Once you've spent some time studying the human brain or other organisms, it's not much of a stretch to start viewing all life as programs, sets of complex instructions that allow the organism to accomplish a variety of tasks given a particular set of environmental constraints.
Is it any wonder then that the attitude you describe should develop in people who do for a living what god did. Assuming a god did/does exist.
Most people strive their entire lives for the something approaching control over the things surrounding them. Few experience the intoxicating power of near total control.
Yeah, normally the investment analysts have a vested interest to basically lie. With the Google IPO they can say what they should be saying about the vast majority of stocks.
It never ceases to amaze me how people's short term greed can overcome their ability to make anything resembling a rational evaluation.
So many of the price to earnings ratios out there are just outright laughable.
Foreign capital, personal and goverment debt, and pyramid scheme social programs (a la social security/medicare) will only carry us so far. The day of reckoning is coming.
p^4 would give you a decreased failure probability.
So that say there is a 1% chance of failure over 3 years for a given drive. Using the first formula, using 4 drives in raid 0 would increase the chance of at least one drive failing (and consequently all) to 3.94%.
That's only true if your model is static. A dynamic model in theory could remain accurate.
I'm not suggesting it's likely we will find one, but the problem you highlight is not an insurmountable one.
As mentioned in the article, this isn't meant to be a catch all interface used for all tasks, rather it's mainly useful for rarely used operations where the individual is unlikely to retain working knowledge over the time gaps seperating usage.
Your criticism is appropriate where developers have overused the interface and applied it to common tasks as well, and I'm not sure that making it a readily availabe option with its inclusion in the Longhorn tools will increase misuse or not, but when used judiciously I think it can be quite beneficial.
Two years is a lot of time. We only have 30-40 years of prime productivity. I know not everyone will be interested in being highly productive throughout their lives, but for many of us, it's a central part of who we are. Things that distract us or directly impede our making meaningful contributions to our society/family are both frustrating and morale sapping.
Of course back then a lot of kit was made in the US, are there any significant parts that are made in the US anymore? On a related note, how much does it cost to ship say a standard ATX case from China to the US? Is it on the order of a couple pennies or dollars or what?
When you say there aren't that many Python jobs out there, I suspect that's part of the reason why he found it a useful metric. Even if Java were great (ignoring the observations about Java avoidance), if most people use it it wouldn't be a possible tool to discriminate the top 1%.
Python users are those who have enough interest/curiosity of their own or for personal project to devote the time and energy to become proficient in Python. Which ties into some of the defining characteristics Graham gives for "great hackers."
He's not talking about the superiority of any language or implying that some languages have no use.
Think of it in these terms, if you're a salesman selling yachts, looking at the type of watch a potential buyer is wearing can quickly help you identify persons of extreme interest who you should take every possible care to treat right. This doesn't say anything at all about the ability of a cheap Casio to tell the time or perform reliably. It's just saying that people who wear Rolexes are the type of people you're looking for if you are selling yachts.
Similarly, Graham's suggesting that in his experience, great hackers he knows almost invariably enjoy using Python.
I know it's easy to get defensive when someone looks dismissively at the Casio on your wrist, but to say that they shouldn't do so because you can tell time just as well as someone with a Rolex is missing the point.
I upgraded back when they announced a release date for HL2 a year ago lol. I didn't get a top of the line system but it was a lot better than what I was replacing and I figured it would do okay for HL2. If I had it to do over again I would of course have waited, but I'm relieved to find out that I'll be able to at least run Doom 3 somewhat decently.
And it's not like I'll lose the game or anything, I figure I'll just wait another year or two to upgrade again and by that time I'll have a system that can run it with everything turned on and maxed out. I really don't think it will be worth blowing 2 grand on, especially since it's shaping up to be something of a rail shooter (nothing against that, sounds from the previews like it will be quite an experience, but dividing the hours of gameplay into the cost of an upgrade doesn't sit well on the register).
I just wish they weren't still selling video cards for $500+ for the top of the line. I remember when CPUs would top a grand for the latest and greatest, but now you can get that for a third of that.
When wars end isn't it generally the practice to provide amnesty so that people can move on with their lives as opposed to having strong incentives to continue fighting/subverting/undermining?
Last I checked the Cold War was over.
Granted he was mentally ill before all of this happened, but all this doesn't help I'm sure. Like that saying goes, just because you're paranoid doesn't mean they aren't really out to get you.
All too true, the sad fact is at the age when people are figuring out what to do with our lives we tend to be not terribly cynical and able to consider the self serving falsehoods that people can promulgate.
I find myself in between now, and in what for me is something of an ethical dilemna. Do I cut my losses (all the time and money) spent getting this far get out into a field that is more productive. Or do I leverage the education and get a teaching position somewhere that is solely designed to churn out more people that will find themselves in my own current position.
Yes there's a need for PhD researchers in almost all fields. But it's a damnable lie that we need them in the quantities that are being produced. Some fields more so than others of course.
All the MBA programs I'm aware of are 2 years. If you're including an undergraduate degree, well why not throw in the 12 years of primary education as well?
If an undergrad degree is a given (all the jobs we're talking about require one) it's not really germane to the tally.
Your comment reminds me of that scene in Back to School with Rodney Dangerfield where the business prof is explaining how things should work, and there's no room for bribes kickbacks etc in a legitimate business, then asks where to build, and Rodney says, How about fantasy land?
Yes the stated motive for investing is to get a return from profits. But if you look in the real world, the people that make big money make it from gains in stock price, not dividends.
And where does that money come from? From the lower tier investers that end up losing money.
The parents comments are spot on. You can invest in Microsoft in the hopes that the share price will get inflated even more, but don't pretend you'll be getting your money back plus some from actual revenue generation lol.
One of the bonuses to walking away when he hits 1 million is then it will be an open question how long he could have gone on for. Maybe there isn't anyone on the planet that could beat him, if he walks away that remains an open question, but if he keeps going until he gets beaten, well then we know the answer to that question.
You know the funny thing is I remember thinking to myself the first time I saw that why the holographic video was grainy, it seemed preposterous to me that they could have that sort of technology on R2D2 and yet have it be all grainy in appearance.
And now it seems incredibly prescient lol, given the millionfold increase in processing speed using the noise variance method described in the article, the trade off between graininess and speed actually becomes quite rational.
Are you suggesting that there should be no risk involved in taking stock options over cash compensation. That if the stock fails to rise you should be able to go back and demand the cash after the fact?
Stock options, just as buying stocks, represent a financial risk. People are willing to assume the risk because of the potential for much higher returns compared to low risk instruments.
He bet and he lost. As did many many other employees who got stomped by the merger and subsequent crash in the value of the company's stock.
You can certainly say in the cosmic sense that it's unfair, that he didn't get what he deserved. But ultimately the loss stems from the risk he assumed by taking the options over the cash. Wouldn't it be great if no matter what the risks, you could always go back and take the safe option if things didn't turn out? But that just isn't how things work. That they gave him 10 million in severance yet he still is whining and talking about bringing lawsuits etc speaks volumes in my mind about the true nature of the situation.
There's a fanboi here all right, but it's you. A conversation means actually making points and giving your reasons. Diatribes are just randomly spewing invective. Try having a conversation sometime, you might even like it.
Slashdot Mirror
Same here, took about 4 minutes to get it, amazing.
Once you've spent some time studying the human brain or other organisms, it's not much of a stretch to start viewing all life as programs, sets of complex instructions that allow the organism to accomplish a variety of tasks given a particular set of environmental constraints.
Is it any wonder then that the attitude you describe should develop in people who do for a living what god did. Assuming a god did/does exist.
Most people strive their entire lives for the something approaching control over the things surrounding them. Few experience the intoxicating power of near total control.
Ah yes, sorry I didn't see it that way, makes for an easier calculation too.
Yeah, normally the investment analysts have a vested interest to basically lie. With the Google IPO they can say what they should be saying about the vast majority of stocks.
It never ceases to amaze me how people's short term greed can overcome their ability to make anything resembling a rational evaluation.
So many of the price to earnings ratios out there are just outright laughable.
Foreign capital, personal and goverment debt, and pyramid scheme social programs (a la social security/medicare) will only carry us so far. The day of reckoning is coming.
Shouldn't that be 1-(1-p)^4?
p^4 would give you a decreased failure probability.
So that say there is a 1% chance of failure over 3 years for a given drive. Using the first formula, using 4 drives in raid 0 would increase the chance of at least one drive failing (and consequently all) to 3.94%.
That's only true if your model is static. A dynamic model in theory could remain accurate. I'm not suggesting it's likely we will find one, but the problem you highlight is not an insurmountable one.
As mentioned in the article, this isn't meant to be a catch all interface used for all tasks, rather it's mainly useful for rarely used operations where the individual is unlikely to retain working knowledge over the time gaps seperating usage. Your criticism is appropriate where developers have overused the interface and applied it to common tasks as well, and I'm not sure that making it a readily availabe option with its inclusion in the Longhorn tools will increase misuse or not, but when used judiciously I think it can be quite beneficial.
Two years is a lot of time. We only have 30-40 years of prime productivity. I know not everyone will be interested in being highly productive throughout their lives, but for many of us, it's a central part of who we are. Things that distract us or directly impede our making meaningful contributions to our society/family are both frustrating and morale sapping.
Of course back then a lot of kit was made in the US, are there any significant parts that are made in the US anymore? On a related note, how much does it cost to ship say a standard ATX case from China to the US? Is it on the order of a couple pennies or dollars or what?
When you say there aren't that many Python jobs out there, I suspect that's part of the reason why he found it a useful metric. Even if Java were great (ignoring the observations about Java avoidance), if most people use it it wouldn't be a possible tool to discriminate the top 1%.
Python users are those who have enough interest/curiosity of their own or for personal project to devote the time and energy to become proficient in Python. Which ties into some of the defining characteristics Graham gives for "great hackers."
He's not talking about the superiority of any language or implying that some languages have no use.
Think of it in these terms, if you're a salesman selling yachts, looking at the type of watch a potential buyer is wearing can quickly help you identify persons of extreme interest who you should take every possible care to treat right. This doesn't say anything at all about the ability of a cheap Casio to tell the time or perform reliably. It's just saying that people who wear Rolexes are the type of people you're looking for if you are selling yachts.
Similarly, Graham's suggesting that in his experience, great hackers he knows almost invariably enjoy using Python.
I know it's easy to get defensive when someone looks dismissively at the Casio on your wrist, but to say that they shouldn't do so because you can tell time just as well as someone with a Rolex is missing the point.
I upgraded back when they announced a release date for HL2 a year ago lol. I didn't get a top of the line system but it was a lot better than what I was replacing and I figured it would do okay for HL2. If I had it to do over again I would of course have waited, but I'm relieved to find out that I'll be able to at least run Doom 3 somewhat decently.
And it's not like I'll lose the game or anything, I figure I'll just wait another year or two to upgrade again and by that time I'll have a system that can run it with everything turned on and maxed out. I really don't think it will be worth blowing 2 grand on, especially since it's shaping up to be something of a rail shooter (nothing against that, sounds from the previews like it will be quite an experience, but dividing the hours of gameplay into the cost of an upgrade doesn't sit well on the register).
I just wish they weren't still selling video cards for $500+ for the top of the line. I remember when CPUs would top a grand for the latest and greatest, but now you can get that for a third of that.
The new instant pricing is the real inovation here as the parent pointed out. They've essentially put an engineer in a box for your personal use.
I didn't know Longhorn was far enough along to get a test machine up and running.
And I'm sure your momma just loved you playing Lesiure Suit Larry right?
When wars end isn't it generally the practice to provide amnesty so that people can move on with their lives as opposed to having strong incentives to continue fighting/subverting/undermining?
Last I checked the Cold War was over.
Granted he was mentally ill before all of this happened, but all this doesn't help I'm sure. Like that saying goes, just because you're paranoid doesn't mean they aren't really out to get you.
All too true, the sad fact is at the age when people are figuring out what to do with our lives we tend to be not terribly cynical and able to consider the self serving falsehoods that people can promulgate.
I find myself in between now, and in what for me is something of an ethical dilemna. Do I cut my losses (all the time and money) spent getting this far get out into a field that is more productive. Or do I leverage the education and get a teaching position somewhere that is solely designed to churn out more people that will find themselves in my own current position.
Yes there's a need for PhD researchers in almost all fields. But it's a damnable lie that we need them in the quantities that are being produced. Some fields more so than others of course.
All the MBA programs I'm aware of are 2 years. If you're including an undergraduate degree, well why not throw in the 12 years of primary education as well?
If an undergrad degree is a given (all the jobs we're talking about require one) it's not really germane to the tally.
Your comment reminds me of that scene in Back to School with Rodney Dangerfield where the business prof is explaining how things should work, and there's no room for bribes kickbacks etc in a legitimate business, then asks where to build, and Rodney says, How about fantasy land?
Yes the stated motive for investing is to get a return from profits. But if you look in the real world, the people that make big money make it from gains in stock price, not dividends.
And where does that money come from? From the lower tier investers that end up losing money.
The parents comments are spot on. You can invest in Microsoft in the hopes that the share price will get inflated even more, but don't pretend you'll be getting your money back plus some from actual revenue generation lol.
One of the bonuses to walking away when he hits 1 million is then it will be an open question how long he could have gone on for. Maybe there isn't anyone on the planet that could beat him, if he walks away that remains an open question, but if he keeps going until he gets beaten, well then we know the answer to that question.
so buy the replacement now and stick it in the glovebox
Only to pedantic cornholes, are you one?
You know the funny thing is I remember thinking to myself the first time I saw that why the holographic video was grainy, it seemed preposterous to me that they could have that sort of technology on R2D2 and yet have it be all grainy in appearance.
And now it seems incredibly prescient lol, given the millionfold increase in processing speed using the noise variance method described in the article, the trade off between graininess and speed actually becomes quite rational.
Are you suggesting that there should be no risk involved in taking stock options over cash compensation. That if the stock fails to rise you should be able to go back and demand the cash after the fact?
Stock options, just as buying stocks, represent a financial risk. People are willing to assume the risk because of the potential for much higher returns compared to low risk instruments.
He bet and he lost. As did many many other employees who got stomped by the merger and subsequent crash in the value of the company's stock.
You can certainly say in the cosmic sense that it's unfair, that he didn't get what he deserved. But ultimately the loss stems from the risk he assumed by taking the options over the cash. Wouldn't it be great if no matter what the risks, you could always go back and take the safe option if things didn't turn out? But that just isn't how things work. That they gave him 10 million in severance yet he still is whining and talking about bringing lawsuits etc speaks volumes in my mind about the true nature of the situation.
There's a fanboi here all right, but it's you. A conversation means actually making points and giving your reasons. Diatribes are just randomly spewing invective. Try having a conversation sometime, you might even like it.