I am an economics student, and I am working on my first paper right now. As such, I'm becoming more cognizant of the glacial pace publishing takes in economics. When I heard that it could take two years or more in some cases from first submission to appearing in an issue, I thought it was an anomaly, that there were a few papers that were in such a state.
But then I read a paper by Glenn Ellison in the Journal of Political Economy from 2002. His work suggested that not only is the mean time in publishing papers upwards of two years (especially in fields like econometrics), but that the submit-review-revise-publish cycle has been slower and going through more iterations over the past two decades, especially at the top journals.
I get the sense that there's very little in economics with any credibility in the field that has a cycle on par with Astrophysics Journal or Physical Review.
FTA:
Traditional economists had long thought--or assumed--that the prospect of a $1,000 gain could compensate you for an equally likely loss of the same size.
Well...it depends. That statement assumes that a person has preferences described by a risk-neutral utility function (for example, a linear function). In that case the utility a $1000 gain would fully compensate for the decline of utility from a $1000 loss.
However, people can also be risk-averse (in which case the loss in utility from being out $1000 would be greater than the gain from receiving $1000) or risk-loving (in which case the opposite situation happens). Further, they can be any of those within particular intervals. It's generally accepted that not all agents are risk-neutral (though it does make some models easier to build).
You may not know this, but in kde 3.1 the kde developers added a beta DRM system to stop you from doing certain things like launching unauthorized programs, reading certain programs or changing certain settings.
I fail to see how this is DRM.
This isn't any different from settings in versions of Windows that allow an admin to restrict users to certain sets of programs or not allowing to modify settings or install applications. Depending on local computer use policies, this may be reasonable (in terms of maintaining a consistent platform, or keeping desktop users from installing warez). How this equates to content providers determining whether their products can be viewed, heard, copied or otherwise distributed is wholly uncertain.
There's a fairly intereting article article in the most recent issue of the Pittsburgh City Paper about the local pinball scene, its competitions, and the decline of pinball culture.
From what I remember, there actually was a form of write-only memory at one point. Some of the sound registers on the Commodore 64 were "write only" in the sense that you could poke any value (well, from 0-255) into the memory location and it would change the nature of the sounds generated. However, if you tried to peek into the address, it returned with zero no matter what. Can anyone verify this? It's been a good bunch of years since I've had one of those to program.
Not truly write-only memory (in the sense that you could get a value, albeit a painfully useless one), but it seems to come close to the spirit.
I guess the newest thing about this is the proposed contiguous range. But public wireless service in Pittsburgh isn't a new idea. Telerama has been offering free wireless service for the better part of a year, but mostly at coffeeshops and a few restaurants. While this is a far cry from the four square miles of coverage 3 Rivers Connect offers, it's hard to beat "free", especially outside of the downtown area.
One of the big problems with wireless connectivity around Pittsburgh is the local topology. There are lots of hills and valleys and comparatively little flat land. This has made cellular service rather unreliable in a lot of cases, and makes wireless service difficult outside of short ranges (at least, outside the relatively flat downtown area). It'll be a while before both providers offer service beyond small ranges, but it's a promising start all the same.
Slashdot Mirror
I am an economics student, and I am working on my first paper right now. As such, I'm becoming more cognizant of the glacial pace publishing takes in economics. When I heard that it could take two years or more in some cases from first submission to appearing in an issue, I thought it was an anomaly, that there were a few papers that were in such a state.
But then I read a paper by Glenn Ellison in the Journal of Political Economy from 2002. His work suggested that not only is the mean time in publishing papers upwards of two years (especially in fields like econometrics), but that the submit-review-revise-publish cycle has been slower and going through more iterations over the past two decades, especially at the top journals.
I get the sense that there's very little in economics with any credibility in the field that has a cycle on par with Astrophysics Journal or Physical Review.
Well...it depends. That statement assumes that a person has preferences described by a risk-neutral utility function (for example, a linear function). In that case the utility a $1000 gain would fully compensate for the decline of utility from a $1000 loss.
However, people can also be risk-averse (in which case the loss in utility from being out $1000 would be greater than the gain from receiving $1000) or risk-loving (in which case the opposite situation happens). Further, they can be any of those within particular intervals. It's generally accepted that not all agents are risk-neutral (though it does make some models easier to build).
I fail to see how this is DRM.
This isn't any different from settings in versions of Windows that allow an admin to restrict users to certain sets of programs or not allowing to modify settings or install applications. Depending on local computer use policies, this may be reasonable (in terms of maintaining a consistent platform, or keeping desktop users from installing warez). How this equates to content providers determining whether their products can be viewed, heard, copied or otherwise distributed is wholly uncertain.
There's a fairly intereting article article in the most recent issue of the Pittsburgh City Paper about the local pinball scene, its competitions, and the decline of pinball culture.
Not truly write-only memory (in the sense that you could get a value, albeit a painfully useless one), but it seems to come close to the spirit.
One of the big problems with wireless connectivity around Pittsburgh is the local topology. There are lots of hills and valleys and comparatively little flat land. This has made cellular service rather unreliable in a lot of cases, and makes wireless service difficult outside of short ranges (at least, outside the relatively flat downtown area). It'll be a while before both providers offer service beyond small ranges, but it's a promising start all the same.