I actually got every math problem right on the general GRE and only got a 91% so I think you got it opposite.
I would argue that percentiles tell you more than how many questions you got right. It sets a standard - an easy test will just as hard to do well on as a hard one.
I really hate it when kids rush through their education. What some people don't realize is school is just as much about growing maturity as it is about growing the mind. Yeah, this kid may be smarter than the average college student, but he is going to miss important aspects of life like having friends and interacting with other people his age, which is arguably more important than college.
I have a question that has perplexed me for years now (since I built my AMD computer in 2001). If AMD consistently offers better CPUs for a lower price, why do they lag behind so much in sales? You would think at some point capitalism would kick in, people would leave Intel, and AMD would start getting a better market share. So, what's the deal?
Oh well, Dell can easily ride it out - they probably make majority of their money off ordinary computer users who don't know any better and have no clue what this "AMD" thing is.
I also love the scrollwheel, but i find it to be kind of slow in large lists.
I thought of another idea that may be a little more expensive to implement. It would be a touchscreen (like a pda). Instead of scrolling through a list of 3000 songs for a specific song, you could write the first couple of letters onto the screen (maybe like palm's graffitti) which would filter out most of the songs. You could even do searches (like type in gre and it would show you green day songs as well as songs from an album called grenadine). You could also use the touchscreen as a scrollwheel once the list is shortened, and simply click on the song you want to play.
Rambus is the reason why I built my first computer AMD. Back then (2001), Pentium 4s forced you into using RDRAM, which was far more expensive than DDR (I guess I know why now). The extra price of ram more than tipped the price/performance to AMD's side. I have never went back to intel because I know AMD well, and I still think the price is right.
When you wake up at night and you can see the room in nearly pitch black, things appear to be as bright as your room in the morning with the shades closed. Actually, the room in the morning is 1000 times brighter. The "author" of the real world (God?) "intended" the room to be 1000 times brighter by slamming 1000 times more protons onto your retina, but your brain normalizes things to make the world easier to comprehend.
Now, when you are playing a video game, and you go into a dark room with almost no light, current algorithms don't make it easier to see anything - they present you with a black screen. When you walk out into the sunlight, you get a white screen. This is now the way our brain sees the world, and makes the experience less realistic.
Audio, on the other hand, can be presented to us nearly perfectly. My headphones can range from 20 Hz to 20 KHz, all the frequencies our ears can hear. The mega-bass thing is therefore useless if you have a decent pair of speakers.
I guess my point can be summed up with this example: you can make a really good set of speakers as loud as an airplane if you want. Your monitor, however, cannot shine the sun in your eyes.
Lost Coast is already out. And yes, HDR looks great - it was probably the most impressive part of Lost Coast. I hope that we see it in all future 3d games.
I doubt he even needs to take the tax writeoff. He DOES has 234 quadrillian dollars.
Also, does he even make that much salary that he would need to take the tax writeoff? Most wealthy people find ways around paying majority of their taxes. A lot of Bill's money/income is in stock, which I don't think is taxed until he liquidates.
What's the point of a kiosk if you can just play a demo? I don't buy a PC game unless it has a demo or I "try" it first . I really wish more companies provided demos. This is for a few reasons:
-I shouldn't have to pay for a game I don't enjoy. It's hard to tell if you will enjoy a game before trying it out. -I should be able to tell how well a game will run on my hardware. I can't do this without a demo, even on a kiosk -Sometimes I will get addicted to a game from the demo. This happened with Unreal Tournament, Battlefield, and some others. Without the excellent demos, I never would have thought to buy the games, harming both the company and myself.
Ironically, with the huge surge in multiplayer games in the last few years, GTA is one of the few examples of the death of multiplayer in a series. The first two GTAs (the top down ones) had wonderful multiplayer. It easily is in my top 5 list of the best multiplayer games of all time. The shift to 3D, for some reason, meant no multiplayer. Yeah, there is a mod for GTA (MTA I think) which adds multiplayer, and it's good but its still in its infancy last I checked. I really would like to see Rockstar add multiplayer to the game.
A. Most people don't give a damn how long it takes to transcode a video file. In fact, most people don't even know what that means. When I was picking my CPU my most important concerns were general speed (running basic applications like Firefox and Winamp) and games (which can be bottlenecked by the CPU very easily). Saying that the GPU does x% of the calculations in running a game misses the point of a CPU benchmark! You make a good point that CPU isn't even close to everything, but that wasn't the point of this article.
B. Yes, cheaper is slower, but its the *function* of speed to cost that is interesting, not the trend. Finding the sweet spot on the price/performance curve of the various components of a computer is the art of building a computer. I spent 2 extra hours thinking over the parts of my computer and saved 200 dollars while giving up virtually no speed in the applications I use.
Inciting violence is not protected by the first amendment. Listing ways to kill the president will get you in a lot of trouble, especially nowadays. And I would argue that listing ways to kill a specific person is a threat.
There should never be ads in an information source that tries to be objective and fair. For example, if Britannica placed ads for iPods in an article about MP3s, I wouldn't want to use it. It only creates the possibility of bias. It's a very minor, subtle effect, but it is still detrimental to the cause.
Fortunetly wikipedia isn't adding advertisements, which I think would start its downfall
In all fairness, there is some truth to what people say. Africa is the least urbanized continent in the world, at around 30-40%. I agree plenty of people in Africa don't live in huts or in the desert. But I am still pretty sure that computers are a low priority in the typical resident of Africa's life.
Africans throghout the contininent have a lot of problems, and only the very privledged (relatively) can both have access to computers and use them to inrich their lives. Here are some figures about africa from http://www.conserveafrica.org.uk/
# 315 million people - one in two of people in Sub Saharan Africa survive on less than one dollar per day. In a year, this would be half of what I just spent on my fairly modest computer. # 184 million people - 33% of the African population - suffer from malnutrition. So... maybe a lot of people in Africa really do need to worry about food. #The average life expectancy in Africa is 41 years. #Only 57% of African children are enrolled in primary education, and one of three children do no complete school. #Less than one person out of five has electricity.
Read that last one again, and maybe you will start to see the point. The typical African probably does not see computers as viable or useful in their lives. I'm not going to say "what's the use for computers if you don't have food" but maybe you are being overly optimistic. Yeah, we could bring computers to Africa (which I think is a great thing) but we shouldn't trick ourselves into thinking it will change a whole lot.
It's an assassin's job to kill people, but I don't like him. It's a lawyer's job to do whatever he needs to get someone out of trouble, even if he knows that is bad for society. That doesn't put him beyond criticism...
My original post was just to point out how stupid the defense was. I was amazed that so few of the comments were critical of the lawyer (rather than closed-software).
I know I'll get modded down for this, but whatever:
Typical lawyer - he'll do anything to get his client off. You don't need to know how something works to know if it works - you just need to be able to test it. For example, Linux may be open but no one person knows how a computer running linux works entirely (from the high level code down to the transistor level). There could be bugs/unintended consequences in it, but we use it, it works under testing, and we trust it.
In the case of a breathalizer, the code is likely very simple. The company may want to keep the algorithms or code secret (i guess, i didn't rtfa), but I'm sure the company would allow you to test it all you want. In fact, they probably have tested it themselves a lot.
This whole mentality of "if its computer code it should be open" doesn't *always* make sense.
the most obvious ways I can immeditately think of would be a democratic process (voting), either from everyone or the contributors, or moderated (there ARE moderators on wikipedia, after all). The main problem with either one is they make it slower to fix a problem or add a change. Also how you add changes is another problem that needs to be resolved.
I like the idea though, because it removes no current functionality from wikipedia. Like the way it is now? Use the unstable wikipedia. Want something more reliable (or don't want to see the goatcex guy instead of a picture of george bush)? Use the stable version.
Yeah, but when you make less money than you could (say from graphical ads) you are also doing it for your users. It's a longterm thing - make your users happy by not placing colorful flashy ads, and they'll keep coming back. So yeah, it is about money, but the method to get that money is user loyalty.
I'd say they are doing a good job based on how many google fanboys are out there
Slashdot Mirror
I actually got every math problem right on the general GRE and only got a 91% so I think you got it opposite.
I would argue that percentiles tell you more than how many questions you got right. It sets a standard - an easy test will just as hard to do well on as a hard one.
In my experience, people like him won't take college lightly and will not have free time to go camping with his non-existant friends.
I really hate it when kids rush through their education. What some people don't realize is school is just as much about growing maturity as it is about growing the mind. Yeah, this kid may be smarter than the average college student, but he is going to miss important aspects of life like having friends and interacting with other people his age, which is arguably more important than college.
I have a question that has perplexed me for years now (since I built my AMD computer in 2001). If AMD consistently offers better CPUs for a lower price, why do they lag behind so much in sales? You would think at some point capitalism would kick in, people would leave Intel, and AMD would start getting a better market share. So, what's the deal?
Oh well, Dell can easily ride it out - they probably make majority of their money off ordinary computer users who don't know any better and have no clue what this "AMD" thing is.
I also love the scrollwheel, but i find it to be kind of slow in large lists.
I thought of another idea that may be a little more expensive to implement. It would be a touchscreen (like a pda). Instead of scrolling through a list of 3000 songs for a specific song, you could write the first couple of letters onto the screen (maybe like palm's graffitti) which would filter out most of the songs. You could even do searches (like type in gre and it would show you green day songs as well as songs from an album called grenadine). You could also use the touchscreen as a scrollwheel once the list is shortened, and simply click on the song you want to play.
Rambus is the reason why I built my first computer AMD. Back then (2001), Pentium 4s forced you into using RDRAM, which was far more expensive than DDR (I guess I know why now). The extra price of ram more than tipped the price/performance to AMD's side. I have never went back to intel because I know AMD well, and I still think the price is right.
"Big company finds that due to some small print they aren't covered. (ie: a clause saying they can't knowingly be involved in infringing activity)"
That's not small print, that's common sense.
Think of it this way:
When you wake up at night and you can see the room in nearly pitch black, things appear to be as bright as your room in the morning with the shades closed. Actually, the room in the morning is 1000 times brighter. The "author" of the real world (God?) "intended" the room to be 1000 times brighter by slamming 1000 times more protons onto your retina, but your brain normalizes things to make the world easier to comprehend.
Now, when you are playing a video game, and you go into a dark room with almost no light, current algorithms don't make it easier to see anything - they present you with a black screen. When you walk out into the sunlight, you get a white screen. This is now the way our brain sees the world, and makes the experience less realistic.
Audio, on the other hand, can be presented to us nearly perfectly. My headphones can range from 20 Hz to 20 KHz, all the frequencies our ears can hear. The mega-bass thing is therefore useless if you have a decent pair of speakers.
I guess my point can be summed up with this example: you can make a really good set of speakers as loud as an airplane if you want. Your monitor, however, cannot shine the sun in your eyes.
Lost Coast is already out. And yes, HDR looks great - it was probably the most impressive part of Lost Coast. I hope that we see it in all future 3d games.
I doubt he even needs to take the tax writeoff. He DOES has 234 quadrillian dollars.
Also, does he even make that much salary that he would need to take the tax writeoff? Most wealthy people find ways around paying majority of their taxes. A lot of Bill's money/income is in stock, which I don't think is taxed until he liquidates.
What's the point of a kiosk if you can just play a demo? I don't buy a PC game unless it has a demo or I "try" it first . I really wish more companies provided demos. This is for a few reasons:
-I shouldn't have to pay for a game I don't enjoy. It's hard to tell if you will enjoy a game before trying it out.
-I should be able to tell how well a game will run on my hardware. I can't do this without a demo, even on a kiosk
-Sometimes I will get addicted to a game from the demo. This happened with Unreal Tournament, Battlefield, and some others. Without the excellent demos, I never would have thought to buy the games, harming both the company and myself.
In the case of AIM, I am pretty sure you have to click a link. And I stand by my opinion, regardless of what the moderators think :)
if you are stupid enough to get a virus on AIM (which requires you to click a link) you deserve it
I normally hate this cliche, but I just can't resist
1. make crappy movies
2. ?
3. profit!
I guess the ? was answered by the parent poster
I just realized I used the word "multiplayer" like 10 times in that post
multiplayer
multiplayer
multiplayer
multiplayer
multiplayer
multiplayer
there, got it off my chest
Ironically, with the huge surge in multiplayer games in the last few years, GTA is one of the few examples of the death of multiplayer in a series. The first two GTAs (the top down ones) had wonderful multiplayer. It easily is in my top 5 list of the best multiplayer games of all time. The shift to 3D, for some reason, meant no multiplayer. Yeah, there is a mod for GTA (MTA I think) which adds multiplayer, and it's good but its still in its infancy last I checked. I really would like to see Rockstar add multiplayer to the game.
A. Most people don't give a damn how long it takes to transcode a video file. In fact, most people don't even know what that means. When I was picking my CPU my most important concerns were general speed (running basic applications like Firefox and Winamp) and games (which can be bottlenecked by the CPU very easily). Saying that the GPU does x% of the calculations in running a game misses the point of a CPU benchmark! You make a good point that CPU isn't even close to everything, but that wasn't the point of this article.
B. Yes, cheaper is slower, but its the *function* of speed to cost that is interesting, not the trend. Finding the sweet spot on the price/performance curve of the various components of a computer is the art of building a computer. I spent 2 extra hours thinking over the parts of my computer and saved 200 dollars while giving up virtually no speed in the applications I use.
Inciting violence is not protected by the first amendment. Listing ways to kill the president will get you in a lot of trouble, especially nowadays. And I would argue that listing ways to kill a specific person is a threat.
There should never be ads in an information source that tries to be objective and fair. For example, if Britannica placed ads for iPods in an article about MP3s, I wouldn't want to use it. It only creates the possibility of bias. It's a very minor, subtle effect, but it is still detrimental to the cause.
Fortunetly wikipedia isn't adding advertisements, which I think would start its downfall
In all fairness, there is some truth to what people say. Africa is the least urbanized continent in the world, at around 30-40%. I agree plenty of people in Africa don't live in huts or in the desert. But I am still pretty sure that computers are a low priority in the typical resident of Africa's life.
Africans throghout the contininent have a lot of problems, and only the very privledged (relatively) can both have access to computers and use them to inrich their lives. Here are some figures about africa from http://www.conserveafrica.org.uk/
# 315 million people - one in two of people in Sub Saharan Africa survive on less than one dollar per day. In a year, this would be half of what I just spent on my fairly modest computer.
# 184 million people - 33% of the African population - suffer from malnutrition. So... maybe a lot of people in Africa really do need to worry about food.
#The average life expectancy in Africa is 41 years.
#Only 57% of African children are enrolled in primary education, and one of three children do no complete school.
#Less than one person out of five has electricity.
Read that last one again, and maybe you will start to see the point. The typical African probably does not see computers as viable or useful in their lives. I'm not going to say "what's the use for computers if you don't have food" but maybe you are being overly optimistic. Yeah, we could bring computers to Africa (which I think is a great thing) but we shouldn't trick ourselves into thinking it will change a whole lot.
It's an assassin's job to kill people, but I don't like him. It's a lawyer's job to do whatever he needs to get someone out of trouble, even if he knows that is bad for society. That doesn't put him beyond criticism...
My original post was just to point out how stupid the defense was. I was amazed that so few of the comments were critical of the lawyer (rather than closed-software).
I know I'll get modded down for this, but whatever:
Typical lawyer - he'll do anything to get his client off. You don't need to know how something works to know if it works - you just need to be able to test it. For example, Linux may be open but no one person knows how a computer running linux works entirely (from the high level code down to the transistor level). There could be bugs/unintended consequences in it, but we use it, it works under testing, and we trust it.
In the case of a breathalizer, the code is likely very simple. The company may want to keep the algorithms or code secret (i guess, i didn't rtfa), but I'm sure the company would allow you to test it all you want. In fact, they probably have tested it themselves a lot.
This whole mentality of "if its computer code it should be open" doesn't *always* make sense.
the most obvious ways I can immeditately think of would be a democratic process (voting), either from everyone or the contributors, or moderated (there ARE moderators on wikipedia, after all). The main problem with either one is they make it slower to fix a problem or add a change. Also how you add changes is another problem that needs to be resolved.
I like the idea though, because it removes no current functionality from wikipedia. Like the way it is now? Use the unstable wikipedia. Want something more reliable (or don't want to see the goatcex guy instead of a picture of george bush)? Use the stable version.
Yeah, but when you make less money than you could (say from graphical ads) you are also doing it for your users. It's a longterm thing - make your users happy by not placing colorful flashy ads, and they'll keep coming back. So yeah, it is about money, but the method to get that money is user loyalty.
I'd say they are doing a good job based on how many google fanboys are out there