Psychiatric medicine seems to rely on a lot of trial and error, to see what works and what doesn't. The problem compounds as soon as multiple medications are used. Differences in physiology and the nature of the disorder, including factors such as incorrect or incomplete diagnosis seem to lead some unfortunates down the wrong paths, where the presumed illness is incorrectly treated. For example, some personality disorders, such as BPD, can't be effectively treated with medication at all, and must be tackled therapeutically instead, but are often misdiagnosed as something else, or, are sometimes only recognized as anxiety or depression, and while some SSRIs can help with that component, the bigger underlying diagnosis isn't recognized.
In short, treating mental illness can really only be done on an individual basis, and not every psychologist or psychiatrist is going to get it right, and more often than not, many mental illnesses are not treated correctly from day one. To some degree this is to be expected, but it also results in many people seeing nothing but confusion when looking at treatments which are in place. It takes time to get to know someone's mind, so it's no wonder that years can pass before even skilled doctors are able to make a positive impact on many mentally ill patients. It's also no wonder that many of these patients fall through the cracks in the mean-time. Not everyone can afford the kind of treatment required by some diereses, and the waiting game can be frustrating to even well adjusted people.
All I'm saying is that there are many problems which lead to GPs continuously prescribing a regimen of ineffectual drugs, without even thinking about issues such as poor education or practices, or the various evils, (imagined or otherwise), of pharmaceutical companies. To be clear, it's not the drugs that are the problem. The drugs actually do help in many cases. It's getting to that point where they do help that is the trick.
This just in: Post Title for Source Code For IoT Botnet 'Mirai' Which Took Down Krebs On Security Website With DDoS Attack Released Deemed 'Not Enough Like That Brain Freeze Feeling' on Slashdot
Except that doesn't seem to have been their motive. You are right, a lot of people don't care about "breakthrough" special effects, but they do tend to be dismissive about yet another film where talking animals prevent an audience's suspense of disbelief.
Or, maybe they are just proud of the tech and want to showcase a particularly challenging and interesting component of the film. Are you saying a good movie wouldn't talk about their 'breakthrough' special effects?
This isn't about the quality of the story, the human actors, or the script itself, it's about the tech being used to solve a problem. You can, on occasion, have a technical masterpiece which has nothing to do with the value of the actual project it was meant to accommodate.
That corrected, I wonder how hard it would be for a civilization that advanced to manipulate existing structures into a Dyson sphere.... I.E., collecting "nearby" debris such as asteroids, moons, or even planets, and assembling them like LEGOs to build an infrastructure of some kind around a star in some sort of grid or lattice.
I sense Don Norman's influence here. I agree with Cook, and I'm not really much of an Apple fan. There's nothing wrong with avoiding the, (as I see it), trap of trying to be everything to everyone. This might be an old PARC mentality, but I think that purpose driven devices with shared intelligence and data sources is a really smart way to see the future of information tech. The real hurdle is getting everyone to agree on how those devices should communicate. My Motorola 360, for example, is woefully crippled at the hands of my company iPhone 6's rather mediocre level of integration. Yes, I know that in today's mindset, expecting integration between Android and iOS devices is ludicrous, but that's kind of my point - it shouldn't be. That said, there's not nearly as much to complain about when pairing Apple devices with other Apple devices, and I'd almost be a little disappointed to see that replaced with an iMacPadPhone, just as I've always had an uncontrollable eye-twitch when it comes to the MS Surface.
Did the exact same thing. Was going to post the misread, but then thought, "Nah... NOBODY else would have done this. I clearly need to give up for today and head back to bed...."
The Ginko Biloba is -not- working well for me, but at least I'm not alone.
I wonder if this is where Microsoft tries to figure out how to skirt anti-trust issues and incent OEMs into locking their systems.... kick-backs, under the table finagling, etc. The real question is this - if Microsoft is so altruistic and trustworthy, why allow a system to be locked to just one OS in the first place?
He didn't really ask for cheap. He asked for the best chances of survival. Unless the lockbox is airtight and humidity/temperature controlled, your cheap DVD media could degrade over time.
The jury is out on how long it would take for optical media to degrade to the point of data loss, as many tests seem to yield varying results depending on the quality of the media used, but depending on the kind, (writeable vs rewriteable, etc), the general consensus seems to be that the survivability of most optical media in average room temperature and humidity is several decades, (citations obviously would be handy, but I'm not up for finding them). Archival grade optical media is your best bet if you head down this road, and it's not necessarily cheap.
Flash media may be even more volatile than optical media. Without power, minute leakages over time will lead to the loss of data, possibly within months or just a few years. (Again, citation needed.... I have the flu, so research this yourself to confirm... this is just a guideline for investigative consideration).
Tape media may still be a good bet, and probably better than magnetic HDDs. Tapes are small, store lots of data, and are pretty resilient.
I wonder how long they require/expect the data to last for? Years? Decades? Generations?
I think Gnome 3 is the New Coke of the DE world. It wasn't so much that it was a horrible idea... taste tests seemed promising, and change is good, right? It just seems to be what happens when makers 'mess' with a product. Now that they've reintroduced Gnome 'Classic', (see where I went with the Coke thing?), people are simmering down a bit and reluctantly muttering, "Oh, well.... that's okay then, I guess. Watch it - we've got our eyes on you!"
Where it's nothing like New Coke is that the Gnome developers get to mess with the formula while they try to, (often unsuccessfully), balance needs and vision, (whose vision?). In this case, I think the vision preceded the needs department for a lot of people. I actually like the standard Gnome 3 interface, but I also see how it pissed a lot of people off... especially with earlier versions.
Yup. Maybe. But it also doesn't sound like Snowden is naive either, and he was willing to risk doing all of those things you mentioned and more. He still had his job when he took confidential info from the NSA, and he has taken his risk of getting 'fired' to a whole new level.
It may not have happened right away, but he must have at some point knew a cover up would have been the result, and if he was clever enough to evade the NSA with all that data, he was also clever enough to leave some insurance behind. Perhaps I'm wrong.
Assuming he is an intelligent man, and also assuming he knows that cover-up and concealment is a matter of course at the NSA, I presume he would have sent them securely from an outside network, perhaps through a network he hoped the NSA couldn't touch. Or better yet, he left the evidence hidden in plain sight, somewhere within the NSA where he could point to it later. If I was Snowden, I'd be paranoid as heck when covering my own behind. He had to have known they would lie about anything that made him look good in the aftermath.
It's kind of like giving the Coke machine down the hall an IP address with sensors.... 'why' becomes such an unimaginative and mundane question in such scenarios, and if pressed, can simply be answered with, "Because I can."
If it can make these kinds of predictions without a tonne of false positives, then we have something we can call a tool - otherwise it's just a more efficient but no more reliable form of gossip and rumour.
Science and medicine use 'tools' that typically have false positives or negatives all the time in order to help rule things out or determine possibilities. The measure of how helpful a tool is does not always hinge on accuracy. Weather forecasting would be a pointless exercise if what we wanted was more than 'gossip' and 'rumour', or what I'm going to call 'conjecture'. Using EEGs to help diagnose seizure disorders frequently offer false negatives - that doesn't mean a wise neurologist will discard test. Using a d-dimer test doesn't tell you that you have a DVT, it merely indicates the possibility, and a positive result suggests that more investigation is warranted.
Predictions highlight points of interest in a landscape that might otherwise look chaotic or homogeneous. Nothing wrong with calling this a tool.
Slashdot Mirror
Psychiatric medicine seems to rely on a lot of trial and error, to see what works and what doesn't. The problem compounds as soon as multiple medications are used. Differences in physiology and the nature of the disorder, including factors such as incorrect or incomplete diagnosis seem to lead some unfortunates down the wrong paths, where the presumed illness is incorrectly treated. For example, some personality disorders, such as BPD, can't be effectively treated with medication at all, and must be tackled therapeutically instead, but are often misdiagnosed as something else, or, are sometimes only recognized as anxiety or depression, and while some SSRIs can help with that component, the bigger underlying diagnosis isn't recognized.
In short, treating mental illness can really only be done on an individual basis, and not every psychologist or psychiatrist is going to get it right, and more often than not, many mental illnesses are not treated correctly from day one. To some degree this is to be expected, but it also results in many people seeing nothing but confusion when looking at treatments which are in place. It takes time to get to know someone's mind, so it's no wonder that years can pass before even skilled doctors are able to make a positive impact on many mentally ill patients. It's also no wonder that many of these patients fall through the cracks in the mean-time. Not everyone can afford the kind of treatment required by some diereses, and the waiting game can be frustrating to even well adjusted people.
All I'm saying is that there are many problems which lead to GPs continuously prescribing a regimen of ineffectual drugs, without even thinking about issues such as poor education or practices, or the various evils, (imagined or otherwise), of pharmaceutical companies. To be clear, it's not the drugs that are the problem. The drugs actually do help in many cases. It's getting to that point where they do help that is the trick.
This just in: Post Title for Source Code For IoT Botnet 'Mirai' Which Took Down Krebs On Security Website With DDoS Attack Released Deemed 'Not Enough Like That Brain Freeze Feeling' on Slashdot
Except for Chrysler for a bit....
Except that doesn't seem to have been their motive. You are right, a lot of people don't care about "breakthrough" special effects, but they do tend to be dismissive about yet another film where talking animals prevent an audience's suspense of disbelief.
Have a quick read of this article for more: http://www.nytimes.com/2016/04...
Or, maybe they are just proud of the tech and want to showcase a particularly challenging and interesting component of the film. Are you saying a good movie wouldn't talk about their 'breakthrough' special effects?
This isn't about the quality of the story, the human actors, or the script itself, it's about the tech being used to solve a problem. You can, on occasion, have a technical masterpiece which has nothing to do with the value of the actual project it was meant to accommodate.
Err... an energy source.
That corrected, I wonder how hard it would be for a civilization that advanced to manipulate existing structures into a Dyson sphere.... I.E., collecting "nearby" debris such as asteroids, moons, or even planets, and assembling them like LEGOs to build an infrastructure of some kind around a star in some sort of grid or lattice.
If you had matter to energy conversion down pat, I doubt the locals on Mars would approve of you converting their home into a Dyson sphere.
I think consumers expect their cars to become Cell Phones or Tablets, not Mini Data Centers....
I sense Don Norman's influence here. I agree with Cook, and I'm not really much of an Apple fan. There's nothing wrong with avoiding the, (as I see it), trap of trying to be everything to everyone. This might be an old PARC mentality, but I think that purpose driven devices with shared intelligence and data sources is a really smart way to see the future of information tech. The real hurdle is getting everyone to agree on how those devices should communicate. My Motorola 360, for example, is woefully crippled at the hands of my company iPhone 6's rather mediocre level of integration. Yes, I know that in today's mindset, expecting integration between Android and iOS devices is ludicrous, but that's kind of my point - it shouldn't be. That said, there's not nearly as much to complain about when pairing Apple devices with other Apple devices, and I'd almost be a little disappointed to see that replaced with an iMacPadPhone, just as I've always had an uncontrollable eye-twitch when it comes to the MS Surface.
** Hands around customer's throat **
You're using too much bandwidth! Stop it!
Did the exact same thing. Was going to post the misread, but then thought, "Nah... NOBODY else would have done this. I clearly need to give up for today and head back to bed...."
The Ginko Biloba is -not- working well for me, but at least I'm not alone.
I guess that depends on how you define "oldest" and "eSport". Even Counter Strike's official release predated Quake III Arena's.
The correct captions: Oculus Rift as seen through a pair of Joo Janta 200 Super-Chromatic Peril Sensitive Sunglasses
There's an app for that.
I wonder if this is where Microsoft tries to figure out how to skirt anti-trust issues and incent OEMs into locking their systems.... kick-backs, under the table finagling, etc. The real question is this - if Microsoft is so altruistic and trustworthy, why allow a system to be locked to just one OS in the first place?
He didn't really ask for cheap. He asked for the best chances of survival. Unless the lockbox is airtight and humidity/temperature controlled, your cheap DVD media could degrade over time.
The jury is out on how long it would take for optical media to degrade to the point of data loss, as many tests seem to yield varying results depending on the quality of the media used, but depending on the kind, (writeable vs rewriteable, etc), the general consensus seems to be that the survivability of most optical media in average room temperature and humidity is several decades, (citations obviously would be handy, but I'm not up for finding them). Archival grade optical media is your best bet if you head down this road, and it's not necessarily cheap.
Flash media may be even more volatile than optical media. Without power, minute leakages over time will lead to the loss of data, possibly within months or just a few years. (Again, citation needed.... I have the flu, so research this yourself to confirm... this is just a guideline for investigative consideration).
Tape media may still be a good bet, and probably better than magnetic HDDs. Tapes are small, store lots of data, and are pretty resilient.
I wonder how long they require/expect the data to last for? Years? Decades? Generations?
That said, the fact that it was the OPP rather than the RCMP makes it even less likely this will fly on a Federal level.
I think Gnome 3 is the New Coke of the DE world. It wasn't so much that it was a horrible idea... taste tests seemed promising, and change is good, right? It just seems to be what happens when makers 'mess' with a product. Now that they've reintroduced Gnome 'Classic', (see where I went with the Coke thing?), people are simmering down a bit and reluctantly muttering, "Oh, well.... that's okay then, I guess. Watch it - we've got our eyes on you!"
Where it's nothing like New Coke is that the Gnome developers get to mess with the formula while they try to, (often unsuccessfully), balance needs and vision, (whose vision?). In this case, I think the vision preceded the needs department for a lot of people. I actually like the standard Gnome 3 interface, but I also see how it pissed a lot of people off... especially with earlier versions.
Yup. Maybe. But it also doesn't sound like Snowden is naive either, and he was willing to risk doing all of those things you mentioned and more. He still had his job when he took confidential info from the NSA, and he has taken his risk of getting 'fired' to a whole new level.
It may not have happened right away, but he must have at some point knew a cover up would have been the result, and if he was clever enough to evade the NSA with all that data, he was also clever enough to leave some insurance behind. Perhaps I'm wrong.
Assuming he is an intelligent man, and also assuming he knows that cover-up and concealment is a matter of course at the NSA, I presume he would have sent them securely from an outside network, perhaps through a network he hoped the NSA couldn't touch. Or better yet, he left the evidence hidden in plain sight, somewhere within the NSA where he could point to it later. If I was Snowden, I'd be paranoid as heck when covering my own behind. He had to have known they would lie about anything that made him look good in the aftermath.
There are so many ACs who post in response to MS-centric articles. It's almost as if you can feel the shame and terror as you read your way through.
It's kind of like giving the Coke machine down the hall an IP address with sensors.... 'why' becomes such an unimaginative and mundane question in such scenarios, and if pressed, can simply be answered with, "Because I can."
If it can make these kinds of predictions without a tonne of false positives, then we have something we can call a tool - otherwise it's just a more efficient but no more reliable form of gossip and rumour.
Science and medicine use 'tools' that typically have false positives or negatives all the time in order to help rule things out or determine possibilities. The measure of how helpful a tool is does not always hinge on accuracy. Weather forecasting would be a pointless exercise if what we wanted was more than 'gossip' and 'rumour', or what I'm going to call 'conjecture'. Using EEGs to help diagnose seizure disorders frequently offer false negatives - that doesn't mean a wise neurologist will discard test. Using a d-dimer test doesn't tell you that you have a DVT, it merely indicates the possibility, and a positive result suggests that more investigation is warranted.
Predictions highlight points of interest in a landscape that might otherwise look chaotic or homogeneous. Nothing wrong with calling this a tool.
Sounds like the dinosaurs were humiliated backwards... feathered ...then tarred.