Also, right now the results are based on what the website creators want to be "searchable", though Google is becoming harder to steer. I suppose a search result based on other similarly bizarre people to me would be better than a search result based on what the websites want me to find.
I don't usually search for single words such as "wine". (I know it was just an example.) I've learned how to phrase my searches to get what I want within the first few entries on the first page. Yes, that is also partly Google getting better. Maybe part of my concern is selfish: I'll have to re-learn how to phrase things all over again.:-)
Of course not. But I was being conservative.:-) I doubt that they could find any useful patterns. I use Google dozens of times a day. They could certainly find patterns within any give hour, say. But those patterns would not repeat themselves in subsequent hours and usually not in subsequent days.
I do understand that there are many ways that patterns could appear. Not only do I not always search for things within my fields of expertise, but I usually search for things with are outside of my fields of expertise - that means, pretty much everything. So if I search for the Gospel of Thomas, for example, because I've heard about it and am curious, will they assume that I'm religious (a mistake) and slant their results toward religious sites or subjects?
And I don't always look for products to buy, but I sometimes do. And sometimes I am interested in information on products, with no intention of buying them. I sometimes look for information on people or companies that I do business with, but sometimes for information on people or companies that I have no relationship or commonality with. If I read an article saying that eggplant is good for my health, and I want to learn about it, will they send me a bunch of eggplant recipes because my previous food searches were for recipes? That would not be useful. At the very least, I would have to build a new intuition of how to word my search queries so that they will confuse the algorithms and produce the results that I want. I've spent years building my current intuition and I'm pretty good at asking the right questions so I will get what I want.
Anyway, I'm not worried that they are evil, but that we'll lose a useful web tool.
I think Google has done a good job of making their search results more and more appropriate, and I really appreciate it, so I'm afraid they are going to make themselves less useful by trying to second-guess what I want. At least half of the searches I do on Google follow no pattern, probably more. Yet they will try to discern a pattern and skew the results appropriately. That will result in poorer search results. I'll have to start looking elsewhere.
It's been so long since I've used a rival search engine/site that I don't even know who the second best one is. I do remember that many of them also returned google search results along with their own. I don't imagine that Google will be able to profile other search sites the way it does individual users because so many users will create near randomness. So maybe those results will become better than results acquired directly from Google.
From my perspective it has been very effective in the US. We went from getting numerous calls each day to getting less than half a dozen a year. But our do not call list is more rigorous. It does not set allowable times of day or anything. Marketeers are simply not allowed to call any number on the list. Exceptions are allowed for non-profits and political organizations, but they apparently don't do much telemarketing.
Yes. The old Roman ships were planked in cedar (very flammable wood) and sealed/coated with tar and pitch. The fishing boat may have been cedar planked, but was certainly painted, not pitch sealed and coated in tar. And these are just the obvious differences.
Being about 50 years old I have seen most of our shift from theaters to home viewing. I have noticed that theaters seem to be getting smaller and more numerous. The multiplex near my home in megapolitan southern California has more theaters than gates at O'Hare airport (and they are arranged similarly), but most of them are smaller than the theater in the tiny little home town of my youth.
At the same time, home theaters are growing - both in size and in number. I wonder when and where the convergence will happen...
I find it interesting that a Russian and an Englishman are making a bet apparently using US dollars. I think they are betting as much on the future value of our dollar (low) as on the climate.
Electric powered farm equipment would be great. The motors have excellent torque curves (lines) and all those heavy batteries would be great when plowing - then you wouldn't have to add extra traction weights.
Or, you could use biodiesel to run existing farm equipment. If you distill corn to make ethanol, what happens to all that corn oil? Might as well burn it in the tractor, Jake. Biodiesel is real and it is now.
We share 98.5% of our genes with chimpanzes. We are so out of our element, in attempting to understand and deal with climate change, that it's pathetic to watch.
It was silence that allowed our subs to enter Soviet harbors. I think that this 13" aircraft would be almost invisible if it were silent.... Or if it went around cawing like a crow.
I don't watch TV at home, but I'd heard about these robot wars. I was very disappointed when I finally saw one, recently. Hardly even robotic, they were just remote control wedges. Someone needs to make one with a switch under the edge. When a wedge goes under it, the switch triggers a big steel fist that slams down on top of the offending wedge. Or maybe a suction cup that picks up the wedge, then transports it to the nearest trash can.
Re:An accessible page, more types of fluids tested
on
Bang But No Splash
·
· Score: 1
As one bear to another, I think you are right. And yes, it is interesting.
That is interesting. Is it really true? If so, I would like to learn about it. Could you cite a reference? Thank you.
Re:An accessible page, more types of fluids tested
on
Bang But No Splash
·
· Score: 1
A person landing flat on the water will make a bigger splash than the same person entering the water more smoothly. A flattened sphere will hit the water "flatter" than a rounded sphere. I just surmised that the less flattened sphere might splat a bit more "gracefully". But this might not be what is happening, anyway. I noticed that someone else suggested that as the drop hits and starts to spread it meets air resistance. Denser air resists the spread and breaks it up into drops. Thinner air allows it to spread more smoothly. I don't know what is right.
Re:An accessible page, more types of fluids tested
on
Bang But No Splash
·
· Score: 2, Informative
That's what it looks like as it leaves the spigot, but it quickly assumes a spherical shape as it falls. Surface tension pulls the same on all surfaces of the drop, so it would pull it into a sphere. In a vacuum it should attain a perfect sphere, though it may take some time because of sloshing around inside the drop. Atmospheric drag would tend to flatten the bottom of the drop as it falls. If you look at the film clip (see previous posting) you will see that the drop falling through the denser atmosphere is noticeably flattened, while the drop falling through the thinner atmosphere is more spherical.
Re:An accessible page, more types of fluids tested
on
Bang But No Splash
·
· Score: 3, Insightful
Yes it is a good movie. I see that the drop in the top frame is flattened, presumeably due to the resistance of the thicker air it is passing through. The drop in the lower frame/lower atmospheric pressure is more nearly a perfect sphere. Maybe that accounts for the splash/no splash effect? Kind of like the difference between a belly flop (flattened sphere) and a clean dive.
I am glad to see that the fifth word posted in reply to this article was "parents". Yeah, parents cannot totally control their kids, but I know some parents who should never have had their kids because they cannot or will not raise them.
Not just motorcycles - how many men, women, and children died while crossing the continent in conestoga wagons in the mid-1800s?
Re:Red index fingers: the hip new way to protest B
on
Hondas in Space
·
· Score: 1
Interesting how the people who are loudest about defending our liberty are also the loudest to condemn those who use freedom of speech to express their opinions.
As one who served in the military myself (long ago) I encourage expression of all opinions. Please don't stifle the very freedoms we have defended.
It had to be a kid. If it was the wife, the police would have arrested her - having already established that it was an "arrestable" crime. Kids are too hard to prosecute.
Also, a firefighter would know that you probably won't start a house on fire by putting a burning napkin in a box and placing it next to a window. He would also know that an investigation would take place. After all his years fighting fires, I think he would probably have done a more effective job.
Slashdot Mirror
Also, right now the results are based on what the website creators want to be "searchable", though Google is becoming harder to steer. I suppose a search result based on other similarly bizarre people to me would be better than a search result based on what the websites want me to find.
I don't usually search for single words such as "wine". (I know it was just an example.) I've learned how to phrase my searches to get what I want within the first few entries on the first page. Yes, that is also partly Google getting better. Maybe part of my concern is selfish: I'll have to re-learn how to phrase things all over again. :-)
I do understand that there are many ways that patterns could appear. Not only do I not always search for things within my fields of expertise, but I usually search for things with are outside of my fields of expertise - that means, pretty much everything. So if I search for the Gospel of Thomas, for example, because I've heard about it and am curious, will they assume that I'm religious (a mistake) and slant their results toward religious sites or subjects?
And I don't always look for products to buy, but I sometimes do. And sometimes I am interested in information on products, with no intention of buying them. I sometimes look for information on people or companies that I do business with, but sometimes for information on people or companies that I have no relationship or commonality with. If I read an article saying that eggplant is good for my health, and I want to learn about it, will they send me a bunch of eggplant recipes because my previous food searches were for recipes? That would not be useful. At the very least, I would have to build a new intuition of how to word my search queries so that they will confuse the algorithms and produce the results that I want. I've spent years building my current intuition and I'm pretty good at asking the right questions so I will get what I want.
Anyway, I'm not worried that they are evil, but that we'll lose a useful web tool.
It's been so long since I've used a rival search engine/site that I don't even know who the second best one is. I do remember that many of them also returned google search results along with their own. I don't imagine that Google will be able to profile other search sites the way it does individual users because so many users will create near randomness. So maybe those results will become better than results acquired directly from Google.
From my perspective it has been very effective in the US. We went from getting numerous calls each day to getting less than half a dozen a year. But our do not call list is more rigorous. It does not set allowable times of day or anything. Marketeers are simply not allowed to call any number on the list. Exceptions are allowed for non-profits and political organizations, but they apparently don't do much telemarketing.
Hehehe. Flaming idiots, so to speak? I do have to agree that at 150 yards a volley of flaming arrows certainly does seem more reliable and practical.
Yes. The old Roman ships were planked in cedar (very flammable wood) and sealed/coated with tar and pitch. The fishing boat may have been cedar planked, but was certainly painted, not pitch sealed and coated in tar. And these are just the obvious differences.
"I couldn't do it, therefore it cannot be done"? These guys need to go back to logic 101.
"I can remember when it was $7." I can remember when it was a dime at the Saturday matinee.
Being about 50 years old I have seen most of our shift from theaters to home viewing. I have noticed that theaters seem to be getting smaller and more numerous. The multiplex near my home in megapolitan southern California has more theaters than gates at O'Hare airport (and they are arranged similarly), but most of them are smaller than the theater in the tiny little home town of my youth. At the same time, home theaters are growing - both in size and in number. I wonder when and where the convergence will happen...
I find it interesting that a Russian and an Englishman are making a bet apparently using US dollars. I think they are betting as much on the future value of our dollar (low) as on the climate.
Electric powered farm equipment would be great. The motors have excellent torque curves (lines) and all those heavy batteries would be great when plowing - then you wouldn't have to add extra traction weights. Or, you could use biodiesel to run existing farm equipment. If you distill corn to make ethanol, what happens to all that corn oil? Might as well burn it in the tractor, Jake. Biodiesel is real and it is now.
We share 98.5% of our genes with chimpanzes. We are so out of our element, in attempting to understand and deal with climate change, that it's pathetic to watch.
It was silence that allowed our subs to enter Soviet harbors. I think that this 13" aircraft would be almost invisible if it were silent. ... Or if it went around cawing like a crow.
I don't watch TV at home, but I'd heard about these robot wars. I was very disappointed when I finally saw one, recently. Hardly even robotic, they were just remote control wedges. Someone needs to make one with a switch under the edge. When a wedge goes under it, the switch triggers a big steel fist that slams down on top of the offending wedge. Or maybe a suction cup that picks up the wedge, then transports it to the nearest trash can.
As one bear to another, I think you are right. And yes, it is interesting.
That is interesting. Is it really true? If so, I would like to learn about it. Could you cite a reference? Thank you.
A person landing flat on the water will make a bigger splash than the same person entering the water more smoothly. A flattened sphere will hit the water "flatter" than a rounded sphere. I just surmised that the less flattened sphere might splat a bit more "gracefully". But this might not be what is happening, anyway. I noticed that someone else suggested that as the drop hits and starts to spread it meets air resistance. Denser air resists the spread and breaks it up into drops. Thinner air allows it to spread more smoothly. I don't know what is right.
That's what it looks like as it leaves the spigot, but it quickly assumes a spherical shape as it falls. Surface tension pulls the same on all surfaces of the drop, so it would pull it into a sphere. In a vacuum it should attain a perfect sphere, though it may take some time because of sloshing around inside the drop. Atmospheric drag would tend to flatten the bottom of the drop as it falls. If you look at the film clip (see previous posting) you will see that the drop falling through the denser atmosphere is noticeably flattened, while the drop falling through the thinner atmosphere is more spherical.
Yes it is a good movie. I see that the drop in the top frame is flattened, presumeably due to the resistance of the thicker air it is passing through. The drop in the lower frame/lower atmospheric pressure is more nearly a perfect sphere. Maybe that accounts for the splash/no splash effect? Kind of like the difference between a belly flop (flattened sphere) and a clean dive.
I am glad to see that the fifth word posted in reply to this article was "parents". Yeah, parents cannot totally control their kids, but I know some parents who should never have had their kids because they cannot or will not raise them.
It's a great idea, but $1 billion? They'll go over budget.
Sumpin tells me this guys doesn't get many chicks - hot or otherwise.
Not just motorcycles - how many men, women, and children died while crossing the continent in conestoga wagons in the mid-1800s?
As one who served in the military myself (long ago) I encourage expression of all opinions. Please don't stifle the very freedoms we have defended.
Also, a firefighter would know that you probably won't start a house on fire by putting a burning napkin in a box and placing it next to a window. He would also know that an investigation would take place. After all his years fighting fires, I think he would probably have done a more effective job.