Nonsense. You have no clue what Math is. There are hypotheses (called "Theorems") and there are experiments (called "finding a proof") and there sure is "reproduction of results" (i.e. verifying proofs by others). Maybe talk to some actual mathematician some time?
You apparently never have heard of models, of theories and of verification of said theories. _That_ is hard. Doing experiments is easy (well, sometimes), but getting useful results and interpreting them is hard. Incidentally, when a result is known and well verified, repeating the experiments falls under "education" or "entertainment", not "Science".
If you have a "slight" effect, there is a large probability that something else caused it or that it is just statistical variation. Also, a "slight" effect is usually not worth the effort for the change and may well come with a "slight" negative effect as well. I know that whenever I read a text with these two spaces, I get offended at the ugliness. That would offset any benefit in reading comprehension.
"Math" is not the scientific method. It is an result of the application of the scientific method. And it does not apply to reality directly. Some you can apply to reality by use of a translator like Physics, but there is a ton of Math that does actually not apply to physical reality at all.
Next, everyone will discover that local computing actually has its benefits and the cycle will start again. Personally, I have zero hot vapor ("cloud") needs at this time and I will just continue to ignore this insanity. It does affect my work negatively though.
Unfortunately, that is pretty accurate. Science is a pretty complicated thing in that it requires you to understand why the scientific method works and everything else tried so far fails. You usually do that on a concrete subject and often in the context of a PhD. Just reading up on it is not enough, you have to see it work and have to see the alternatives fail to really understand why it is the only way to do things. Yes, that takes several years of working on one or a small set of closely related problems, but it is neccessary.
Now, this "Citizen Science" is pretty universally not Science. In the words of the great Feynman, this is "Cargo Cult Science" where people try to follow the rituals without understanding and then expect scientific results to manifest. That does not work. Copying the language, copying the rituals (doing measurements and experiments, papers, conferences, workshops, titles, etc.) does absolutely nothing to make something scientific.
The second thing "Citizen Scientists" usually fool themselves about is how slow scientific work almost universally is and how little you typically have to show for a lot of work. Hence they often try do do things faster and that universally fails. Because the thing is, if you have a little, incremental, but scientifically sound result, this result will basically stand forever.
Bottom line: Science is really hard, but it is really easy to fool yourself into thinking you are doing Science when nothing of the sort is true. Also, don't get me wrong, there are lots of people with PhDs and quite a few with professorships, that do not qualify as scientists. But there are basically no people without that PhD that do qualify. It is a necessary step, but not a sufficient one. Yes, I know some people do not want to hear that. Bit these are all people without that PhD, that want to cut that corner. That does not work. And yes, I also realize that this makes Science a club that is very hard to get into. That is unfortunate, and if there were any other known way to do it, I would be all for it. But there is not. There are just a lot of ways to fool yourself because you only see what you were missing in insight when you have gotten it. That is unfortunate as well, but it is how reality presents itself.
Ahahahahahaha, nice one! In actual fact, the US needs to import bright people with good education as its school system in incredibly broken. As to the university education for Chinese that go back home, they can get that elsewhere just as well.
Very true. The fascinating thing is, however, how much Generation P actually fails at risk management by vastly overestimating some risks and vastly underestimating others.
Anybody that thinks this can be made totally safe is just stupid at this time. Maybe it will eventually get down to the risk of air travel, but that will take a few decades.
I have been using Linux on the desktop and on the server since 1994. I just find that playing the games I want to play on Linux is still not a good idea, even if the gap gets smaller. As the trend is clear, I will eventually switch over, but not now.
The stupidity of the customers comes from digging themselves deeper and deeper into the MS mess, when it was clear from the outset that it is a mess. Your "argument" just illustrates this point further.
Not for me, restricting gaming to Linux cuts too many things I want to play. I expect that with Vulcan things will get better over the next 10 years or so. Having a "secure" system and one where there is minimal personal data, no email, no web-surfing, etc. for gaming was a longer-term plan of me anyways and properly restricted, Win10 becomes an acceptable risk for the moment, I think.
So? You are expected to learn _faster_ than technology advances and you are expected to keep solved problems solved. Basically everybody besides MS manages that.
Slashdot Mirror
Nonsense. You have no clue what Math is. There are hypotheses (called "Theorems") and there are experiments (called "finding a proof") and there sure is "reproduction of results" (i.e. verifying proofs by others). Maybe talk to some actual mathematician some time?
Thanks!
You apparently never have heard of models, of theories and of verification of said theories. _That_ is hard. Doing experiments is easy (well, sometimes), but getting useful results and interpreting them is hard. Incidentally, when a result is known and well verified, repeating the experiments falls under "education" or "entertainment", not "Science".
Not at the end...
Incidentally, this "utterly basic rule" is unknown in Europe as far as I can tell. So it is not "basic" at all.
If you have a "slight" effect, there is a large probability that something else caused it or that it is just statistical variation. Also, a "slight" effect is usually not worth the effort for the change and may well come with a "slight" negative effect as well. I know that whenever I read a text with these two spaces, I get offended at the ugliness. That would offset any benefit in reading comprehension.
"Math" is not the scientific method. It is an result of the application of the scientific method. And it does not apply to reality directly. Some you can apply to reality by use of a translator like Physics, but there is a ton of Math that does actually not apply to physical reality at all.
Next, everyone will discover that local computing actually has its benefits and the cycle will start again. Personally, I have zero hot vapor ("cloud") needs at this time and I will just continue to ignore this insanity. It does affect my work negatively though.
Unfortunately, that is pretty accurate. Science is a pretty complicated thing in that it requires you to understand why the scientific method works and everything else tried so far fails. You usually do that on a concrete subject and often in the context of a PhD. Just reading up on it is not enough, you have to see it work and have to see the alternatives fail to really understand why it is the only way to do things. Yes, that takes several years of working on one or a small set of closely related problems, but it is neccessary.
Now, this "Citizen Science" is pretty universally not Science. In the words of the great Feynman, this is "Cargo Cult Science" where people try to follow the rituals without understanding and then expect scientific results to manifest. That does not work. Copying the language, copying the rituals (doing measurements and experiments, papers, conferences, workshops, titles, etc.) does absolutely nothing to make something scientific.
The second thing "Citizen Scientists" usually fool themselves about is how slow scientific work almost universally is and how little you typically have to show for a lot of work. Hence they often try do do things faster and that universally fails. Because the thing is, if you have a little, incremental, but scientifically sound result, this result will basically stand forever.
Bottom line: Science is really hard, but it is really easy to fool yourself into thinking you are doing Science when nothing of the sort is true. Also, don't get me wrong, there are lots of people with PhDs and quite a few with professorships, that do not qualify as scientists. But there are basically no people without that PhD that do qualify. It is a necessary step, but not a sufficient one. Yes, I know some people do not want to hear that. Bit these are all people without that PhD, that want to cut that corner. That does not work. And yes, I also realize that this makes Science a club that is very hard to get into. That is unfortunate, and if there were any other known way to do it, I would be all for it. But there is not. There are just a lot of ways to fool yourself because you only see what you were missing in insight when you have gotten it. That is unfortunate as well, but it is how reality presents itself.
It is really fascinating. MS consistently delivers bad quality, ignores their customers, messes around, and _still_ they rake in cash like crazy...
Ahahahahahaha, nice one! In actual fact, the US needs to import bright people with good education as its school system in incredibly broken. As to the university education for Chinese that go back home, they can get that elsewhere just as well.
Oh? You seem to be unaware of all the bad things that can happen to airplanes.
Probably part of a stock-manipulation attempt, as others here have already pointed out.
Very true. The fascinating thing is, however, how much Generation P actually fails at risk management by vastly overestimating some risks and vastly underestimating others.
Indeed. The writer uses simplification so gross that all conclusions drawn from it are basically invalid.
Anybody that thinks this can be made totally safe is just stupid at this time. Maybe it will eventually get down to the risk of air travel, but that will take a few decades.
I have been using Linux on the desktop and on the server since 1994. I just find that playing the games I want to play on Linux is still not a good idea, even if the gap gets smaller. As the trend is clear, I will eventually switch over, but not now.
Hehehehe. No surprise then this does not work. The foreign ones that are really good at their job would never take a H1B deal.
You still do not get what I was saying. At all. Instead you defend the bad choices that made MS the mess it is today. That is not smart. At all.
I _literally_ did not even mention Linux anywhere except to say I was not talking about it. Are you functionally illiterate?
As expected, you understand nothing. This is not about Linux. It is about MS.
The stupidity of the customers comes from digging themselves deeper and deeper into the MS mess, when it was clear from the outset that it is a mess. Your "argument" just illustrates this point further.
Not for me, restricting gaming to Linux cuts too many things I want to play. I expect that with Vulcan things will get better over the next 10 years or so. Having a "secure" system and one where there is minimal personal data, no email, no web-surfing, etc. for gaming was a longer-term plan of me anyways and properly restricted, Win10 becomes an acceptable risk for the moment, I think.
You _must_ be stupid. My condolences.
So? You are expected to learn _faster_ than technology advances and you are expected to keep solved problems solved. Basically everybody besides MS manages that.