the stock market is not ~(0,1) but it is extremely difficult to show it is not random, if you can show that please let me know so I can make lots of money in a short time.
Something can be deterministic (i.e. totally not random) and yet still be unpredictable. Chaos theory. It was famous just before teh intarweb.
Should the US impose restrictive tariffs on imports from WTO members the result is that all WTO members get to impose restrictive tariffs on the US, and we may need to pay fines to the WTO.
If Sydney's suddenly floated across the Pacific and anchored off 'Frisco Bay, there might be other things to worry about.
I can't ignore what's not there.
My point was that without selection pressure, a change in environment will not necessarily lead to evolution. Antelopes only got faster because lions ate the slow ones.
Those just look like normal, albeit fairly aesthetic, toilets. I was expecting something special, like French toilets. Maybe "special" wasn't quite the right word there...
If my fridge has the ability to tell me its internal temperature, I'd like to have a way to query it.
Me, I walk the 20 or so feet to the kitchen, open the fridge, and place my hand on one of the beers contained therein. If it's at the correct temperature, I take it out and drink it. If it isn't, I wait for them to cool down. I'll have one while I'm waiting, of course.
Well said. A little thought experiment to demonstrate the existence of sub-species level distinctions: Take several varieties of canis familiaris - I'd recommend chihauha, rottweiler, old English sheepdog and Jack Russel. Deliver to each specimen a swift kick up the arse. Observe the results.
All of them, since that's how "maladapted" is defined in this context.
As a result of living in centrally heated houses, driving cars and surfing teh intarwebs"and similar moders, like, stuff, everyone dies before they reproduce?
I think one minor flaw of your theory is that doesn't account for how bloody crowded it is around here.
Again, evolution is not teleological or intelligently driven - that's the whole point.
However, I don't think that stupid people have a genetic predisposition to have stupid babies.
Do you believe that tall people tend to have tall babies[1]? Do you believe that fat placid pigs tend to have fat placid piglets? Intelligence is a characteristic like any other. I wonder if people who claim it isn't heritable are really wishing it wasn't.
[1] Measured when they grow up, before anyone gets sarky.
What I am saying that education has nothing to do with genes.
Nice switch. What about the relation between intelligence (or IQ) and genes?
Personally, I'd expect a link, though not a direct causal one: intelligent people will tend to make better advantage of their education, hence they'll tend to earn more, thus giving their children (who will inherit some of their genes) a head start.
As technology develops, natural selection becomes more about humans selecting nature than nature selecting them. I would have though genetic evolution in humans would have slowed to a crawl as memetic evolution took its place. But maybe a few short-sighted people still get eaten by lions....
In terms of open source solutions, I highly doubt anyone's gone that route. It's such a big undertaking, I don't think OS has even come up with a reasonable, scalable accounting suite.
I think it's not so much that open source couldn't, but it just wouldn't want to. Accounting is boring - it's not even mathematically interesting - and all this double entry nonesense sounds very inefficient. Business majors are so square. Sales is for teh luz3rz in 5uitz.
What would 99.999% of geeks rather do - research & develop a routine to validate Belgian bank account numbers, or shave a few picoseconds off their homebrew sort routine (which is about half the speed of the standard one, but better...)?
unless you are in the extraordinarily unlikely position of having a business that lines up 100% with the vendors "best practices"
The inflexibility of SAP is a bit of a myth, to be honest. If you think installing SAP means there's only one way to do it, you're simply plain wrong. When they talk about customising, that's basically plugging a range of preprogrammed behaviours together. But it's surprising just how many variations that can give. In my experience 90% of the times SAP "can't do it" it can, but people just don't or won't understand that it does it a different way to the old sytstem. Most of the rest don't make sense to start with and with hindsight the old system wouldn't have been written that way - not that they'd admit that.
Of course there are companies where SAP really doesn't fit. But if they did a proper analysis they ought to find that out before they go live.
they say that with SAP you don't need do code, only customize. But instead of 1000 coding man hour, you will need 1000 customizer man hour
Fact is, there's only so much you can do with customising - it's analagous to slotting lego bricks together. You can't make settings for what isn't there - that tends to put an upper limit on how much of it you can do.
Hacking code around is more like carving your own bricks. Or just carving. There's no end to what you can create - useful or not, needed or not, justified in business terms or not. Duplicate every report that existed before, even though half of them were control reports to check the sales against inventory after the overnight interface run? Sure.
Anybody who's worked on an SAP implementation (i.e. actually knows what they're talking about) knows that.
Fido's cell phone customer service in Canada is a great example of this. It's not outsourced, either... all Canadian CS.
The two are not mutually exclusive. Outsourcing just means getting another company do do what you aren't very good at, or don't specialise in. Just because some people confuse it with offshoring or globalisation in general doesn't make it so.
Outsourced service does not have the corner on the complete incompetence market. =)
No, but offshore outsourced service can be equally crap but at a lower price. Or much more crap at a much lower price.
Slashdot Mirror
That command is only valid for System V type variants.
I can't ignore what's not there. My point was that without selection pressure, a change in environment will not necessarily lead to evolution. Antelopes only got faster because lions ate the slow ones.
Those just look like normal, albeit fairly aesthetic, toilets. I was expecting something special, like French toilets. Maybe "special" wasn't quite the right word there ...
Shiny my ass! What matters is that they're made from oxygen free macromicrocrystalline myconium. And they're a nice colour.
Disclaimer: don't kick dogs up the arse.
I think one minor flaw of your theory is that doesn't account for how bloody crowded it is around here.
I don't recall saying that it is.Now how many of the ones who are maladapted to it die as a result, or are otherwise prevented from repoducing?
Can we add aesthetics to the list of things that usability isn't?
[1] Measured when they grow up, before anyone gets sarky.
Personally, I'd expect a link, though not a direct causal one: intelligent people will tend to make better advantage of their education, hence they'll tend to earn more, thus giving their children (who will inherit some of their genes) a head start.
As technology develops, natural selection becomes more about humans selecting nature than nature selecting them. I would have though genetic evolution in humans would have slowed to a crawl as memetic evolution took its place. But maybe a few short-sighted people still get eaten by lions....
What would 99.999% of geeks rather do - research & develop a routine to validate Belgian bank account numbers, or shave a few picoseconds off their homebrew sort routine (which is about half the speed of the standard one, but better...)?
Of course there are companies where SAP really doesn't fit. But if they did a proper analysis they ought to find that out before they go live.
And its not it's. At least one of them, anyway.
Have you looked into the linux source? Not exactly beautiful and tricky to modify unless you really know what you're doing.
It may run your apps well, but it's hardly extensible or flexible. You'd be better off writing your own operating system, IMO.
Fact is, there's only so much you can do with customising - it's analagous to slotting lego bricks together. You can't make settings for what isn't there - that tends to put an upper limit on how much of it you can do.
Hacking code around is more like carving your own bricks. Or just carving. There's no end to what you can create - useful or not, needed or not, justified in business terms or not. Duplicate every report that existed before, even though half of them were control reports to check the sales against inventory after the overnight interface run? Sure.
Anybody who's worked on an SAP implementation (i.e. actually knows what they're talking about) knows that.
Assuming this would be a civil case, isn't balance of probabilities (a somewhat lower standard) sufficient? Which is pretty scary.
No, but offshore outsourced service can be equally crap but at a lower price. Or much more crap at a much lower price.