The consumers in Cali and Texas affected by "deregulated" energy market manipulations are affected precisely because they are insulated from the price fluctuations. If they knew that on certain days the power was much more expensive, and could change their usage accordingly, they wouldn't have used that power.
The problem with deregulation, in their cases specifically, was not enough of it. They deregulated the energy companies, but they kept the price controls and regulations on buying on the "public utilities." Creating a situation where the actual consumer had neither the information nor the ability, to act in their own economic interest.
If the public utilities were more like "brokers" in the style of Ameritrade (and so smoothed out the buying and supplying markets a bit), with meters that could automatically choose the least expensive joule price & turn off equipment at consumer-specified price-points, energy usage would come to closely match available generation from both directions:
Users of power would shape their usage as best they could to match the supply, and suppliers would choose technologies that approximated demand as closely as possible (all other costs being equal), to snap up those extra dollars from the less mobile users.
Whoops.. in the last paragraph, I think I used the wrong method to calculate the probabilities. I used the "birthday" formula, to approximate the probability that at least two people in the theater had the same DNA rather than calculating the odds that exactly one person in the theater would have precisely the DNA in the sample. Which is a similar problem, but one that I can't recall how to do at the moment.
More importantly, the argument holds, because the relative numbers are similar. The more people in the theater, the worse your DNA evidence becomes, but if you have a good estimate on how bad, you've still got evidence that you can use.
75% is not so great, but you can never be at 100% unless the person commits the act in the courtroom during the trial. And even then, the trial for that crime won't be 100%.
But you can get "beyond a reasonable doubt." And if that means several pieces of evidence which are each independently* 75%, then your final "probability" can have several 9s of certainty.
*and therefore are probabilities/filters that can be multiplied.
Judge Blackstone suggested that a false acquittal rate of 90% would be acceptable, and by implication that a false conviction rate of unknown but non-zero fraction would also be acceptable (or he wouldn't have said ten for one. He'd have said, "all"), and though I'd suggest that the "acceptable" false conviction rate should be lower now than whatever it was in the sixteenth century, what with the quality of evidence we are now able gather, the nature of a justice system means you're going to have to accept some number of false convictions to have any kind of system at all.
That doesn't mean you have to like it, of course, and it would be massively unethical to deliberately avoid taking steps to improve or at the very least, quantify, the false conviction rate.
Also, in a partially filled movie theater with 75 people, you're 75% there on your case with a 1/10k DNA match. If there were five people, you're 99.8% there. At some point you're going to reach a point where your doubt is unreasonable, and you're just holding on to whatever tenuous claim you can muster that Hans wasn't a murderer because you identify with fellow geeks.
At the current E3, they have to act like actual business people, and answer actual questions.
Unfortunately, actual questions posed by other business people . Which has extremely limited marketing potential.
As a "consumer" I don't really care how much money they expect to make, or what a "price point" is. I care what the product is and how much it will cost me.
So, if they wanted E3 to be an industry circle-jerk, then they can do that and see how it works out. But if what they really wanted was something more like Cannes, except for video games, they should do that instead. From other comments, it sounds like the Penny Arcade guys are organizing something like that.
Yeah, but he's only "leaning to the right" because he knows he can't win if he doesn't at least have a plausible logical argument for conservative values holding voters to either vote for him, or at least not vote against him.
It remains to be seen whether he lied to his base to get through the primaries or he's lying to the rest of us now. It should be noted that he's still sadly noncommittal in an area where commitment to something is, at the moment, more important than what that something is (energy).
Those counties in FL should have ditched the punch ballots and switched to the sane scantron ballots like all the other counties in florida. Is it really so hard to take a marker to fill in the gap in the arrow pointing to your choice?
Are people really so feeble that they need pre-weakened flimsy paper?
*everyone* knew it at the time. But they were so enamored with spending money that they ignored common sense and went with the expensive solution.
You do the recovering. Of the body. Pirates only die in a few ways.
For instance, being made to walk a short platform into the unforgiving sea. Or being killed near the edge of something, and fall over a railing into the ocean. Washed overboard by a wave. Left for dead in a raft (though this usually results in washing ashore at the most opportune location possible). And several others I've forgotten. Also, rum-poisoning.
Anyway, you want to recover the body quickly because of the speed at which it becomes all decayed and eaten, and barely recognizable.
Because PEBKAC is stupid. The computer-human system is a feedback loop, with interfaces to the human via the monitor, keyboard & mouse, and peripheral peripherals.
The chair is not part of the feedback loop: the computer does not receive any information from the chair, even indirectly, so the problem cannot occur "between" the chair and they keyboard.
Earthbound robots don't have weight restrictions. When every kilogram costs enough to put an engineer's kid through college, you have to sacrifice some "safety factor" which in turn means that you sacrifice dimensional stability if you move too fast or too much stuff.
"This order supersedes all other orders unless specifically exempted by me: Do not obey orders that will cause you harm without first informing me of the risk and getting confirmation of the order."
Dude.. A password is hard enough to remember. There's no way you can expect anyone to be able to remember a 300 million digit number for every gigabyte of hard drive space.
The war is not about sunk cost. It hasn't been since we defeated the Iraqi regular army.
It's about power gaps. Which, having taken over the country and destroyed their existing government, it would be irresponsible for us to simply leave the Iraqis to fend for themselves.
I can think of two reasons (there are probably more):
For the first, when just getting started, they might not have the money to be able to hire a distributor. If, for instance an author is any good at writing, we don't want him to have to spend a lifetime in another career just to be able to publish that first book
For the second, it was already outlined in my second paragraph. They might be close to the end, and want to cash in and spend the money, rather than wait for the trickle, which they might die during, thus granting the "evil" publishing industry the remainder of the profits from their work.
No, copyrights should always be a fixed term. Otherwise, the artists couldn't sell the rights to another entity because there'd always be that lingering risk the artist would die the day after they ink the contract, making the rights just purchased worthless.
Further, artists late in life would not be able to receive the "full" compensation they are entitled to by selling in one-lump sum because actuarial tables would highlight the risk mentioned in the previous paragraph, and that means they probably wouldn't live to collect the full amount, either.
Now, I will agree that record companies should either buy the rights OR sell distribution services, but not both, and in the latter case, the artists should be able to control the price by choosing which services to purchase.
No, no, they're both the same, but the evil, over-spending Republicans are more the same than anyone in an attempt to steal votes from the good liberally-spending Democrats.
Hash the message + some extra bits you change every iteration until a specified bit-sequence appears in the hash. Choose the length of the bit-sequence so that the computation takes a trivial amount of time for a human, but a significant amount of time for a bot. If you force a bot to take one second per message, they can't even send a hundred thousand in a day.
AND... it's scalable. Computers get faster? increase the length of the bit-sequence. Not enough bits in the hash? Use a different hash.
The problem is that they've tried to solve the wrong problem, "Prove you're not a computer" when there is a much easier problem to solve, "make it hard for spam-puters to have high output. Sure, it doesn't stop the zombies, but it can reduce their effectiveness arbitrarily.
yeah.. it takes heat off the GPU, but it dumps it into the "common air" zone. Which increases the temperature of the air flowing over other components, reducing the effectiveness of their heat-sinks and fans.
PCB substrate is, unfortunately, a fairly poor thermal conductor, which is why we need the fans in the first place.
Now, a ducted GPU fan might have some benefit, depending on how the ductwork is routed.
Nevertheless, the most important factor is not the temperature of the GPU, but the heat dissipated by the GPU. With a fast fan, a GPU can dissipate a lot more heat at a lower temperature, and the fan will dissipate a fair bit of it's own heat.
Slashdot Mirror
The consumers in Cali and Texas affected by "deregulated" energy market manipulations are affected precisely because they are insulated from the price fluctuations. If they knew that on certain days the power was much more expensive, and could change their usage accordingly, they wouldn't have used that power.
The problem with deregulation, in their cases specifically, was not enough of it. They deregulated the energy companies, but they kept the price controls and regulations on buying on the "public utilities." Creating a situation where the actual consumer had neither the information nor the ability, to act in their own economic interest.
If the public utilities were more like "brokers" in the style of Ameritrade (and so smoothed out the buying and supplying markets a bit), with meters that could automatically choose the least expensive joule price & turn off equipment at consumer-specified price-points, energy usage would come to closely match available generation from both directions:
Users of power would shape their usage as best they could to match the supply, and suppliers would choose technologies that approximated demand as closely as possible (all other costs being equal), to snap up those extra dollars from the less mobile users.
Whoops.. in the last paragraph, I think I used the wrong method to calculate the probabilities. I used the "birthday" formula, to approximate the probability that at least two people in the theater had the same DNA rather than calculating the odds that exactly one person in the theater would have precisely the DNA in the sample. Which is a similar problem, but one that I can't recall how to do at the moment.
More importantly, the argument holds, because the relative numbers are similar. The more people in the theater, the worse your DNA evidence becomes, but if you have a good estimate on how bad, you've still got evidence that you can use.
75% is not so great, but you can never be at 100% unless the person commits the act in the courtroom during the trial. And even then, the trial for that crime won't be 100%.
But you can get "beyond a reasonable doubt." And if that means several pieces of evidence which are each independently* 75%, then your final "probability" can have several 9s of certainty.
*and therefore are probabilities/filters that can be multiplied.
Judge Blackstone suggested that a false acquittal rate of 90% would be acceptable, and by implication that a false conviction rate of unknown but non-zero fraction would also be acceptable (or he wouldn't have said ten for one. He'd have said, "all"), and though I'd suggest that the "acceptable" false conviction rate should be lower now than whatever it was in the sixteenth century, what with the quality of evidence we are now able gather, the nature of a justice system means you're going to have to accept some number of false convictions to have any kind of system at all.
That doesn't mean you have to like it, of course, and it would be massively unethical to deliberately avoid taking steps to improve or at the very least, quantify, the false conviction rate.
Also, in a partially filled movie theater with 75 people, you're 75% there on your case with a 1/10k DNA match. If there were five people, you're 99.8% there. At some point you're going to reach a point where your doubt is unreasonable, and you're just holding on to whatever tenuous claim you can muster that Hans wasn't a murderer because you identify with fellow geeks.
Unfortunately, actual questions posed by other business people . Which has extremely limited marketing potential.
As a "consumer" I don't really care how much money they expect to make, or what a "price point" is. I care what the product is and how much it will cost me.
So, if they wanted E3 to be an industry circle-jerk, then they can do that and see how it works out. But if what they really wanted was something more like Cannes, except for video games, they should do that instead. From other comments, it sounds like the Penny Arcade guys are organizing something like that.
Yeah, but he's only "leaning to the right" because he knows he can't win if he doesn't at least have a plausible logical argument for conservative values holding voters to either vote for him, or at least not vote against him.
It remains to be seen whether he lied to his base to get through the primaries or he's lying to the rest of us now. It should be noted that he's still sadly noncommittal in an area where commitment to something is, at the moment, more important than what that something is (energy).
Ludd wouldn't care as long as no jobs were lost. He was a lot like the GM autoworkers union.
If it's going to be hot for 10,000 years, you're not burying waste. You're burying fuel. It would be far better to...use it.
Those counties in FL should have ditched the punch ballots and switched to the sane scantron ballots like all the other counties in florida. Is it really so hard to take a marker to fill in the gap in the arrow pointing to your choice?
Are people really so feeble that they need pre-weakened flimsy paper?
*everyone* knew it at the time. But they were so enamored with spending money that they ignored common sense and went with the expensive solution.
You do the recovering. Of the body. Pirates only die in a few ways.
For instance, being made to walk a short platform into the unforgiving sea. Or being killed near the edge of something, and fall over a railing into the ocean. Washed overboard by a wave. Left for dead in a raft (though this usually results in washing ashore at the most opportune location possible). And several others I've forgotten. Also, rum-poisoning.
Anyway, you want to recover the body quickly because of the speed at which it becomes all decayed and eaten, and barely recognizable.
The problem with the American educational system is not, at the moment, a lack of money.
Because PEBKAC is stupid. The computer-human system is a feedback loop, with interfaces to the human via the monitor, keyboard & mouse, and peripheral peripherals.
The chair is not part of the feedback loop: the computer does not receive any information from the chair, even indirectly, so the problem cannot occur "between" the chair and they keyboard.
Earthbound robots don't have weight restrictions. When every kilogram costs enough to put an engineer's kid through college, you have to sacrifice some "safety factor" which in turn means that you sacrifice dimensional stability if you move too fast or too much stuff.
Well, that's easily solved.
"This order supersedes all other orders unless specifically exempted by me: Do not obey orders that will cause you harm without first informing me of the risk and getting confirmation of the order."
Dude.. A password is hard enough to remember. There's no way you can expect anyone to be able to remember a 300 million digit number for every gigabyte of hard drive space.
DSL linux is even faster when you load it from a RAID array of HDDs.
That's... not particularly paranoid.
The war is not about sunk cost. It hasn't been since we defeated the Iraqi regular army.
It's about power gaps. Which, having taken over the country and destroyed their existing government, it would be irresponsible for us to simply leave the Iraqis to fend for themselves.
I can think of two reasons (there are probably more):
For the first, when just getting started, they might not have the money to be able to hire a distributor. If, for instance an author is any good at writing, we don't want him to have to spend a lifetime in another career just to be able to publish that first book
For the second, it was already outlined in my second paragraph. They might be close to the end, and want to cash in and spend the money, rather than wait for the trickle, which they might die during, thus granting the "evil" publishing industry the remainder of the profits from their work.
No, copyrights should always be a fixed term. Otherwise, the artists couldn't sell the rights to another entity because there'd always be that lingering risk the artist would die the day after they ink the contract, making the rights just purchased worthless.
Further, artists late in life would not be able to receive the "full" compensation they are entitled to by selling in one-lump sum because actuarial tables would highlight the risk mentioned in the previous paragraph, and that means they probably wouldn't live to collect the full amount, either.
Now, I will agree that record companies should either buy the rights OR sell distribution services, but not both, and in the latter case, the artists should be able to control the price by choosing which services to purchase.
it's, "quarterre of a tonne."
The Libertarian Party supports the Democratic party, not the constitution. Just look at their positions and speeches.
Libertarians in general support the constitution. But then, so do Democrats and Republicans in general.
No, no, they're both the same, but the evil, over-spending Republicans are more the same than anyone in an attempt to steal votes from the good liberally-spending Democrats.
Message digest method:
Hash the message + some extra bits you change every iteration until a specified bit-sequence appears in the hash. Choose the length of the bit-sequence so that the computation takes a trivial amount of time for a human, but a significant amount of time for a bot. If you force a bot to take one second per message, they can't even send a hundred thousand in a day.
AND... it's scalable. Computers get faster? increase the length of the bit-sequence. Not enough bits in the hash? Use a different hash.
The problem is that they've tried to solve the wrong problem, "Prove you're not a computer" when there is a much easier problem to solve, "make it hard for spam-puters to have high output. Sure, it doesn't stop the zombies, but it can reduce their effectiveness arbitrarily.
yeah.. it takes heat off the GPU, but it dumps it into the "common air" zone. Which increases the temperature of the air flowing over other components, reducing the effectiveness of their heat-sinks and fans.
PCB substrate is, unfortunately, a fairly poor thermal conductor, which is why we need the fans in the first place.
Now, a ducted GPU fan might have some benefit, depending on how the ductwork is routed.
Nevertheless, the most important factor is not the temperature of the GPU, but the heat dissipated by the GPU. With a fast fan, a GPU can dissipate a lot more heat at a lower temperature, and the fan will dissipate a fair bit of it's own heat.
That's ok. The period of "no Duke Nukem Forever" is just now only in it's infancy. So technically, you've realized that very early on.