Meh, financial analysis is tough because it's a chaotic system that monitors itself. Upon monitoring itself, it changes the system. Sure, you might be able to model the data, but models are just simplifications of the actual system. And this sux because the minutia of each possible data point could have wide-sweeping implications for the whole system. You come up with a tool to measure the whole system (because it's not simply the sum of its pieces), you'll be king of the world.
The other best theory is the big crunch, basically where gravity pulls all objects together from existence into one singularity.
I dunno if I'd subscribe to the big crunch theory -> infinite loop, mostly because runs counter to the idea of losing energy. Either creating the universe costs energy or creating a giant gravity well costs energy, and one of those is the lowest state of equilibrium. Granted though we, as a species, are very ignorant as to the mechanisms of gravity, and there could be a cosmological perpetual machine out there, but it seems to run counter to the theories we have learned so far.
Heath death seems more likely, but too bad I'll never know. : P
Installed Ubuntu and it "just works" right out of the box. Unfortunately, what most people mean by just works is compatibility with most of Window's legacy software, including their third-party stuff. Given that, I think linux has done a fair job, partly because it has been more developer friendly than windows. It's much less annoying as a poor college student to get linux rather than to get a 'free' version of some windows sdk and bother with shelling out 1k to un-cripple it.
I think the article isn't saying that all poor scholastic performance are the fault of games but that games can be addictive and due to that and their time consuming nature, games are a factor. Kinda like how not all people who drink alcohol are alcoholics, but some are and this causes them to drive poorly or become violent. If this is the case, they might need some kind of social support structure to control their addictions lest they ruin their lives. On that note, I've actually witnessed a few college-mates, even smart ones, nearly flunk out because they had to get some item of power from an Everquest raid. Consequently, they lost sleep, didn't study, failed tests, etc. If they had some kind of support structure, they might be doing cooler things instead of working at the local Gap.
Yes, school work may be dull and difficult but there may be some merit to the argument that games addictive and draw our attention away from topics no matter how interesting or uninteresting they are. I think this study is not about blaming video games but in realizing that people have low self control and need help.
I find the difference between the two, certification programs and universities, is that for the former you're required to remember a body facts (which may or may not change) and in the latter you're required to understand the material and apply it to new situations. The difference is subtle but important. Having a certification informs your employer that you are a replaceable cog; that you have the exact criteria to do the job, no more no less. A university education (at least at the higher levels) would tell the employer that you have some body of knowledge but also the capacity above and beyond the minimum. This would allow them to invest in a partner rather than a replaceable cog.
Now my views on this are probably limited, but that is my impression of what the two types of programs offer. Particularly from seeing all of the TV programs which advertise 'Get your degree in x-months to get a high paying job'. It all seems focused on teaching you the 'what' of learning instead of the 'how'. Ah but, maybe some ITT Tech graduate will prove me wrong.
Maybe being outspoken, vocal, and whiney, is the only way to get what you want. Sometimes if you let people take an inch, they go all the fucking way because they want to make money. You should try it sometime, maybe you'll get what you want.:)
Hmm...I haven't really played Prince of Persia, but I'm playing Braid and I'd have to say the levels are fairly well crafted. The time mechanic isn't simply a gimmick but essential in beating all (but the tutorial) levels. Not to mention, that the story, artwork, and music blend together for a nice ambiance. I'd probably liken Braid to Portal for it's ingenuity rather than Mario + Prince of Persia for its mechanics.
Sadly, I think the reason these topics are easy is not inherent to the topic itself but to the lack of attention academia, or even the rest of the world, give it. Consider works in an art class. We might label someone as gifted if they pay special attention to detail, shading, aesthetics, etc. for a painting. Another student could pretty much produce stick figures and achieve a grade within one letter of the gifted student. There are plenty examples of this in the real world, where individuals who have specialized in the fine arts or literature become famous/wealthy due to the effort they put in: Noam Chomsky, Andrew Loyd Webber, Andy Warhol. My point being, it's not just that these individuals are gifted, it's that most schools don't cultivate artists and linguists. The reason for this failure, is that the hierarchy of teaching: math > physics > chemistry > engineering > english > art, persist from a time, the industrial revolution, where it was more important to produce an interoperable cog than a creative individual. Hence why English 300 was probably easy; we, as a society, just don't care enough.
Btw, take some linguistics classes, they're generally harder. Linguistics + compiler design + machine learning + stochastics = fun times.
How exactly would you measure collusion though? Companies could probably do the same thing and just offer periodic 'sales' to keep up the illusion that there is competition. What would be interesting is if consumers organized and just bought into one provider to force the other to compete. If the lack of competition forces a company to lose a significant amount of customers, you might see some fairness/greed creep back into the system.
To be fair though, almost all websites are more than just pure HTML. A lot of them tend to be non-trivial chimeric combinations of databases, server-side code, and client-side code to provide a web application with some dynamic content. A proper MVC usually alleviates some of the mess of serializing/deserializing data just to pass data around, but then again, a lot of coding might be needed to provide a smooth user interface. I guess what I'm saying is that developing a website can be as complicated as you make it; See the slashdot or any opensource blog for an example . So, in developing a website for a major news corporation, I wouldn't be surprised if a computer analyst was at the helm only that a) he wasn't consulted about securing content or b) didn't secure the content.
Technically, though, you could now monitor the number of people who access the torrent and speculate more accurately as to how many hypothetical dollars are lost. I believe an above post mentioned ~60k downloaders total and at about 10$ a ticket (rounding up), it should be a loss of 600k. This is probably the upper limit since most tickets range from 5$-8.50$ and there will be some unknown percentage of people who will see the move anyways. So, leaving the mark at 600k, a movie usually needs to gross several million to break even with production costs. I'm not sure what the costs where, but in terms of similar movies' revenue, they tend to break 100 million easy. So, technically, they're losing 1% (maybe ~1% if you subtract costs) to piracy and, it seems, shouldn't be a valid scape goat.
That works sometimes. In other situations, you have so much traffic merging on to the road from different directions, that the light will cycle through your turn while other cars squeeze in while you wait. In other words, you'll never get in, at least until rush hour is over, unless you bend the law. At that point, the people behind you would just route around you because while you're obeying the letter of the law, you're not acknowledging the spirit of the road (which is moody and violent from being cooped up in an office).
HR is usually involved when you're dealing with a large number of applicants, and you're trying to find the ideal candidate. And they're not just there to review resumes, but to also ensure the accepted applicants fill out forms X and get security clearance Y, and have the appropriate orientation for job Z. A lot of this is just grunt secretary work that doesn't need a manager's time and could be delegated to someone on a lower pay grade. This then allows the manager to manage people instead of hashing with the logistics of getting them into and out of the job.
Your IQ has just placed you within 1 stdev of mainstream intelligence. Prepare to laugh at fart jokes, cry at the plight of 2 dimensional characters, and rabidly justify gaping plot holes with the theory of intelligent design! We the broadcast executives in collaboration with the brain slug planet would like to thank you for your added support.
Sennheiser's actually have decent sub woofer-like thumps in their headphones. I think most high-end headphones, and a few low-ends, do have limited sub woofer capabilities. The only limitation of course is that you only feel/hear the reverberations in your ears rather than your whole body.
I visited my alma mater recently, and I was stuck by how much changed in just ten years time. The students are doing "cool" projects that I can only dream of doing in the real world. (Example - Programming a robot to swim across a lake and collect trash.) It makes me wonder if they will be disappointed with their first jobs, which will mostly consist of sitting at a cubicle all day and writing documents.
I don't consider myself a narcissistic student, but I wonder, what's the point of going through years of education, if not to use it? Ok, there is the money and having a less difficult time at getting a job, but, I see it as a tragedy if a company some time to explore cool stuff because it's worried about micro-efficiency. Considering this, I'm reminded of something a friend (double major CE & Chemistry) once told me: Education is dumb because you work really hard to accumulate all this knowledge only to be placed in management and never use it again. I'm sure that's not true for all situations, but I do think I'd be disappointed to not apply what I've learned to what I'm interested in.
I think if this is used purely to select 'valuable' people by-the-numbers it could be disastrous. If, however, it turns into a data mining exercise, it could enhance the ability of the HR department to ferret out resources and organize teams or research projects. The first thing they should probably do is test out the theory: HR alone, HR + data mining, data mining alone, to see if there is any empirical evidence for making such a move. Maybe they'd then find out that combined, the human + machine performs better because the machine can manage gobs of data more efficiently and the human is more capable of adding qualities that normally aren't encoded into bits. Overall though, it should be tested before implementing. : P
Ah but the point is: I don't need a gui editor for me, I need others to use a LaTeX gui editor if I want them to peer-review and edit my papers. It's kinda like how linux doesn't have the dominant market share because linux doesn't have the dominant market share. Because other people aren't using LaTeX compatible software and LaTeX doesn't try to be compatible with proprietary formats, it's missing a key killer app feature: the ability to collaborate with others.
I find the Biomedical disciplines also fall into that area. A lot of those people don't or wouldn't use LaTeX either. LaTeX is worthwhile to learn, but getting people to review and edit an electronic copy of the document probably won't be fun.
I find the trouble with latex is that it doesn't lend itself well to peer-editing. The editable usually contains a bit of markup and requires that it be read in some plain text editor (and most lay people would probably get lost in the markup). The readable source, or the stuff which most efficiently conveys information, is usually in an un-editable format like pdf or gs. Sure, there probably are pdf and gs editors out there, but most people don't have them, nor would they be willing to pick it up just for your document. So, sadly I'm stuck with WISIWYG editors because I have to work with other people. Maybe after the revision phase I can just cut-and-paste it into a LaTeX doc, but, it's not much of an option for developing a draft.
Slashdot Mirror
Meh, financial analysis is tough because it's a chaotic system that monitors itself. Upon monitoring itself, it changes the system. Sure, you might be able to model the data, but models are just simplifications of the actual system. And this sux because the minutia of each possible data point could have wide-sweeping implications for the whole system. You come up with a tool to measure the whole system (because it's not simply the sum of its pieces), you'll be king of the world.
The other best theory is the big crunch, basically where gravity pulls all objects together from existence into one singularity.
I dunno if I'd subscribe to the big crunch theory -> infinite loop, mostly because runs counter to the idea of losing energy. Either creating the universe costs energy or creating a giant gravity well costs energy, and one of those is the lowest state of equilibrium. Granted though we, as a species, are very ignorant as to the mechanisms of gravity, and there could be a cosmological perpetual machine out there, but it seems to run counter to the theories we have learned so far.
Heath death seems more likely, but too bad I'll never know. : P
Installed Ubuntu and it "just works" right out of the box. Unfortunately, what most people mean by just works is compatibility with most of Window's legacy software, including their third-party stuff. Given that, I think linux has done a fair job, partly because it has been more developer friendly than windows. It's much less annoying as a poor college student to get linux rather than to get a 'free' version of some windows sdk and bother with shelling out 1k to un-cripple it.
I think the article isn't saying that all poor scholastic performance are the fault of games but that games can be addictive and due to that and their time consuming nature, games are a factor. Kinda like how not all people who drink alcohol are alcoholics, but some are and this causes them to drive poorly or become violent. If this is the case, they might need some kind of social support structure to control their addictions lest they ruin their lives. On that note, I've actually witnessed a few college-mates, even smart ones, nearly flunk out because they had to get some item of power from an Everquest raid. Consequently, they lost sleep, didn't study, failed tests, etc. If they had some kind of support structure, they might be doing cooler things instead of working at the local Gap.
Yes, school work may be dull and difficult but there may be some merit to the argument that games addictive and draw our attention away from topics no matter how interesting or uninteresting they are. I think this study is not about blaming video games but in realizing that people have low self control and need help.
I find the difference between the two, certification programs and universities, is that for the former you're required to remember a body facts (which may or may not change) and in the latter you're required to understand the material and apply it to new situations. The difference is subtle but important. Having a certification informs your employer that you are a replaceable cog; that you have the exact criteria to do the job, no more no less. A university education (at least at the higher levels) would tell the employer that you have some body of knowledge but also the capacity above and beyond the minimum. This would allow them to invest in a partner rather than a replaceable cog.
Now my views on this are probably limited, but that is my impression of what the two types of programs offer. Particularly from seeing all of the TV programs which advertise 'Get your degree in x-months to get a high paying job'. It all seems focused on teaching you the 'what' of learning instead of the 'how'. Ah but, maybe some ITT Tech graduate will prove me wrong.
Maybe being outspoken, vocal, and whiney, is the only way to get what you want. Sometimes if you let people take an inch, they go all the fucking way because they want to make money. You should try it sometime, maybe you'll get what you want. :)
Hmm...I haven't really played Prince of Persia, but I'm playing Braid and I'd have to say the levels are fairly well crafted. The time mechanic isn't simply a gimmick but essential in beating all (but the tutorial) levels. Not to mention, that the story, artwork, and music blend together for a nice ambiance. I'd probably liken Braid to Portal for it's ingenuity rather than Mario + Prince of Persia for its mechanics.
Sadly, I think the reason these topics are easy is not inherent to the topic itself but to the lack of attention academia, or even the rest of the world, give it. Consider works in an art class. We might label someone as gifted if they pay special attention to detail, shading, aesthetics, etc. for a painting. Another student could pretty much produce stick figures and achieve a grade within one letter of the gifted student. There are plenty examples of this in the real world, where individuals who have specialized in the fine arts or literature become famous/wealthy due to the effort they put in: Noam Chomsky, Andrew Loyd Webber, Andy Warhol. My point being, it's not just that these individuals are gifted, it's that most schools don't cultivate artists and linguists. The reason for this failure, is that the hierarchy of teaching: math > physics > chemistry > engineering > english > art, persist from a time, the industrial revolution, where it was more important to produce an interoperable cog than a creative individual. Hence why English 300 was probably easy; we, as a society, just don't care enough.
Btw, take some linguistics classes, they're generally harder. Linguistics + compiler design + machine learning + stochastics = fun times.
Isn't that what slashdot's for?
How exactly would you measure collusion though? Companies could probably do the same thing and just offer periodic 'sales' to keep up the illusion that there is competition. What would be interesting is if consumers organized and just bought into one provider to force the other to compete. If the lack of competition forces a company to lose a significant amount of customers, you might see some fairness/greed creep back into the system.
To be fair though, almost all websites are more than just pure HTML. A lot of them tend to be non-trivial chimeric combinations of databases, server-side code, and client-side code to provide a web application with some dynamic content. A proper MVC usually alleviates some of the mess of serializing/deserializing data just to pass data around, but then again, a lot of coding might be needed to provide a smooth user interface. I guess what I'm saying is that developing a website can be as complicated as you make it; See the slashdot or any opensource blog for an example . So, in developing a website for a major news corporation, I wouldn't be surprised if a computer analyst was at the helm only that a) he wasn't consulted about securing content or b) didn't secure the content.
Technically, though, you could now monitor the number of people who access the torrent and speculate more accurately as to how many hypothetical dollars are lost. I believe an above post mentioned ~60k downloaders total and at about 10$ a ticket (rounding up), it should be a loss of 600k. This is probably the upper limit since most tickets range from 5$-8.50$ and there will be some unknown percentage of people who will see the move anyways. So, leaving the mark at 600k, a movie usually needs to gross several million to break even with production costs. I'm not sure what the costs where, but in terms of similar movies' revenue, they tend to break 100 million easy. So, technically, they're losing 1% (maybe ~1% if you subtract costs) to piracy and, it seems, shouldn't be a valid scape goat.
That works sometimes. In other situations, you have so much traffic merging on to the road from different directions, that the light will cycle through your turn while other cars squeeze in while you wait. In other words, you'll never get in, at least until rush hour is over, unless you bend the law. At that point, the people behind you would just route around you because while you're obeying the letter of the law, you're not acknowledging the spirit of the road (which is moody and violent from being cooped up in an office).
Please. Is there any "sci-fi" out there that avoids that tired old cliche?
The twilight zone? Of course, they pretty much helped define the genre.
Thankfully youtube saves us all: BSG at UN
HR is usually involved when you're dealing with a large number of applicants, and you're trying to find the ideal candidate. And they're not just there to review resumes, but to also ensure the accepted applicants fill out forms X and get security clearance Y, and have the appropriate orientation for job Z. A lot of this is just grunt secretary work that doesn't need a manager's time and could be delegated to someone on a lower pay grade. This then allows the manager to manage people instead of hashing with the logistics of getting them into and out of the job.
Your IQ has just placed you within 1 stdev of mainstream intelligence. Prepare to laugh at fart jokes, cry at the plight of 2 dimensional characters, and rabidly justify gaping plot holes with the theory of intelligent design! We the broadcast executives in collaboration with the brain slug planet would like to thank you for your added support.
Sennheiser's actually have decent sub woofer-like thumps in their headphones. I think most high-end headphones, and a few low-ends, do have limited sub woofer capabilities. The only limitation of course is that you only feel/hear the reverberations in your ears rather than your whole body.
I visited my alma mater recently, and I was stuck by how much changed in just ten years time. The students are doing "cool" projects that I can only dream of doing in the real world. (Example - Programming a robot to swim across a lake and collect trash.) It makes me wonder if they will be disappointed with their first jobs, which will mostly consist of sitting at a cubicle all day and writing documents.
I don't consider myself a narcissistic student, but I wonder, what's the point of going through years of education, if not to use it? Ok, there is the money and having a less difficult time at getting a job, but, I see it as a tragedy if a company some time to explore cool stuff because it's worried about micro-efficiency. Considering this, I'm reminded of something a friend (double major CE & Chemistry) once told me: Education is dumb because you work really hard to accumulate all this knowledge only to be placed in management and never use it again. I'm sure that's not true for all situations, but I do think I'd be disappointed to not apply what I've learned to what I'm interested in.
I think if this is used purely to select 'valuable' people by-the-numbers it could be disastrous. If, however, it turns into a data mining exercise, it could enhance the ability of the HR department to ferret out resources and organize teams or research projects. The first thing they should probably do is test out the theory: HR alone, HR + data mining, data mining alone, to see if there is any empirical evidence for making such a move. Maybe they'd then find out that combined, the human + machine performs better because the machine can manage gobs of data more efficiently and the human is more capable of adding qualities that normally aren't encoded into bits. Overall though, it should be tested before implementing. : P
Ah but the point is: I don't need a gui editor for me, I need others to use a LaTeX gui editor if I want them to peer-review and edit my papers. It's kinda like how linux doesn't have the dominant market share because linux doesn't have the dominant market share. Because other people aren't using LaTeX compatible software and LaTeX doesn't try to be compatible with proprietary formats, it's missing a key killer app feature: the ability to collaborate with others.
I find the Biomedical disciplines also fall into that area. A lot of those people don't or wouldn't use LaTeX either. LaTeX is worthwhile to learn, but getting people to review and edit an electronic copy of the document probably won't be fun.
I find the trouble with latex is that it doesn't lend itself well to peer-editing. The editable usually contains a bit of markup and requires that it be read in some plain text editor (and most lay people would probably get lost in the markup). The readable source, or the stuff which most efficiently conveys information, is usually in an un-editable format like pdf or gs. Sure, there probably are pdf and gs editors out there, but most people don't have them, nor would they be willing to pick it up just for your document. So, sadly I'm stuck with WISIWYG editors because I have to work with other people. Maybe after the revision phase I can just cut-and-paste it into a LaTeX doc, but, it's not much of an option for developing a draft.
erm, I meant, micrometres. Forgot the terminology.
erm, don't you mean nano-meters? There's a bit of a difference between the two.