Bill Nye is OK if you didn't have access to Mr. Wizard. Bill Nye's show was way too fluffy and tended to make science a freakshow. Mr. Wizard was a lot more sedate and the science he used was much more front and center without the cheap gimmicks.
Probably because NCLB was an unfunded mandate which had bench marks set via standardized testing of a rather elaborate nature. Also due to the stakes it tends to crowd out significant portions of the year when teachers are theoretically supposed to be teaching.
There is a burden of proof on those that have it to prove it from a technical stand point. However your conclusion that because there isn't a lot of supporting evidence that it's automatically bullshit isn't really the way that it works either.
There's plenty of things that are only recently being uncovered to suggest that those of us that have a very real and very consistent negative reaction to things like a wall of TVs is patently absurd though. If you've got 12 TVs on a wall, that's not a small amount of radiation to be dealing with. Especially if those particular devices are of low quality and poorly shielded. Personally, I'm satisfied that the effect is real from the years where I could consistently identify which TVs were on and which were off based upon which ones gave me a head ache.
I do concede that it's unlikely to the max that a small magnet is going to have much of an impact, if any, on ones health. The sorts and amounts of radiation that people are being subjected to on a daily basis hasn't adequately been studied to know precisely where the limits might be for sensitivity.
In this situation given that it's known that powerful magnets can impact the brain, it's quite telling that you seem to know at precisely what power that no longer is a concern. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Magnetic_seizure_therapy
But, of course it's obviously bullshit because everybody is equally sensitive to everything else.
That's probably vestigial. Which is basically just a way of saying that they don't know if it's useful any longer. People say the same thing about the ability to wiggle ones ears, even though it serves precisely the same purpose as it does in animals.
Just because you own IP that's in a standard doesn't necessarily mean that you should have to give up your rights to use it defensively. In this case Apple brought this BS on themselves when they filed that questionable lawsuit that could best be reduced to Samsung's product having a similar shape to the one that Apple sells.
Also, Samsung is only targeting Apple at this time and there is no reason to believe that Samsung won't stop with Apple. Rambus OTOH, went way beyond using the patents as a defensive weapon and targeted more than just one company.
At this point not using the net isn't particularly feasible. And it's getting worse as more and more essential services move to it. It used to be that everything that one legitimately needed to do had an offline equivalent, but the direction things are flowing that might not be the case for much longer.
And even where one doesn't have to be online to do something, it's often times significantly faster to use the online equivalent rather than doing it offline. Not to mention things like statements where banks are increasingly charging a fee to mail them to you rather than using electronic ones.
What was really fun back in the day was buying a card only to find out that the pins were compatible, but that the card placed them too deeply or too shallowly in the chassis to connect.
To an extent yes, but I've found that it's more convenient most of the time to have one desktop and one laptop. There are a few things which require more juice, and I use the desktop for that, and for most other things I just use the laptop.
But, the desktop itself is several years old at this point, I can't recall how old, but I think it's 3 or 4 years old. And for the most part, I do my gaming on my PS3. Mainly because I can't rent PC games the way that I can rent PS3 games.
As for servers, for a home server you don't need much power, a cheap netbook is probably sufficient to handle the demands of a small number of users wanting to access files.
Unless there's a significant difference in the rates, it's probably not going to be worth the wear and tear on the battery and the electricity lost in the process. Plus, you'd have to convert the electricity from AC to DC to store in the battery, then from DC to AC to run those appliances.
The bigger issue I see with it is that it would ensure that you would never leave for work with a fully charged battery. Because during the night is when solar power isn't going to be helpful, and during the night is the most likely time for your car to be parked at home.
And I can't imagine anybody agreeing to let the power be borrowed from their car while out and about that would make no sense at all as one would presumably need power to get home.
No, they still have to have invented it. If somebody else publishes the idea, somebody else doesn't get to come along and get a patent because they filed for it, they would still have to show that there wasn't prior art that would invalidate the patent.
It's been a while since I took an online class, but it's still not the same. Even with the best technology, it's still not as good as doing it in person. People tend to forget about things like being able to point at a map or draw an alternative which AFAIK are still not things which are reasonable. And ultimately, it's a lot harder to take notes when one is dealing with online materials.
But more than that, it's really hard to feel like one is a part of a class when one isn't physically in a class. You might laugh, but you'd be surprised at how big a difference that feeling can make.
The deal there is that the teachers typically own the materials unless it's otherwise specified. It's not hard for the school to gain ownership, they just need to put it in the contract and pay the teachers to create the materials. Teachers generally assume that they own the materials because it's something they do on their time without any compensation.
To an extent I disagree, the school I got my most recent certification from offered it both online and in the classroom with the credits issued by an accredited institution. Anybody inquiring about my credentials would have no way of knowing whether the classes were online or in class without actually seeing my transcript.
That being said, be careful, not all certificates and degrees are equal and make sure that the accrediting body is going to be recognized by people that you're likely to be applying to.
I take it you've never actually tried to take an online course. For most people it's not anywhere near as good. Having good study skills helps, but it's just not the same. Things like study groups and being able to play off each other to find a solution or better formulate a question just don't work as well online as they do in person. Where an exchange in class might take 2 minutes, a similar one online can easily take an hour if both parties aren't obsessively glued to their keyboard.
I'm sure there are people who do as well or better in online classes, but I doubt that they're in a substantial enough majority to justify cutting back on physical schools.
OTOH, for some things it works just great, for instance one off virtual seminars can be quite useful.
Right and for better or for worse, those are non-voting shares so the US Government has about as much say in what goes on at GM as I do as a random member of the public. I take it you don't recall the uproar when it was suggested that some of the corporations getting bailed out should be required to fire their executives as a condition of acceptance.
That's sort of the point. You have to do something with those people that are no longer able to work because their skills aren't in demand. Personally, I don't think either of us would seriously suggest euthanasia for such people, but I get the feeling that there are plenty of folks out there that would be fine with Marge and Jim starving to death in a box.
Not really, we've been complaining about the over reliance upon cars. You do realize that buses and bikes can and are used on roads, right? And that it's mostly when people decide to live many miles away from their work and drive by themselves that we start having problem.
But, then again, I bet it's easier to just bash a fictitious view than to actually deal with reality. I'm sure that there are a few oddballs that believe it, but they're hardly the majority of liberals.
The problem is that in order for that to work, there needs to be some guarantees that people will still be able to feed themselves. It doesn't matter whether there's a huge mountain of food on the neighbors table and if all the work is being done by robots if you're starving.
In the US we've chosen to subscribe to the radical notion that the poor deserve to be poor because clearly it's less work to work two jobs for minimum wage than to work one that pays substantially more.
Just because it's hyped doesn't mean that it's not real. Granted it's highly unlikely that we'll get unlimited computational power, but that's hardly reason to believe that quantum computing won't ever happen. Keep in mind that if you asked somebody working in a computer lab back in the 60s or even 80s, what we have now would likely be met with a lot of skepticism as well.
That was more or less my thought, I mean quantum computing is probably a lot further along than when Babbage came up with his difference engine idea. And it wasn't until a century or so after his death that computers finally made their way out of the lab and started winding up in living rooms on a regular basis.
Slashdot Mirror
Bill Nye is OK if you didn't have access to Mr. Wizard. Bill Nye's show was way too fluffy and tended to make science a freakshow. Mr. Wizard was a lot more sedate and the science he used was much more front and center without the cheap gimmicks.
Probably because NCLB was an unfunded mandate which had bench marks set via standardized testing of a rather elaborate nature. Also due to the stakes it tends to crowd out significant portions of the year when teachers are theoretically supposed to be teaching.
There is a burden of proof on those that have it to prove it from a technical stand point. However your conclusion that because there isn't a lot of supporting evidence that it's automatically bullshit isn't really the way that it works either.
There's plenty of things that are only recently being uncovered to suggest that those of us that have a very real and very consistent negative reaction to things like a wall of TVs is patently absurd though. If you've got 12 TVs on a wall, that's not a small amount of radiation to be dealing with. Especially if those particular devices are of low quality and poorly shielded. Personally, I'm satisfied that the effect is real from the years where I could consistently identify which TVs were on and which were off based upon which ones gave me a head ache.
I do concede that it's unlikely to the max that a small magnet is going to have much of an impact, if any, on ones health. The sorts and amounts of radiation that people are being subjected to on a daily basis hasn't adequately been studied to know precisely where the limits might be for sensitivity.
In this situation given that it's known that powerful magnets can impact the brain, it's quite telling that you seem to know at precisely what power that no longer is a concern. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Magnetic_seizure_therapy
But, of course it's obviously bullshit because everybody is equally sensitive to everything else.
That's probably vestigial. Which is basically just a way of saying that they don't know if it's useful any longer. People say the same thing about the ability to wiggle ones ears, even though it serves precisely the same purpose as it does in animals.
Firefox 6? that's so last Thursday.
It's not the same, it's different.
Just because you own IP that's in a standard doesn't necessarily mean that you should have to give up your rights to use it defensively. In this case Apple brought this BS on themselves when they filed that questionable lawsuit that could best be reduced to Samsung's product having a similar shape to the one that Apple sells.
Also, Samsung is only targeting Apple at this time and there is no reason to believe that Samsung won't stop with Apple. Rambus OTOH, went way beyond using the patents as a defensive weapon and targeted more than just one company.
At this point not using the net isn't particularly feasible. And it's getting worse as more and more essential services move to it. It used to be that everything that one legitimately needed to do had an offline equivalent, but the direction things are flowing that might not be the case for much longer.
And even where one doesn't have to be online to do something, it's often times significantly faster to use the online equivalent rather than doing it offline. Not to mention things like statements where banks are increasingly charging a fee to mail them to you rather than using electronic ones.
What was really fun back in the day was buying a card only to find out that the pins were compatible, but that the card placed them too deeply or too shallowly in the chassis to connect.
To an extent yes, but I've found that it's more convenient most of the time to have one desktop and one laptop. There are a few things which require more juice, and I use the desktop for that, and for most other things I just use the laptop.
But, the desktop itself is several years old at this point, I can't recall how old, but I think it's 3 or 4 years old. And for the most part, I do my gaming on my PS3. Mainly because I can't rent PC games the way that I can rent PS3 games.
As for servers, for a home server you don't need much power, a cheap netbook is probably sufficient to handle the demands of a small number of users wanting to access files.
If it doesn't *BSD definitely does.
Unless there's a significant difference in the rates, it's probably not going to be worth the wear and tear on the battery and the electricity lost in the process. Plus, you'd have to convert the electricity from AC to DC to store in the battery, then from DC to AC to run those appliances.
The bigger issue I see with it is that it would ensure that you would never leave for work with a fully charged battery. Because during the night is when solar power isn't going to be helpful, and during the night is the most likely time for your car to be parked at home.
And I can't imagine anybody agreeing to let the power be borrowed from their car while out and about that would make no sense at all as one would presumably need power to get home.
No, they still have to have invented it. If somebody else publishes the idea, somebody else doesn't get to come along and get a patent because they filed for it, they would still have to show that there wasn't prior art that would invalidate the patent.
It's been a while since I took an online class, but it's still not the same. Even with the best technology, it's still not as good as doing it in person. People tend to forget about things like being able to point at a map or draw an alternative which AFAIK are still not things which are reasonable. And ultimately, it's a lot harder to take notes when one is dealing with online materials.
But more than that, it's really hard to feel like one is a part of a class when one isn't physically in a class. You might laugh, but you'd be surprised at how big a difference that feeling can make.
The deal there is that the teachers typically own the materials unless it's otherwise specified. It's not hard for the school to gain ownership, they just need to put it in the contract and pay the teachers to create the materials. Teachers generally assume that they own the materials because it's something they do on their time without any compensation.
To an extent I disagree, the school I got my most recent certification from offered it both online and in the classroom with the credits issued by an accredited institution. Anybody inquiring about my credentials would have no way of knowing whether the classes were online or in class without actually seeing my transcript.
That being said, be careful, not all certificates and degrees are equal and make sure that the accrediting body is going to be recognized by people that you're likely to be applying to.
I take it you've never actually tried to take an online course. For most people it's not anywhere near as good. Having good study skills helps, but it's just not the same. Things like study groups and being able to play off each other to find a solution or better formulate a question just don't work as well online as they do in person. Where an exchange in class might take 2 minutes, a similar one online can easily take an hour if both parties aren't obsessively glued to their keyboard.
I'm sure there are people who do as well or better in online classes, but I doubt that they're in a substantial enough majority to justify cutting back on physical schools.
OTOH, for some things it works just great, for instance one off virtual seminars can be quite useful.
Right and for better or for worse, those are non-voting shares so the US Government has about as much say in what goes on at GM as I do as a random member of the public. I take it you don't recall the uproar when it was suggested that some of the corporations getting bailed out should be required to fire their executives as a condition of acceptance.
That's sort of the point. You have to do something with those people that are no longer able to work because their skills aren't in demand. Personally, I don't think either of us would seriously suggest euthanasia for such people, but I get the feeling that there are plenty of folks out there that would be fine with Marge and Jim starving to death in a box.
You mean the schizophrenic attitude of the voters, right? It's not like they get mixed messages from the voters.
Not really, we've been complaining about the over reliance upon cars. You do realize that buses and bikes can and are used on roads, right? And that it's mostly when people decide to live many miles away from their work and drive by themselves that we start having problem.
But, then again, I bet it's easier to just bash a fictitious view than to actually deal with reality. I'm sure that there are a few oddballs that believe it, but they're hardly the majority of liberals.
The problem is that in order for that to work, there needs to be some guarantees that people will still be able to feed themselves. It doesn't matter whether there's a huge mountain of food on the neighbors table and if all the work is being done by robots if you're starving.
In the US we've chosen to subscribe to the radical notion that the poor deserve to be poor because clearly it's less work to work two jobs for minimum wage than to work one that pays substantially more.
Just because it's hyped doesn't mean that it's not real. Granted it's highly unlikely that we'll get unlimited computational power, but that's hardly reason to believe that quantum computing won't ever happen. Keep in mind that if you asked somebody working in a computer lab back in the 60s or even 80s, what we have now would likely be met with a lot of skepticism as well.
That was more or less my thought, I mean quantum computing is probably a lot further along than when Babbage came up with his difference engine idea. And it wasn't until a century or so after his death that computers finally made their way out of the lab and started winding up in living rooms on a regular basis.