The problem is that the tests are defective in that they can be readily gamed. The SATs are particularly notorious for being best predicted by the income bracket of the test taker due to all the prep classes out there. You're not going to do the students any favors by taking the moral high ground here. The tests just don't reward that sort of thing. People take the tests, get their scores and hopefully gain admission to the school of their choice.
Eh, I was just talking about the set dressing, from about season VII on they seemed to be doing a lot more than just updating the sets and as such the observation sort of breaks down. Series VI was also the end of the original run and it doesn't strike me as fair to continue beyond there.
The problem is that it's pretty well established that smoking is bad for you, but that doesn't necessarily mean that it's bad for you in the way that people think. Which is one of the problems, often times conventional wisdom is correct. But sometimes it's not and other times the conventional wisdom is lacking the necessary information to deal with whatever.
Imagine trying to build a large castle in a swamp, which is precisely what happens when you don't do these sorts of duh studies. In the past it probably wasn't as prevalent, mostly because any science that you wanted to do was probably advanced enough to elicit more respect from the general population.
That's in large part the fault of the crew. I think Red Dwarf is probably one of the best examples of the problem and the solution. Look at series one, series 4 and say series 6, the budget for sets went up little if at all in the mean time, but the sets looked better and better as the series went on, due in large part to more and more creativity in terms of where the money went. Roger Corman is a similar mind, you look back on the Pit and the Pendulum and you'd think it was a much more expensive film than it really was.
Indeed, the CIA actually wants people that know what they're doing. They'll train agents on any cheating and trickery that's necessary to do their job, but most agents don't need that type of thing for their jobs. The CIA employs a surprising number of people in support roles doing things like analysis.
Indeed, and cramming is a legitimate response if not the desired one. The same goes for all those high value tests, GRE, MCAT, TOEFL, SAT, ACT etc.
I'd personally have no ethical qualms teaching students strategies for maximizing their scores, mainly because that's what everybody else is going and the tests themselves do nothing to discourage it. But, cheating is a completely different matter.
This is less about a barrier to entry than it is about ethics. They need to weed folks out in some fashion and I for one wouldn't want somebody that was willing to cheat on an exam to get an artificial boost into med school. On what basis would you suggest that the individuals would stop there?
PhysX is proprietary, it was developed by nVidia precisely for this reason, to make it difficult for the competition to compete. It's been integrated into CUDA which is an nVidia only technology meaning that even if AMD wanted to integrate it they couldn't without paying a lot of money in licensing and architectural changes to their product line.
What it means is that you can have a gaming machine where the GPU is completely shut off when you're not actually gaming. There are definitely cards out there that will consume nearly as much power as the rest of the system. While they're somewhat unusual for most people, there are definitely cards out there that will use over 100watts themselves, and that's without going the SLI route. And for a machine using that much power, you can still be taking about 50 watts being used on just normal tasks. Granted this is a bit outdated, but it illustrates nicely: Power Consumption--Graphics Cards And Electricity Costs
If you can shut that down or off for the times that you don't need the full performance there's potential for saving some money there, depending upon the cost of the AGU option.
You're an idiot. Of course it's very easy to beat Fusion with discrete parts, if it weren't the morons designing the discrete parts would be fired. My next laptop will have a Fusion APU and the reason is that it means that I don't need an IGP, which is fine, if I'm just running a desktop, there's no reason why I need that extra thermal overhead and hit to my battery life.
It's interesting to see what you posted, but you forgot that part where Intel was caught using it's dominant market position to keep integrators from using AMD products. Even now it's difficult to find computers that have AMD products without having to put them together yourself.
The point of it is that most if not all computers made today have the potential for including OpenCL goodness, it doesn't mean that a particular user will need it, but it will be available for the developers to tap. It might be something that the user only uses from time to time like for video decoding/encoding, but if the hardware is already capable of handling a bit of that with minor design adjustments there's little reason not to offer it.
Plus, 3D accelerators used to be just for games, and since pretty much all computers now have one, it's moved into other areas like the desktop (For better or for worse) and CUDA.
Sigh, 1943 is the name of an arcade game from the late 80s. 1943: The Battle of Midway compared to most of the stuff on this site, it's not really that obscure.
A large part of the problem over at MS seems to be that the guy leading it is a bean counter and not a geek. Getting a proper geek won't necessarily solve the problem, but it would get a person that actually understands the technological side of things. MS has plenty of very smart people working for it who have some pretty amazing ideas, it's just that somewhere between the idea, implementation and release stages something seems to get fucked up in most cases. I mean hell, they let Apple beat them to the punch with Time machine when they had the same basic technology in their OS unreleased.
The problem is that you're out of the work force and hence not gaining experience, if you're not fortunate you're probably not gaining much in the way of networking. I had a really hard time making the transition because I had worked in high turn over fields prior to going to college, as a result when I got out of school I had a really hard time getting references just to apply for jobs. Additionally since work study was only for certain subsets of people on financial aid and I went to a school in the middle of nowhere, the chances of working during the school year were pretty slim. On top of which I had to contend with applications which were very narrowly defined in terms of the degrees that they'd accept, even if there was no particular reason for it.
What's particularly nasty is that if you don't manage to get into your field of choice very quickly you end up losing more and more ground versus the idealized model that the census is presumably using. Which means anybody that's graduated in the last couple years that hasn't managed to find something in their field is likely to fall further behind, they probably will eventually catch up, but losing that half mill wouldn't be surprising at all.
Personally, I wish that had been apparent years back when I was getting my bachelors. It wasn't until I got out and found that I needed more education or experience for most jobs, even entry level jobs required both, that I realized what a predicament I was in. It does tend to get a bit better once you push through to a Masters or even just a Masters' level certificate, as there are fewer people to compete with, and it's less likely that somebody is going to be able to finish it and still be completely worthless. MBAs excepted.
But that was a decade ago, and things are definitely worse now. The cost is significantly higher than it was, the amount of aid is drastically reduced, and the number of jobs that require a degree just to get you in the door are even larger now. Yes, it's a bubble, but that doesn't mean that one can afford to ignore it anyways.
I think typically if you get a Bachelors in psychology you'd either go for a Masters related to counseling or go onto a PhD.
A large part of the problem is that we let HR jack asses handle the hiring decisions rather than people who contribute something to the welfare of the company. Beyond just the degree, the institution also matters. I personally wouldn't hire anybody with a degree from most of those private for profit schools, just on principle. Even without going the ivy league route, some public schools have a definite reputation for excellence in terms of turning out graduates that are educated beyond their degree level.
So then, the problem with Windows is that MS didn't number the releases properly? So, that's why they largely gave up on numbers for a while. They go from 3.11 to 95 to 98 then to a weird Me thing, before skipping all the way to 2000. After which they went XP to Vista before going all the way back to 7.
Thank you, I finally get the problem, MS developers can't count. Thankfully they fixed the problem. The next release was going to be Windows Eleventy thousand billion.
I think he went a bit overboard with that. With Linux it's a bit odd in that the kernel itself isn't what people typically see the version number for at first. They'll probably see the 13.37 Slackware release number of the 11.04 for Ubuntu, and the version of the kernel isn't something which many people will even notice. Personally, I'm not even sure what version Linux Mint 11 is going to be using.
I take it you haven't actually used one. Whenever you change the font size it takes a period of time to recalculate the pagination and if you're not using the default size it can't just use the pagination that's been given for the rest of the book. Which means that it has to recalculate whenever you open it and you end up with more battery use. Additionally, because the page displayed needs to correspond to the page in the book, the ereader has to calculate that as well.
It's not funny at all. When I was doing my undergrad in the natural sciences a decade ago it was pretty well established in the scientific community that the potential for a catastrophic fuck up was there. The question is how much do you trust the folks doing the experiments to not fuck it up in that fashion. It depends on the foods, but not all foods are equally easily cultivated and some food stuffs have gone extinct within the last hundred years, such as the old school bananas.
Nobody but a shill is going to claim that there isn't a potential for a very serious fuck up and the genes definitely are spreading in the wild as we speak. The only question is how bad is it going to be. Adding one gene here or there alone isn't going to cause too much trouble, but when the genes start to combine in ways that we haven't predicted it could get very ugly very quickly. And things like the round up ready modification have already spread to the weeds for which round up was going to be used.
Until they have a means of preventing the genes from spreading to wild and otherwise unrelated plants, they have no right to test in uncontrolled conditions. It's already been documented and it's a big enough problem that Monsanto goes farm to farm in areas where its products are being used to ensure that nobody is accidentally benefiting form its line without paying. This is a serious problem for organic farmers who then can't sell their output as organic and can't compete with the cost of traditionally produced products either.
GMO when done right might achieve that. The problem is that it's mostly crap like golden rice which wouldn't even be necessary if farmers weren't encouraged to only grow rice. The blindness that it prevents was never a problem when the locals were eating a balanced diet.
Additionally, we have plenty of food as it is, growing more via GMO isn't going to solve our problem. At the moment our main problem is distribution. People aren't starving in parts of Africa because there isn't food, they're starving because war and corrupt dictatorships prevent access to food. It's an important distinction to make. Even in places like Zimbabwe where there is plenty of arable land and a recent history of the agriculture necessary corrupt despots like Robert Mugabe rob the people of the ability to feed themselves. GMO won't solve that, at best it's a bandaid over the real issues involved.
As opposed to the pro GMO side which is fucking everybody else' shit up. The means were clearly illegal, but given the extremely careless manner in which these "experiments" are set up in the first place, they really shouldn't be pretending that it's a scientific in nature. I mean WTF have these scientists not even heard of cross contamination?
Slashdot Mirror
The problem is that the tests are defective in that they can be readily gamed. The SATs are particularly notorious for being best predicted by the income bracket of the test taker due to all the prep classes out there. You're not going to do the students any favors by taking the moral high ground here. The tests just don't reward that sort of thing. People take the tests, get their scores and hopefully gain admission to the school of their choice.
Eh, I was just talking about the set dressing, from about season VII on they seemed to be doing a lot more than just updating the sets and as such the observation sort of breaks down. Series VI was also the end of the original run and it doesn't strike me as fair to continue beyond there.
The problem is that it's pretty well established that smoking is bad for you, but that doesn't necessarily mean that it's bad for you in the way that people think. Which is one of the problems, often times conventional wisdom is correct. But sometimes it's not and other times the conventional wisdom is lacking the necessary information to deal with whatever.
Imagine trying to build a large castle in a swamp, which is precisely what happens when you don't do these sorts of duh studies. In the past it probably wasn't as prevalent, mostly because any science that you wanted to do was probably advanced enough to elicit more respect from the general population.
That's in large part the fault of the crew. I think Red Dwarf is probably one of the best examples of the problem and the solution. Look at series one, series 4 and say series 6, the budget for sets went up little if at all in the mean time, but the sets looked better and better as the series went on, due in large part to more and more creativity in terms of where the money went. Roger Corman is a similar mind, you look back on the Pit and the Pendulum and you'd think it was a much more expensive film than it really was.
Indeed, the CIA actually wants people that know what they're doing. They'll train agents on any cheating and trickery that's necessary to do their job, but most agents don't need that type of thing for their jobs. The CIA employs a surprising number of people in support roles doing things like analysis.
Indeed, and cramming is a legitimate response if not the desired one. The same goes for all those high value tests, GRE, MCAT, TOEFL, SAT, ACT etc.
I'd personally have no ethical qualms teaching students strategies for maximizing their scores, mainly because that's what everybody else is going and the tests themselves do nothing to discourage it. But, cheating is a completely different matter.
I'm surprised that they aren't also getting nailed for wire fraud and conspiracy as well.
This is less about a barrier to entry than it is about ethics. They need to weed folks out in some fashion and I for one wouldn't want somebody that was willing to cheat on an exam to get an artificial boost into med school. On what basis would you suggest that the individuals would stop there?
PhysX is proprietary, it was developed by nVidia precisely for this reason, to make it difficult for the competition to compete. It's been integrated into CUDA which is an nVidia only technology meaning that even if AMD wanted to integrate it they couldn't without paying a lot of money in licensing and architectural changes to their product line.
What it means is that you can have a gaming machine where the GPU is completely shut off when you're not actually gaming. There are definitely cards out there that will consume nearly as much power as the rest of the system. While they're somewhat unusual for most people, there are definitely cards out there that will use over 100watts themselves, and that's without going the SLI route. And for a machine using that much power, you can still be taking about 50 watts being used on just normal tasks. Granted this is a bit outdated, but it illustrates nicely: Power Consumption--Graphics Cards And Electricity Costs
If you can shut that down or off for the times that you don't need the full performance there's potential for saving some money there, depending upon the cost of the AGU option.
You're an idiot. Of course it's very easy to beat Fusion with discrete parts, if it weren't the morons designing the discrete parts would be fired. My next laptop will have a Fusion APU and the reason is that it means that I don't need an IGP, which is fine, if I'm just running a desktop, there's no reason why I need that extra thermal overhead and hit to my battery life.
It's interesting to see what you posted, but you forgot that part where Intel was caught using it's dominant market position to keep integrators from using AMD products. Even now it's difficult to find computers that have AMD products without having to put them together yourself.
The point of it is that most if not all computers made today have the potential for including OpenCL goodness, it doesn't mean that a particular user will need it, but it will be available for the developers to tap. It might be something that the user only uses from time to time like for video decoding/encoding, but if the hardware is already capable of handling a bit of that with minor design adjustments there's little reason not to offer it.
Plus, 3D accelerators used to be just for games, and since pretty much all computers now have one, it's moved into other areas like the desktop (For better or for worse) and CUDA.
Sigh, 1943 is the name of an arcade game from the late 80s. 1943: The Battle of Midway compared to most of the stuff on this site, it's not really that obscure.
A large part of the problem over at MS seems to be that the guy leading it is a bean counter and not a geek. Getting a proper geek won't necessarily solve the problem, but it would get a person that actually understands the technological side of things. MS has plenty of very smart people working for it who have some pretty amazing ideas, it's just that somewhere between the idea, implementation and release stages something seems to get fucked up in most cases. I mean hell, they let Apple beat them to the punch with Time machine when they had the same basic technology in their OS unreleased.
The problem is that you're out of the work force and hence not gaining experience, if you're not fortunate you're probably not gaining much in the way of networking. I had a really hard time making the transition because I had worked in high turn over fields prior to going to college, as a result when I got out of school I had a really hard time getting references just to apply for jobs. Additionally since work study was only for certain subsets of people on financial aid and I went to a school in the middle of nowhere, the chances of working during the school year were pretty slim. On top of which I had to contend with applications which were very narrowly defined in terms of the degrees that they'd accept, even if there was no particular reason for it.
What's particularly nasty is that if you don't manage to get into your field of choice very quickly you end up losing more and more ground versus the idealized model that the census is presumably using. Which means anybody that's graduated in the last couple years that hasn't managed to find something in their field is likely to fall further behind, they probably will eventually catch up, but losing that half mill wouldn't be surprising at all.
Personally, I wish that had been apparent years back when I was getting my bachelors. It wasn't until I got out and found that I needed more education or experience for most jobs, even entry level jobs required both, that I realized what a predicament I was in. It does tend to get a bit better once you push through to a Masters or even just a Masters' level certificate, as there are fewer people to compete with, and it's less likely that somebody is going to be able to finish it and still be completely worthless. MBAs excepted.
But that was a decade ago, and things are definitely worse now. The cost is significantly higher than it was, the amount of aid is drastically reduced, and the number of jobs that require a degree just to get you in the door are even larger now. Yes, it's a bubble, but that doesn't mean that one can afford to ignore it anyways.
I think typically if you get a Bachelors in psychology you'd either go for a Masters related to counseling or go onto a PhD.
A large part of the problem is that we let HR jack asses handle the hiring decisions rather than people who contribute something to the welfare of the company. Beyond just the degree, the institution also matters. I personally wouldn't hire anybody with a degree from most of those private for profit schools, just on principle. Even without going the ivy league route, some public schools have a definite reputation for excellence in terms of turning out graduates that are educated beyond their degree level.
So then, the problem with Windows is that MS didn't number the releases properly? So, that's why they largely gave up on numbers for a while. They go from 3.11 to 95 to 98 then to a weird Me thing, before skipping all the way to 2000. After which they went XP to Vista before going all the way back to 7.
Thank you, I finally get the problem, MS developers can't count. Thankfully they fixed the problem. The next release was going to be Windows Eleventy thousand billion.
I think he went a bit overboard with that. With Linux it's a bit odd in that the kernel itself isn't what people typically see the version number for at first. They'll probably see the 13.37 Slackware release number of the 11.04 for Ubuntu, and the version of the kernel isn't something which many people will even notice. Personally, I'm not even sure what version Linux Mint 11 is going to be using.
Clearly this is the first evidence that Linux is entering that Google/Mozilla dick measuring by proxy of version number contest.
I take it you haven't actually used one. Whenever you change the font size it takes a period of time to recalculate the pagination and if you're not using the default size it can't just use the pagination that's been given for the rest of the book. Which means that it has to recalculate whenever you open it and you end up with more battery use. Additionally, because the page displayed needs to correspond to the page in the book, the ereader has to calculate that as well.
It's not funny at all. When I was doing my undergrad in the natural sciences a decade ago it was pretty well established in the scientific community that the potential for a catastrophic fuck up was there. The question is how much do you trust the folks doing the experiments to not fuck it up in that fashion. It depends on the foods, but not all foods are equally easily cultivated and some food stuffs have gone extinct within the last hundred years, such as the old school bananas.
Nobody but a shill is going to claim that there isn't a potential for a very serious fuck up and the genes definitely are spreading in the wild as we speak. The only question is how bad is it going to be. Adding one gene here or there alone isn't going to cause too much trouble, but when the genes start to combine in ways that we haven't predicted it could get very ugly very quickly. And things like the round up ready modification have already spread to the weeds for which round up was going to be used.
Until they have a means of preventing the genes from spreading to wild and otherwise unrelated plants, they have no right to test in uncontrolled conditions. It's already been documented and it's a big enough problem that Monsanto goes farm to farm in areas where its products are being used to ensure that nobody is accidentally benefiting form its line without paying. This is a serious problem for organic farmers who then can't sell their output as organic and can't compete with the cost of traditionally produced products either.
GMO when done right might achieve that. The problem is that it's mostly crap like golden rice which wouldn't even be necessary if farmers weren't encouraged to only grow rice. The blindness that it prevents was never a problem when the locals were eating a balanced diet.
Additionally, we have plenty of food as it is, growing more via GMO isn't going to solve our problem. At the moment our main problem is distribution. People aren't starving in parts of Africa because there isn't food, they're starving because war and corrupt dictatorships prevent access to food. It's an important distinction to make. Even in places like Zimbabwe where there is plenty of arable land and a recent history of the agriculture necessary corrupt despots like Robert Mugabe rob the people of the ability to feed themselves. GMO won't solve that, at best it's a bandaid over the real issues involved.
As opposed to the pro GMO side which is fucking everybody else' shit up. The means were clearly illegal, but given the extremely careless manner in which these "experiments" are set up in the first place, they really shouldn't be pretending that it's a scientific in nature. I mean WTF have these scientists not even heard of cross contamination?