+3 Insightful for that? First-to-file has nothing to do with whether a patent is obvious or if there is prior art. Either one can still shoot down a patent. The problem is the patent office isn't very good at doing this, regardless of first-to-file or first-to-invent.
When data diverges, it's dangerous to just remove it without knowing why it is diverging. The danger is that you end up with confirmation bias. I also was talking about Phil Jones and his WMO (World Meteorological Organization) graph, for which both quotes "trick" and "hide the decline" come from. Here he took what Mann did and elevated it to scientific fraud.
I give Google credit for some good ethics and user focus, especially in the early days, but at the end of the day, Google is a business, and has made many for-profit business decisions that are not driven by thinking about what's best for users.
As for the $7,500 tax credit, it really irks me to see my tax dollars spent to subsidize rich people who want an eco-chic toy. I can tell you paying a bit less tax would be a huge help to me right now after nearly four years of Obama and this miserable economy.
If paying a "bit less" in tax would help you, then the idea that this tax credit is actually affecting you is a joke. Taxes have not gone up.
For the millionth time, the "trick" in question referred to a statistical technique used to suppress bad data that was known to be bad, known to be in disagreement with the rest of the data they had, and what it actually did was to tack on real observation to the end of the graph.
That's scientific fraud. Mann's use of it was murky at best, but the "trick" word actually comes from the Phil Jones email regarding the front-page figure in the World Meteorological Organization, and there it is clearly meant to "hide the decline" for political reasons and in a deceptive way.
Heh! Actually SL still exists, and is doing quite well as far as I can tell.
Probably not as well as Facebook, which given all the media hype it went through in its earliest stages is where the expectations were. It sounds like now that it's succeeding as a niche. Based on a quick search, it averages about a million active users. Linden Labs claims to be profitable, but they don't say by how much.
Of course, DDoS *could* be used to silence someone who's only way of speaking out is through a narrow band on the Internet. And it probably is, too. But not in these cases.
So it's OK to shut down somebody's website if they can open up another one? This is terrible reasoning.
But what I think is really bothering folk about the supposed contradiction here is why would one galaxy or galaxy cluster have one type and another galaxy or galaxy cluster have another? This in and of itself would seem to be a rather flagrant violation of the Mediocrity Principle.
Not necessarily. Galaxies come in many different types:
From my understanding of dark matter, isn't it likely yhat they're looking at two entirely different types of matter?
This was one of the possibilities (the third one below) raised in the article:
"Jee, Babul and their colleagues propose several possible explanations for the discrepancy. One explanation might be that the dynamics of the Abell 520 collision are more complex than the Bullet Cluster's crash. Maybe multiple collisions, involving three or four galaxy clusters, have led to the dark matter pile-up.
Another possibility is that there's actually lots of ordinary galactic material in the core, but it's just too dim to be seen, even by Hubble. That would suggest that the super-dim galaxies in the core have somehow formed far fewer stars than normal galaxies.
The most unsettling scenario proposes that there are different kinds of dark matter, and some of those kinds are "stickier" than others. Abell 520 might have a particularly sticky kind of dark matter that interacts with itself and clumps up like a wet snowball."
I do enjoy watching the occasional black cock with the dimensions of a 24 oz. can of Miller pulling a petite white or Asian inside out every now and then.
But mobile porn is kinda creepy.
Was that a joke, or do you think sharing your black cock fetish isn't "kinda creepy"?
It's very easy to speed, and anybody driving the car is capable, and it's also tolerated within certain limits because it is so prevalent.
It's much harder to jam GPS. You have to go out of your way to explicitly do so, and most people don't do much to protect their privacy. If GPS jamming becomes a real enough problem the government can shut it down.
If I'm reading you correctly, you'd rather see him widen the wealth gap between the U.S. hyper-rich and the 3rd world ? The funny thing about wealth gaps is they tend to trigger acts of extreme violence to rebalance the equation.
Not necessarily. Many of the modern acts of terrorism are by people relatively well off with time on their hands. When was the last time a poor, African country threatened the security of the United States?
JThis undermines the stability of the GPS, arguably, but no government can stamp out low-level abuses like this, except by removing the impetus that is leading human nature to the abuse.
If the government is serious about it, then yes, they can. If they can install traffic and street lights on the vast majority of roads then they can install GPS sensors, too.
I think it'd be a better idea to look at the socio-economic problems leading to people willing to commit crimes (fear-incited or not) in the first place.
Being poor is not the main driver of terrorism. Look at the attackers, their backgrounds, and their motives.
As to the grandparent post -- just because I started with Java 1.0 doesn't mean I assume that the JVM hasn't changed. I've been redoing my tests with each Java release that came out to see if my old assumptions still applied.
I'm a professional programmer, not some kid hacking code in a basement.
"Performance advice often has a short shelf life; while it was once true that allocation was expensive, it is now no longer the case. In fact, it is downright cheap, and with a few very compute-intensive exceptions, performance considerations are generally no longer a good reason to avoid allocation. Sun estimates allocation costs at approximately ten machine instructions. That's pretty much free -- certainly no reason to complicate the structure of your program or incur additional maintenance risks for the sake of eliminating a few object creations.
Of course, allocation is only half the story -- most objects that are allocated are eventually garbage collected, which also has costs. But there's good news there, too. The vast majority of objects in most Java applications become garbage before the next collection. The cost of a minor garbage collection is proportional to the number of live objects in the young generation, not the number of objects allocated since the last collection. Because so few young generation objects survive to the next collection, the amortized cost of collection per allocation is fairly small (and can be made even smaller by simply increasing the heap size, subject to the availability of enough memory)."
There are cases where it makes sense to use your own allocator, generally for big objects, but the blanket advice you gave will cause more harm than good.
I should've explained that. Excluding the Mormon Church (I could be wrong about it since I've just really started learning about it in the past few months)
In other words, your "self explanatory" was a cover for your ignorance. The Mormon Church isn't any whackier than many other Christian sects. What really distinguishes it is that it is relatively recent (within the past 200 years), so many (especially mainstream Christians) still call it a cult, but most religions start out as cults, including the original Christianity.
The very fact that you can make it resemble GNOME 2 should amply demonstrate the fact that people are whining about nothing.
The very fact that people have to jump through a lot of hoops just to get back to where they were amply demonstrates that Gnome 3 broke things for people because they decided to blow up the world and rebuild from scratch when they had no need to. They could have added in compositing without fucking up everybody's settings, workflow, and muscle memory.
Slashdot Mirror
Before the "walled garden" thing they were always about proprietary and expensive computers. Apple love/hate has gone through cycles on Slashdot.
These days Apple is the poster child for abusive Chinese labor practices.
+3 Insightful for that? First-to-file has nothing to do with whether a patent is obvious or if there is prior art. Either one can still shoot down a patent. The problem is the patent office isn't very good at doing this, regardless of first-to-file or first-to-invent.
That's the first I've seen of that. It's so fucked up and unreal, it sounds like something out of a Hollywood movie.
Huffington Post is a trashy, liberal blog. Even Fox News is better.
I still don't know why your post was modded interesting. The Anonymous Coward was right, it was "blithering speculation".
When data diverges, it's dangerous to just remove it without knowing why it is diverging. The danger is that you end up with confirmation bias. I also was talking about Phil Jones and his WMO (World Meteorological Organization) graph, for which both quotes "trick" and "hide the decline" come from. Here he took what Mann did and elevated it to scientific fraud.
I give Google credit for some good ethics and user focus, especially in the early days, but at the end of the day, Google is a business, and has made many for-profit business decisions that are not driven by thinking about what's best for users.
As for the $7,500 tax credit, it really irks me to see my tax dollars spent to subsidize rich people who want an eco-chic toy. I can tell you paying a bit less tax would be a huge help to me right now after nearly four years of Obama and this miserable economy.
If paying a "bit less" in tax would help you, then the idea that this tax credit is actually affecting you is a joke. Taxes have not gone up.
For the millionth time, the "trick" in question referred to a statistical technique used to suppress bad data that was known to be bad, known to be in disagreement with the rest of the data they had, and what it actually did was to tack on real observation to the end of the graph.
That's scientific fraud. Mann's use of it was murky at best, but the "trick" word actually comes from the Phil Jones email regarding the front-page figure in the World Meteorological Organization, and there it is clearly meant to "hide the decline" for political reasons and in a deceptive way.
Heh! Actually SL still exists, and is doing quite well as far as I can tell.
Probably not as well as Facebook, which given all the media hype it went through in its earliest stages is where the expectations were. It sounds like now that it's succeeding as a niche. Based on a quick search, it averages about a million active users. Linden Labs claims to be profitable, but they don't say by how much.
Of course, DDoS *could* be used to silence someone who's only way of speaking out is through a narrow band on the Internet. And it probably is, too. But not in these cases.
So it's OK to shut down somebody's website if they can open up another one? This is terrible reasoning.
But what I think is really bothering folk about the supposed contradiction here is why would one galaxy or galaxy cluster have one type and another galaxy or galaxy cluster have another? This in and of itself would seem to be a rather flagrant violation of the Mediocrity Principle.
Not necessarily. Galaxies come in many different types:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Galaxy#Types_and_morphology
From my understanding of dark matter, isn't it likely yhat they're looking at two entirely different types of matter?
This was one of the possibilities (the third one below) raised in the article:
"Jee, Babul and their colleagues propose several possible explanations for the discrepancy. One explanation might be that the dynamics of the Abell 520 collision are more complex than the Bullet Cluster's crash. Maybe multiple collisions, involving three or four galaxy clusters, have led to the dark matter pile-up.
Another possibility is that there's actually lots of ordinary galactic material in the core, but it's just too dim to be seen, even by Hubble. That would suggest that the super-dim galaxies in the core have somehow formed far fewer stars than normal galaxies.
The most unsettling scenario proposes that there are different kinds of dark matter, and some of those kinds are "stickier" than others. Abell 520 might have a particularly sticky kind of dark matter that interacts with itself and clumps up like a wet snowball."
Scientists don't just "throw out" theories if they can be patched and no solid alternative exists. They do, however, look at plausible alternatives:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dark_matter#Alternative_theories
Dark matter is just the prevailing theory. Working scientists know that it might be wrong and the equations for gravity may have to be fixed.
I do enjoy watching the occasional black cock with the dimensions of a 24 oz. can of Miller pulling a petite white or Asian inside out every now and then.
But mobile porn is kinda creepy.
Was that a joke, or do you think sharing your black cock fetish isn't "kinda creepy"?
It's very easy to speed, and anybody driving the car is capable, and it's also tolerated within certain limits because it is so prevalent.
It's much harder to jam GPS. You have to go out of your way to explicitly do so, and most people don't do much to protect their privacy. If GPS jamming becomes a real enough problem the government can shut it down.
If I'm reading you correctly, you'd rather see him widen the wealth gap between the U.S. hyper-rich and the 3rd world ? The funny thing about wealth gaps is they tend to trigger acts of extreme violence to rebalance the equation.
Not necessarily. Many of the modern acts of terrorism are by people relatively well off with time on their hands. When was the last time a poor, African country threatened the security of the United States?
JThis undermines the stability of the GPS, arguably, but no government can stamp out low-level abuses like this, except by removing the impetus that is leading human nature to the abuse.
If the government is serious about it, then yes, they can. If they can install traffic and street lights on the vast majority of roads then they can install GPS sensors, too.
I think it'd be a better idea to look at the socio-economic problems leading to people willing to commit crimes (fear-incited or not) in the first place.
Being poor is not the main driver of terrorism. Look at the attackers, their backgrounds, and their motives.
As to the grandparent post -- just because I started with Java 1.0 doesn't mean I assume that the JVM hasn't changed. I've been redoing my tests with each Java release that came out to see if my old assumptions still applied.
I'm a professional programmer, not some kid hacking code in a basement.
I expect a professional Java programmer to know that "Raw object allocation is EXPENSIVE" is WRONG and OLD information: http://www.ibm.com/developerworks/java/library/j-jtp01274/index.html
"Performance advice often has a short shelf life; while it was once true that allocation was expensive, it is now no longer the case. In fact, it is downright cheap, and with a few very compute-intensive exceptions, performance considerations are generally no longer a good reason to avoid allocation. Sun estimates allocation costs at approximately ten machine instructions. That's pretty much free -- certainly no reason to complicate the structure of your program or incur additional maintenance risks for the sake of eliminating a few object creations.
Of course, allocation is only half the story -- most objects that are allocated are eventually garbage collected, which also has costs. But there's good news there, too. The vast majority of objects in most Java applications become garbage before the next collection. The cost of a minor garbage collection is proportional to the number of live objects in the young generation, not the number of objects allocated since the last collection. Because so few young generation objects survive to the next collection, the amortized cost of collection per allocation is fairly small (and can be made even smaller by simply increasing the heap size, subject to the availability of enough memory)."
There are cases where it makes sense to use your own allocator, generally for big objects, but the blanket advice you gave will cause more harm than good.
I should've explained that. Excluding the Mormon Church (I could be wrong about it since I've just really started learning about it in the past few months)
In other words, your "self explanatory" was a cover for your ignorance. The Mormon Church isn't any whackier than many other Christian sects. What really distinguishes it is that it is relatively recent (within the past 200 years), so many (especially mainstream Christians) still call it a cult, but most religions start out as cults, including the original Christianity.
Lawsuits are too late when people have been poisoned.
And you could stick your keyboard up your ass.
You don't have to jump through any hoops. Just install Mint
So your answer to not jumping through any hoops is to install a new operating system. Brilliant.
The very fact that you can make it resemble GNOME 2 should amply demonstrate the fact that people are whining about nothing.
The very fact that people have to jump through a lot of hoops just to get back to where they were amply demonstrates that Gnome 3 broke things for people because they decided to blow up the world and rebuild from scratch when they had no need to. They could have added in compositing without fucking up everybody's settings, workflow, and muscle memory.