Everyonce in a while a student turns something up that's interesting. That catches my eye, usually because it may have some relavance to something I am working on, and will go and verify the sources.
Note to self: Do not plagia^H^H^H^H^H^Hwrite term paper on subject in ducomputergeek's field of study.
It's still too early to know if Twine will be successful with consumers, says Tony Shaw, president of Semantic Universe, an organization committed to raising awareness of semantic technologies in business and consumer settings. Success will not simply depend on making the technology work, but also on managing people's expectations of the technology, he says. "It's about fighting the hype problem."
Hmm. Let's fight the hype problem by publishing more hype. And maybe if we include a statement saying we're fighting hype, people will assume this reformatted press release isn't hype.
Sure, I understand that managing expectations is important, but let's not lose sight of what this article really is.
Thank you for provided that equivalent. I had no idea that 200,000 LoCs (a measurement of data equal to 20 terabytes) equals 17 GLs (a measurement of liquid volume equal to 2.3 x 10^16 L).
A little back-of-the-napkin calculation, and we can deduce that if those measurements are equal, then there are 110 bytes per Liter of water.
This makes sense -- if we freeze that Liter, each byte is approximately equivalent to a 1 cm x 3 cm x 3 cm chunk of ice, which I could easily fit into my mouth -- you might even say it's bite-sized.
If you're out of middle school, you shouldn't be citing encyclopedias.
If you're in middle school, you shouldn't be citing encyclopedias. Particularly ones that, for all intents and purposes, seem to be edited primarily by your classmates.
What is it with this tradition of inaccurate summaries on Slashdot?
It's been hashed over a lot, but basically there are limited submissions for a particular article to choose from, and when one is chosen, it's based on time submitted and completeness more than accuracy.
Then, there are the cynics who believe that flamebait/inaccurate summaries == more comments/pageviews == more income.
I personally like them because they provide a way to easily determine whether someone bothered to RTFA as the discussion gets deeper.
Although the likelihood that this action is politically motivated remains high
This is not a bad thing. Bringing attention to the negative actions of a party in power will increase the likelihood of that party not remaining in power... it's an effective way to initiate change. A representative government depends on voter awareness in order to operate effectively.
That said, politics is a tricky business, and self-promotion is very important to the goals of gaining power and holding it. It's likely that the personal publicity is a motivating factor in bringing the suit. It's important to note, however, that lawsuits between states and between states and the federal government are not uncommon, and serve a useful purpose in mediating disputes when other methods have failed.
Since the creation of the Federal Reserve, the US dollar has lost 96% of it's spending power. Which pretty much makes the US Dollar one of the worst stores of value on Earth. The "banking system" has presided over an utterly debauched currency for the past century. The dollar is an absolutely failed store of value.
That's meaningless. An effective currency does not need to be a store of value in the long term. It matters not if the dollar has lost 96% of its value if the combination of [wages/(cost of goods normalized for inflation)] has risen 2400% (which it has).
Every commodity, or investment vehicle has it's ups and downs. Gold is no exception.
And that's a problem with gold-backed currency. Using a commodity as currency brings lots of problems into the money supply, since then the money supply will be affected by value fluctuations in the commodity itself. Currency needs to NOT be a commodity in order for an economy to function smoothly.
Are you serious? Do you really believe that the benefits of using currency for trade would disappear after a pandemic, or that no one would take advatnage of those benefits if they did not disappear?
Gold is not some magical thing. People have to desire it in order for it to have any worth, just like everything else.
True. And since we have such a history of using it as currency, likely it would be desired as currency should government institutions all fail. This may not be true in the immediate short-term, but would absolutely hold in the medium- and long-term.
Money is a promissory note
That's incorrect. Money can be a promissory note. In today's world, it is not. You cannot redeem your money for another currency (or specie) by going to the originator of the money.
How much MORE do you think it would suck if everyone who was still participating in a wounded economy had to also drive around wheelbarrows of barter goods in order to get anything done?
Yeah, because we'd all have forgotten that we could substitute precious metals (or even promissory notes) for goods.
Finally, all the free market idealists on slashdot could have their dreams of a precious-metal-backed currency realized. Too bad 20% of them will be coughing up too much blood to take advantage of the fact that their savings (kept under their mattress) wouldn't lose value due to inflation.
Not only is your knowledge of the US legal process off, but your knowledge of history is
Exactly, it couldn't! That's why you'll never see democrat dominated states suing a democrat president. It simply wouldn't happen.
First off, the states don't sue the president...
Second, some democratic states have sued the federal government when a democrat was president. Washington State, for example, sued in 1998 to force the EPA to clean up a superfund site... who was president in 1998?
Look, Islamist terrorists don't nobly meet the opposing force on the field of battle and seek liberty like Washington's generation did.
Oh, please. Washington's generation used terror to win the war for independence. Why do you think Loyalist states eventually joined the revolution? Because Loyalists were terrorized into doing so -- farms were razed, Loyalists lynched, etc. br>Note also that many of the Revolutionary War victories by the Americans were won by sniping officers, which was in no way "nobly meet[ing] the opposing force on the field of battle".
Your understanding of American history is colored by the American mythology we were taught in grade school; I suggest furthering your education on the subject, there are a number of excellent books out there that are more complete in their coverage of how the American Revolution was fought, wony by the Americans, and lost by the British.
I think you interpreted what you wanted to, instead of what was spelled out in the TOS.
I would recommend prospective customers of Verizon to think twice and assess if they want to sign contracts with a company so inclined to assume a user of the service is guilty of copyright violations just because of the amount of data they are transferring.
Nowhere does it say that. They make no mention of copyrights. The prohibted uses:
(i) continuous uploading, downloading, or streaming of audio or video programming or games; (ii) server devices or host computer applications, including, but not limited to, Web camera posts or broadcasts, automatic data feeds, automated machine to-machine connections or peer-to-peer (P2P) file-sharing; or (iii) as a substitute or backup for private lines or dedicated data connections.
Please, don't make a mountain out of a molehill. For once a company is taking steps (though forced to do so) to limit the extent to which they oversell bandwidth.
Well, I'll leave off the obligatory DHMO link for once. But:
heck, water is 2/3rds Hydrogen
Water is significantly less than 2/3 Hydrogen -- much closer to 1/16 Hydrogen. I know you were joking, but this is important when we think about what to do with all the waste.
For every 1 kilo of hydrogen used as fuel, we'll produce 16 kilos of solid waste! (It'll become solid quickly at those altitudes.)
Heh. With our economy heading the way it is, who is surprised?
The USSR could not, in the end, compete with the US in the space race because their economy could not support it.
Currently, we're still the leader, but the technology gap is shrinking -- a lot of this is due to where we choose to focus our resources, but how long until, like the USSR, we don't have the economy to compete? How many decades is the US from being in the same unenviable position?
"To another generation, IT was cool because no one else knew much about it," notes Kate Kaiser, associate professor of IT (and one of Lee's instructors) at Marquette. "This generation is so familiar with technology, they see it as an expected part of life" -- and therefore not worthy of consideration as a full-time career.
That may also have something to do with the fact that it isn't as lucrative as it used to be, that job security is lower than it used to be, and that it's a more mature field where there is little new ground to be broken (most people in IT are busy rebreaking old ground if they do any ground-breaking at all).
Just as with any maturing technology, focus eventually turns to usage, rather than development of the core technology. Is it any surprise that more people are interested in how best to use a wheel, rather than reinventing it?
Seeing as breast cancer accounts for six times more patients - and victims - than endometrial cancer, it better be reducing six times more than it is causing just to break even
Your math logic is a little off there. IF contraceptive hormones were the major risk factor for breast cancer, then your math would begin to make sense.
Not only that, but breast cancer, while still the most common cancer among women, is only three times more prevalent than (endometrial + ovarian) cancer. Furthermore, the increased incidence of breast cancers linked to oral contraceptives tend to be among the most minor and curable of cancers, whereas endometrial and ovarian cancers have a lower survival rate than breast cancer.
It's hard to judge whether there is a net cancer benefit for taking the pill. Your point does remain, that there is FUD from both sides, but one side seems to moreso intentionally propagate misinformation.
By themselves, the statistical correlations mean little. However, there are also many studies of individuals that link elevated lead levels with later delinquency, even delinquency in adult life. Many of these studies are normalized for other factors, since they are conducted among members of the same population.
This, combined with the statistical studies of the type in TFA, can lead to conclusions that we can expect fallig crime rates due to the bannination of leaded gasoline.
If you'd read TFA, you'd have some inkling of this.
Hey AC, the problem isn't Apple's estimation, the problem is that the summary is in error.
Apple never said what their estimation was based on, the summary writer simply made something up, which is why I bothered to write my comment -- that was horrible summarizing, and a bad miss in vetting (not that anyone vets summaries here).
THAT was my point (gee, the title of my post even points that out) but apparently you're too much of an idiot to have figured it out.
Slashdot Mirror
Preface that phrase with "There were" and the grammar, though in the passive, works fine.
Just as prefacing "Much alcohol consumed" with "There was" works in the same fashion.
Sure, I understand that managing expectations is important, but let's not lose sight of what this article really is.
A little back-of-the-napkin calculation, and we can deduce that if those measurements are equal, then there are 110 bytes per Liter of water.
This makes sense -- if we freeze that Liter, each byte is approximately equivalent to a 1 cm x 3 cm x 3 cm chunk of ice, which I could easily fit into my mouth -- you might even say it's bite-sized.
Then, there are the cynics who believe that flamebait/inaccurate summaries == more comments/pageviews == more income.
I personally like them because they provide a way to easily determine whether someone bothered to RTFA as the discussion gets deeper.
That said, politics is a tricky business, and self-promotion is very important to the goals of gaining power and holding it. It's likely that the personal publicity is a motivating factor in bringing the suit. It's important to note, however, that lawsuits between states and between states and the federal government are not uncommon, and serve a useful purpose in mediating disputes when other methods have failed.
And that's a problem with gold-backed currency. Using a commodity as currency brings lots of problems into the money supply, since then the money supply will be affected by value fluctuations in the commodity itself. Currency needs to NOT be a commodity in order for an economy to function smoothly.
True. And since we have such a history of using it as currency, likely it would be desired as currency should government institutions all fail. This may not be true in the immediate short-term, but would absolutely hold in the medium- and long-term.
That's incorrect. Money can be a promissory note. In today's world, it is not. You cannot redeem your money for another currency (or specie) by going to the originator of the money.
Finally, all the free market idealists on slashdot could have their dreams of a precious-metal-backed currency realized. Too bad 20% of them will be coughing up too much blood to take advantage of the fact that their savings (kept under their mattress) wouldn't lose value due to inflation.
Normally what I see is:
(.)(.)
or if I'm at the right website,
( o )( o )
Second, some democratic states have sued the federal government when a democrat was president. Washington State, for example, sued in 1998 to force the EPA to clean up a superfund site... who was president in 1998?
br>Note also that many of the Revolutionary War victories by the Americans were won by sniping officers, which was in no way "nobly meet[ing] the opposing force on the field of battle".
Your understanding of American history is colored by the American mythology we were taught in grade school; I suggest furthering your education on the subject, there are a number of excellent books out there that are more complete in their coverage of how the American Revolution was fought, wony by the Americans, and lost by the British.
And, I'm sorry to say, you missed entirely my point:
Nowhere in the prohibited uses dows it make mention of copyright. Nowhere. This is why I requoted the prohibited uses.
Nowhere does it say that. They make no mention of copyrights. The prohibted uses:
Please, don't make a mountain out of a molehill. For once a company is taking steps (though forced to do so) to limit the extent to which they oversell bandwidth.
For every 1 kilo of hydrogen used as fuel, we'll produce 16 kilos of solid waste! (It'll become solid quickly at those altitudes.)
Heh. With our economy heading the way it is, who is surprised?
The USSR could not, in the end, compete with the US in the space race because their economy could not support it.
Currently, we're still the leader, but the technology gap is shrinking -- a lot of this is due to where we choose to focus our resources, but how long until, like the USSR, we don't have the economy to compete? How many decades is the US from being in the same unenviable position?
Just as with any maturing technology, focus eventually turns to usage, rather than development of the core technology. Is it any surprise that more people are interested in how best to use a wheel, rather than reinventing it?
Not only that, but breast cancer, while still the most common cancer among women, is only three times more prevalent than (endometrial + ovarian) cancer. Furthermore, the increased incidence of breast cancers linked to oral contraceptives tend to be among the most minor and curable of cancers, whereas endometrial and ovarian cancers have a lower survival rate than breast cancer.
It's hard to judge whether there is a net cancer benefit for taking the pill. Your point does remain, that there is FUD from both sides, but one side seems to moreso intentionally propagate misinformation.
By themselves, the statistical correlations mean little. However, there are also many studies of individuals that link elevated lead levels with later delinquency, even delinquency in adult life. Many of these studies are normalized for other factors, since they are conducted among members of the same population.
This, combined with the statistical studies of the type in TFA, can lead to conclusions that we can expect fallig crime rates due to the bannination of leaded gasoline.
If you'd read TFA, you'd have some inkling of this.
And yet you make no mention of the reduced incidence of ovarian and endometrial cancer among those who take the pill.
Pot and kettle and all that...
Hey AC, the problem isn't Apple's estimation, the problem is that the summary is in error.
Apple never said what their estimation was based on, the summary writer simply made something up, which is why I bothered to write my comment -- that was horrible summarizing, and a bad miss in vetting (not that anyone vets summaries here).
THAT was my point (gee, the title of my post even points that out) but apparently you're too much of an idiot to have figured it out.