particularly high risk, though, especially for an industry that's been around for half a century generating statistics. In a free-market, any categorizable risk will find a premium at which someone is willing to insure it.
They're going to be very far apart, and they're going to be lit up. They're no more of a danger to small craft than any other well-lit navigational buoy.
They don't have to suck at the things petrol cars do. Someone just needs to be the first state to electrify the highways: electric cars can charge on-the-go, why would you want carry 300 miles worth of stored chemical energy if you didn't need to?
Anything that can cover the emergency shutdown of a nuclear power plant (e.g. provide a Gigawatt electrical power within minutes without advance notice) can cope with the variations in wind power output.
Yeah, but you're going to be running that thing several times a week to back up the wind plants, whereas you're only going to run it several times a decade to back up the nuclear plants.
I really can't see how the difference wouldn't make your choice of fuels matter.
Although I agree that it's not necessarily an argument against building a specific wind farm: if the wind farm's variation is within the throttling capability of the surrounding base-load plants, you can still see nearly all of the savings from the wind when it is blowing.
Too low. The median gross income in the US is something like 44k, which corresponds to an hourly rate of about $23/hour.
To entice people away from their jobs who make more than the median income (about half of workers, but far fewer than half of all eligible jurors...), you need to offer a wage that's not an insult.
They're basically eminent domain'ing your time. It needs to be compensated at a fair price, for most people, $12.50 wouldn't be anywhere near that fair price. Which makes you wonder if they're cheating people when they eminent domain their property. (well, I don't wonder about it, but I can see how one might...)
Perhaps you've understood a different definition of "re-image" than I do, but I'm pretty sure that's what is supposed to happen in one. No files on the drive except for what's in the image.
I think DeepFreeze does it by storing the image on a hidden partition on the same disk, though, so maybe that's what you're talking about?
Frankly, if you've set things up correctly, it should be a lot less effort to just wipe and re-image, and you're guaranteed as pristine an install as is possible from the media you have on hand.
Slashdot Mirror
Matlab will output to LaTeX...
Also, I don't know if it's changed, but back in R12, you could use a limited subset of LaTeX math mode to typeset the labels on your graphs.
But they are evidence that fun has occurred.
It's not medical equipment unless it's covered in ugly, pink "medical grade" plastic and exposed polished stainless steel tubes. Also, it must have an impossible-to-clean membrane keypad. And cost four thousand dollars, and can only be rented for one thousand dollars a month.
Then and only then should the government pay for his rehabilitation tool.
Seems like a lot of effort. You can always use the c interface (which itself is weird, considering matlab's roots in fortran...) but then you'd have to learn c. Matlab is a tool for physicists and engineers, not computer scientists. They don't necessarily want to take the time to learn c, or they'd have done that. Some do, anyway, of course, but usually what they produce will be one off functions for a specific goal, not entire libraries suitable for sharing.
Frankly, even equally worrisome is that Matlab doesn't appear to take advantage of GPGPU yet. The concept has been around for over half a decade, and I'd have expected the MAtrix LABoratory to jump on the bandwagon quicker than most. It's a game changer in their core competency, after all.
No adds or subtracts, but 128 invocations of a mysterious square root function that doesn't involve adds, subtracts, or divisions.
Therefore the square root function is the problem, and the reason is that it is implemented as a ghastly huge lookup table. This program never gets loaded into memory, let alone has a chance to actually run.
The "singularity theory" is just a red herring.
Integration is supposed to reduce the error....
It's possible that the different compression schemes still leave enough zeros in the right coefficients in the frequency domain to recognize a codec used one or two transcodes ago.
Also, if you're not transcoding to "motion bitmap" then you're going to lose quality every generation.
Hear, Here!
With disk space the way it is, (i.e. *cheap*) I don't know why people would even want a camera that records in a format that uses interframe compression.
I got a camera not long ago that still used DV tapes for this very reason: hdd and dvd all seemed to use codecs that would make editing frustrating, even though they had higher byte-capacity (and therefore vastly higher storage capacity due to the higher compression...)
BS.
A patent affects the manufacturer of a product. The camera manufacturers have to respect patents.
Copyright affects the distribution of a work, which doesn't belong to the manufacturer of the tools used to produce the work, and it also doesn't belong to the patent holder which the manufacturers licensed the right to use their patent in their manufacture.
Copy right belongs to the producer of a work. And only an explicit, mutual agreement among the three parties can cause it to be assigned otherwise.
If the law supports what YOU say, then the law is wrong.
I kind-of think "Lost" is the dumbed down version. A chance meeting five years ago might have relevance to the current storyline, but you don't find out about the five-year-old chance meeting until you're already in the middle of the story where it's relevant.
And lately, apparently, there's a whole flash-sideways thing going on that so far appears to be impossible to be relevant to anything in the actual story....
Maybe, but after Jobs basically ends Apple with your plan, what then?
Proprietary vendors don't want competition. They especially don't want competition from their own products sold by someone else!
Heh. The thing you have to realize, is that Ticketmaster has never been "not evil." They've never even gotten any "not evil" on them accidentally. Bitching about ticketmaster is like the frog bitching about the scorpion in the classic fable.
It's very nice, especially if you want to run something on other people's computers....
Exactly. Before disabling your account, make sure you change your name to bobby tables.
If you track more than five shows, that means you're watching more than 20 hours of programming in less than a month...
What about just the five shows on those 500 channels that I'm interested in?
People were asking for the passwords. People who may even have had the authority to have them. However the only person who Terry was certain legitimately represented the owners that he would be able to identify was the Mayor, to whom he gave the passwords.
How hard is this to understand? I guess very, since it seems Terry has had a difficult time explaining it, or assuming it was obvious.
They are considered uninsurable by their very nature.
Assuming that is true, it doesn't prove the point you're trying to make. Insurance companies love risk; it lets them charge higher premiums.
There are a few reasons why insurance companies wouldn't touch something.
One is over-regulation: If they're not allowed to charge the premiums necessary against some event, then they can't involve themselves in that market if they want to stay in business.
Another is that the risk is unknown, and they're afraid of charging too low a premium against the risk.
And finally, the risk might be so low that a reasonable premium is just not worth their time to bother. (this is probably the reason so few people have flood insurance: the premiums charged in low-risk areas should be vanishingly small and affordable, but the necessary overhead bumps them into the "unreasonable" levels from a property owner's point of view.)
None of those necessarily suggests that the thing they'd be insuring against is a particularly high risk, though, especially for an industry that's been around for half a century generating statistics. In a free-market, any categorizable risk will find a premium at which someone is willing to insure it.
They're going to be very far apart, and they're going to be lit up. They're no more of a danger to small craft than any other well-lit navigational buoy.
They don't have to suck at the things petrol cars do. Someone just needs to be the first state to electrify the highways: electric cars can charge on-the-go, why would you want carry 300 miles worth of stored chemical energy if you didn't need to?
Did you even bother to read my post?
Anything that can cover the emergency shutdown of a nuclear power plant (e.g. provide a Gigawatt electrical power within minutes without advance notice) can cope with the variations in wind power output.
Yeah, but you're going to be running that thing several times a week to back up the wind plants, whereas you're only going to run it several times a decade to back up the nuclear plants.
I really can't see how the difference wouldn't make your choice of fuels matter.
Although I agree that it's not necessarily an argument against building a specific wind farm: if the wind farm's variation is within the throttling capability of the surrounding base-load plants, you can still see nearly all of the savings from the wind when it is blowing.
Too low. The median gross income in the US is something like 44k, which corresponds to an hourly rate of about $23/hour.
To entice people away from their jobs who make more than the median income (about half of workers, but far fewer than half of all eligible jurors...), you need to offer a wage that's not an insult.
They're basically eminent domain'ing your time. It needs to be compensated at a fair price, for most people, $12.50 wouldn't be anywhere near that fair price. Which makes you wonder if they're cheating people when they eminent domain their property. (well, I don't wonder about it, but I can see how one might...)
For some use cases, there's nothing wrong with that. If the bad guys are sitting at your desk, the've got physical access...
Perhaps you've understood a different definition of "re-image" than I do, but I'm pretty sure that's what is supposed to happen in one. No files on the drive except for what's in the image.
I think DeepFreeze does it by storing the image on a hidden partition on the same disk, though, so maybe that's what you're talking about?
Frankly, if you've set things up correctly, it should be a lot less effort to just wipe and re-image, and you're guaranteed as pristine an install as is possible from the media you have on hand.