I like the soda bottle analogy. But it raises the question of what in a regular computer is recyclable. Soda bottles are easy, either wash and reuse or grind the glass up and make something new. I can't easily see what can be so conveniently reused in a computer.
I'm all for greater access to academic publications. However, there is a problem which might be aggrevated. Good publications rely on good reviewers, the better the reviewers the better the output. Currently, the continuuing increase in academic publications is putting more and more pressure on reviewers and it is increasingly common for prospective reviewers to either ignore or refuse requests. If this Virtual Scientific Library increases capacity further then this may well undermine the integrity of peer reviewed research.
Moreover, my concern is that a Virtual Scientific Library will will not emphasise where (i.e. which journal) a paper was published and therefore the rigour of the review process. Instead we'll end up with average research on an equal footing with research that deserves maximum respect.
So, yes to a Virtual Scientific Library but can we have it based on Slashcode please but with moderation linked to expertise?
Golf balls have bumps and divots over the surface to enable longer flight times. Surely these additional bumps will also aid the shuttle's aerodynamics?
While the evidence that subliminal advertising affects behaviour a very similar technique (backward masking) is used in psychology experiments to good effect. The upshot being that presenting stimuli below the conscious threshold *can* affect behaviour. Presenting images of a jackpot win on a gaming machine might just prolong the time that a player is willing to play. Good news for the manufacturer, not so good for the player. Anyhow - what are the changes of a *bug* causing this behaviour?
When I lived in America I got charged $20 for writing a cheque that would have taken me $20 over drawn. They bounced the cheque. I was outraged - they could take my account $20 overdrawn but I couldn't. Nevermind the fact that I had ample funds in a savings account. So I marched into the Cambridge branch and at the top of my voiced declared that I wanted to complain. I received immediate service, a full refund and a written apology.
The moral being, if you don't get a bit shouty now and then you risk being walked on.
So try shouting at Chase first - if that doesn't work come back and I'll agree to not open an account with Chase.
I'd take issue with the one study suggesting addiction is not a valid concept. There's a few more papers suggesting otherwise.
Also - the paper you cite reports research which cannot falsify the hypothesis that the rats were still addicted. Although the behaviour observed might suggest this is the case it is not conclusive. For a start the rats may well have been 'diverted' from their need for morphine by the open space, plentiful food and prospects for sex - a different environment from which they were exlosed to the morphine. Interestingly, diversionary tactics also work with human addictions although their success depends on the degree of addiction. A ten year crack habit will be far harder to break than one which is only a month or so old. But even if the diversions work, the person still remains addicted... and it takes, in some cases, a very very long time to overcome.
No one here has shown the slightest interest in how they can contribute their seed! Surely there's a decent enought reason for a post-apocalypse/. commnity?
One of my big worries in life is traveling miles to a meeting to give a presentation and finding that the media the presentation was stored on has gone awol. At least with Google there's the realistic opportunity of having an online backup which can be dialed up over the internet and, hopefully, presented on any machine with a recent browser.
And if I can put the presentation's url into the talk, so that anyone still awake and interested in the material can dial in and relive some the more exciting moments, then that's a benefit. Over emailing slides out having deciphered some email address scribbled on a bit of paper.
of course you are right - there's going to be site specific biases. however, these numbers should be weighted by the fact that MS shoves IE down everyones throat. some/most people will not know there's a choice, some will but won't know how to change and some might feel comfortable trusting MS more than left-field heretics. so one could argue that browser stats are as much an indication of visitor IQ than a true reflection of *choice*.
The issue was raised last week when a Dutch broadcasting agency outfitted a number of bus stops so they would send a promotional video of an upcoming show to passersby
travelling by bus might actually become fun!
going past those shops each with something interesting to sell... hardware, groceries, books, porn...
great post! for myself there's about three or four dvds on my shelf for which i paid full price - everything else is bargain basement. i tend to have a first viewing in the cinema and, if i like the film, i'll make a mental note to buy the dvd when it is at a reasonable price comensurate with how much the movie entertained me.
i really wish that the movie industry would at least try pricing pirates out of the market - i realise it's not possible to stop all pirates but releasing dvds below £7 would be seriously attractive to the majority of those currently downloading and the sort of price dvds end up at anyhow.
Parents of young children will know that you just cannot keep your eye on them 24/7 - it's near impossible but also because kids need to grow and learn for themselves in safe environments. For the latter, and particularly in the social domain, kids will not want mum and/or dad looking over their shoulder, meddling in their social affairs. A site like MySpace clearly attracts many many juveniles and it's success is partly due to their use of the site so, yes, they should be forced to take greater responsibility. Just the same way that the owners of playgrounds are forced to meet health and safety standards. If a child gets a rusty nail through their hand while going down a slide then it's not mum/dad's fault is the playground operator's fault. Or like someone setting up and running a kids disco but not bothering with door security and leaving the door open for any old creep to walk in, groom a few kids, unchallenged, and basically do what the hell they please. Same with MySpace - the shareholders are doing well from attracting a large number of kids to their site, they need to take greater responsibility - certainly more than they are at the moment.
It's a double edged sword... on the one hand we want government to develop evidence based policy, spend our money on things that work and not waste money on the whim of the hand waving middle-classes. The only realistic way to get anywhere near this is to have good data on the population. I have used government data and had various datasets merged to get a better picture on what's going on - something which has been very informative. So, yes, I think we should welcome this initiative.
But, there are issues of anonymity. From what I know, these data are already there and if someone really really wanted to find out a little bit more about someone then sure, merging these data might make things a little bit easier - but probably not as easy as, say, going through their bins, hacking their home network/pda, etc.
If this initiative works then I think the benefits outweigh the costs.
I'm all for kids learning through play and as a kid some of the most dangerous things I played with were motorways, tall trees, cigarettes, alcohol and... well you get the idea. This top-ten list is a hoot - and I can sort of see why poisonous plastic things might not make a great present. But you have to wonder when those responsible for controlling what kids have acess to start insisting all apple trees have matresses put under them, just in case. And in so doing, take away all the fun of real world learning - it's one thing being told that something is dangerous but far better and fun to learn first hand that snipping a worm in two doesn't make two worms, only two halves and a bit of goo.
Now what we need here is face recognition software, a database of cocktails cross referenced with emotions and access to each drinkers' personal 'myspace drink preference' database... then we're really beginning to get personalised service. Add in the world joke compendium, the database of unbelieveable stories that were actually true the widescreen tv accessory so you don't miss a moment of the game while you order then we're really getting somewhere.
It depends on your view of punishment - if it works as a deterrent then perhaps the stigma associated with sex crime is helping to keep crime numbers down.
Frankly, imho, any form of sexual abuse, whether it is rape, paedophilia, flashing, whatever, involves a victim who should not have had to endure that crime. Although, on the whole, sex offenders' rates of recidivism is below other offenders there are hard core groups who are often organised and do systematically seek out victims. I can't see any good reason not to require these people to register their email addresses.
Sure you CAN walk to your local grocery store, but could you really do it all the time?
No - I don't walk all the time, most of the time I ride a bicycle, a fun, efficient & healthy way of getting about. And on my bike I get to work faster than if I went by car, I park in no time and for free, I get to ride along dinky little country tracks far away from car fumes...
Actually - I hope car drivers stay on their congested roads, if they started to ride as well then it might spoil my fun!
There's some fairly suggestive evidence out there, from medical types, that the police can save NHS resources by being more proactive in environments known to be associated with violent crime (e.g. where there's a high density of pubs and clubs). Basically, if they get to an incident before it kicks off then injury can be avoided. In turn, drunk casualties don't clog up A&E time and resources. Now you can argue that these cameras with microphones are just another invasion of privacy. But there is an equally compelling case that taking a more proactive stance saves us tax payers money, prevents injury and means the poor people who turn up at A&E with non-alcohol related problems aren't sharing space with rowdy aggressive drunks.
I'm all for protecting privacy - but I'm also for reducing harm and, on balance, these cameras benefits might outweigh their costs.
We can argue until the cows come home about the relationship between human activity and climate change. At the end of the day, however, the costs of climate change, if we are responsible and choose not to act, could be catastrophic and irreversible. Even if the probability that our action is related to climate change is small the potential costs are so high as to make acting to reduce emissions, etc., the only realistic strategy.
Isn't Earth's orbit relative to the Earth's mass? Make it lighter and it will move a little way further from the sun. Moving the Earth further from the sun will surely reduce Earth's temperature. So... the answer is just send the heaviest people into space. Lots of them.
When it comes to crowd-sourcing the main stream media *should* win hands down. Established media, in particular some newspapers, have a better reputation when it comes to protecting sources compared to ISPs, for example.
Slashdot Mirror
I like the soda bottle analogy. But it raises the question of what in a regular computer is recyclable. Soda bottles are easy, either wash and reuse or grind the glass up and make something new. I can't easily see what can be so conveniently reused in a computer.
Moreover, my concern is that a Virtual Scientific Library will will not emphasise where (i.e. which journal) a paper was published and therefore the rigour of the review process. Instead we'll end up with average research on an equal footing with research that deserves maximum respect.
So, yes to a Virtual Scientific Library but can we have it based on Slashcode please but with moderation linked to expertise?
Golf balls have bumps and divots over the surface to enable longer flight times. Surely these additional bumps will also aid the shuttle's aerodynamics?
While the evidence that subliminal advertising affects behaviour a very similar technique (backward masking) is used in psychology experiments to good effect. The upshot being that presenting stimuli below the conscious threshold *can* affect behaviour. Presenting images of a jackpot win on a gaming machine might just prolong the time that a player is willing to play. Good news for the manufacturer, not so good for the player. Anyhow - what are the changes of a *bug* causing this behaviour?
surely the best way forward is to not build houses on sand in the first place?
The moral being, if you don't get a bit shouty now and then you risk being walked on.
So try shouting at Chase first - if that doesn't work come back and I'll agree to not open an account with Chase.
I'd take issue with the one study suggesting addiction is not a valid concept. There's a few more papers suggesting otherwise. Also - the paper you cite reports research which cannot falsify the hypothesis that the rats were still addicted. Although the behaviour observed might suggest this is the case it is not conclusive. For a start the rats may well have been 'diverted' from their need for morphine by the open space, plentiful food and prospects for sex - a different environment from which they were exlosed to the morphine. Interestingly, diversionary tactics also work with human addictions although their success depends on the degree of addiction. A ten year crack habit will be far harder to break than one which is only a month or so old. But even if the diversions work, the person still remains addicted... and it takes, in some cases, a very very long time to overcome.
No one here has shown the slightest interest in how they can contribute their seed! Surely there's a decent enought reason for a post-apocalypse /. commnity?
One of my big worries in life is traveling miles to a meeting to give a presentation and finding that the media the presentation was stored on has gone awol. At least with Google there's the realistic opportunity of having an online backup which can be dialed up over the internet and, hopefully, presented on any machine with a recent browser. And if I can put the presentation's url into the talk, so that anyone still awake and interested in the material can dial in and relive some the more exciting moments, then that's a benefit. Over emailing slides out having deciphered some email address scribbled on a bit of paper.
of course you are right - there's going to be site specific biases. however, these numbers should be weighted by the fact that MS shoves IE down everyones throat. some/most people will not know there's a choice, some will but won't know how to change and some might feel comfortable trusting MS more than left-field heretics. so one could argue that browser stats are as much an indication of visitor IQ than a true reflection of *choice*.
to go for a take out - dontcha think?
Oh no! Reruns!
travelling by bus might actually become fun!
going past those shops each with something interesting to sell... hardware, groceries, books, porn...
great post! for myself there's about three or four dvds on my shelf for which i paid full price - everything else is bargain basement. i tend to have a first viewing in the cinema and, if i like the film, i'll make a mental note to buy the dvd when it is at a reasonable price comensurate with how much the movie entertained me. i really wish that the movie industry would at least try pricing pirates out of the market - i realise it's not possible to stop all pirates but releasing dvds below £7 would be seriously attractive to the majority of those currently downloading and the sort of price dvds end up at anyhow.
Parents of young children will know that you just cannot keep your eye on them 24/7 - it's near impossible but also because kids need to grow and learn for themselves in safe environments. For the latter, and particularly in the social domain, kids will not want mum and/or dad looking over their shoulder, meddling in their social affairs. A site like MySpace clearly attracts many many juveniles and it's success is partly due to their use of the site so, yes, they should be forced to take greater responsibility. Just the same way that the owners of playgrounds are forced to meet health and safety standards. If a child gets a rusty nail through their hand while going down a slide then it's not mum/dad's fault is the playground operator's fault. Or like someone setting up and running a kids disco but not bothering with door security and leaving the door open for any old creep to walk in, groom a few kids, unchallenged, and basically do what the hell they please. Same with MySpace - the shareholders are doing well from attracting a large number of kids to their site, they need to take greater responsibility - certainly more than they are at the moment.
But, there are issues of anonymity. From what I know, these data are already there and if someone really really wanted to find out a little bit more about someone then sure, merging these data might make things a little bit easier - but probably not as easy as, say, going through their bins, hacking their home network/pda, etc.
If this initiative works then I think the benefits outweigh the costs.
I'm all for kids learning through play and as a kid some of the most dangerous things I played with were motorways, tall trees, cigarettes, alcohol and... well you get the idea. This top-ten list is a hoot - and I can sort of see why poisonous plastic things might not make a great present. But you have to wonder when those responsible for controlling what kids have acess to start insisting all apple trees have matresses put under them, just in case. And in so doing, take away all the fun of real world learning - it's one thing being told that something is dangerous but far better and fun to learn first hand that snipping a worm in two doesn't make two worms, only two halves and a bit of goo.
Now what we need here is face recognition software, a database of cocktails cross referenced with emotions and access to each drinkers' personal 'myspace drink preference' database... then we're really beginning to get personalised service. Add in the world joke compendium, the database of unbelieveable stories that were actually true the widescreen tv accessory so you don't miss a moment of the game while you order then we're really getting somewhere.
It depends on your view of punishment - if it works as a deterrent then perhaps the stigma associated with sex crime is helping to keep crime numbers down. Frankly, imho, any form of sexual abuse, whether it is rape, paedophilia, flashing, whatever, involves a victim who should not have had to endure that crime. Although, on the whole, sex offenders' rates of recidivism is below other offenders there are hard core groups who are often organised and do systematically seek out victims. I can't see any good reason not to require these people to register their email addresses.
No - I don't walk all the time, most of the time I ride a bicycle, a fun, efficient & healthy way of getting about. And on my bike I get to work faster than if I went by car, I park in no time and for free, I get to ride along dinky little country tracks far away from car fumes...
Actually - I hope car drivers stay on their congested roads, if they started to ride as well then it might spoil my fun!
To follow up on this, there seems to be some evidence/discussion here
There's some fairly suggestive evidence out there, from medical types, that the police can save NHS resources by being more proactive in environments known to be associated with violent crime (e.g. where there's a high density of pubs and clubs). Basically, if they get to an incident before it kicks off then injury can be avoided. In turn, drunk casualties don't clog up A&E time and resources. Now you can argue that these cameras with microphones are just another invasion of privacy. But there is an equally compelling case that taking a more proactive stance saves us tax payers money, prevents injury and means the poor people who turn up at A&E with non-alcohol related problems aren't sharing space with rowdy aggressive drunks. I'm all for protecting privacy - but I'm also for reducing harm and, on balance, these cameras benefits might outweigh their costs.
We can argue until the cows come home about the relationship between human activity and climate change. At the end of the day, however, the costs of climate change, if we are responsible and choose not to act, could be catastrophic and irreversible. Even if the probability that our action is related to climate change is small the potential costs are so high as to make acting to reduce emissions, etc., the only realistic strategy.
Isn't Earth's orbit relative to the Earth's mass? Make it lighter and it will move a little way further from the sun. Moving the Earth further from the sun will surely reduce Earth's temperature. So... the answer is just send the heaviest people into space. Lots of them.
When it comes to crowd-sourcing the main stream media *should* win hands down. Established media, in particular some newspapers, have a better reputation when it comes to protecting sources compared to ISPs, for example.