"Any species that has gained intelligence should be striving to get off the rock they're on and off into space as fast as possible, all our eggs are in one basket right now. "
Don't forget to take your coat and a deck of playing cards. Its mighty cold out there in space and it will take more than a few lifetimes for you to get where you want to go, considering the other nearest star is about 2.3 light years away. Bon Voyage.
You leave out the possibility that they were getting into people's phones through information provided to them by the police, who were given "bonuses" for their "cooperation". There needs to be a fully independent investigation of the full extent of police involvement before this scandal can be cleared up. If it were only phone numbers, this would be one thing, but evidently a lot of other sensitive information that would be known to law enforcement, but that would otherwise not have been either legally or ethically proper for law enforcement to be divulging to News Corporation. It is this "pay for access" aspect of the scandal that is the most injurious to democracy itself, since it permits certain insiders to game and corrupt the system. Just how far down along this road things have gone needs to be clarified and those responsible put either to pasture or in jail. Judging from the multi-million pound size of various lawsuits News Corporation eagerly settled and companies they bought up to keep the lid on the scandal, it is still anybody's guess on who was being paid for what. No doubt there is still a lot concerning the discussions, we still don't know about given the large, but still uncertain number of backdoor visits by Mr. Murdoch and his team to 10 Dowing Street.
In any event, Mr. Clegg seems to have been handed a tremendously stronger hand going forward. An interesting side story is how effectively he will be able to use it.
"as we all know, it's the only news network not controlled by communists "
Obviously, you haven't been paying close attention to the politics of Murdoch's efforts to operate in Hong Kong and what he gives away for the opportunity.
Cancer alwasy starts by first affecting only one cell. This story is still in an exponential growth phase and the formal investigations have hardly started nor have the trials of the underlings, who are being left out to dry. It will take at least 6 months for the FBI investigation to heat up and their will likely be election year hearings in the US Senate.
In the grander scheme of things one would be best to sell News Corporation stock, if for no other reason than to buy it back somtime after the US 2012 elections, when you can be sure, it will be a lot lower than it is now. Legal bills alone are going to bleed shareholders significantly, especially when you consider the hourly rates of the folks they have already hired. Some of these guys get paid thousands of dollars an hour for their services and things have yet hardly started.
Knowing Murdoch, he may have been shorting his own stock, knowing in advance that he would have the company buyback shares after the crash had settled and after he repurchased his shares.
A settlement of 1.5 million pounds and it was paid out without even questioning why? James Murdoch's excuse is hardly a convincing argumen, especially since its being refuted by his own lawyers. This guy is going down, possibly for perjury, possibly direct complicity in the hacking, or at the very least for an attempted cover up of the hacking. His problem isn't with UK parliament, but with the US justice department as what he is implicated in is a felony under US law, punishable by no less than 5 years in a federal prison.
If the FBI confirms that in addition to the violation of the US Foreign Corrupt Practices Act now clearly established should the confirmation of the hacking of 911 and climategate emails surface, News Corp will have a tough time trying to retain their broadcast license during an election year. Already, the News Corporation underlings, who have been chosen to take the full responsibility for the scandal, are beginning to crack, especially since many may face extradition to the US to face their own felony trials in 2012.
At some point the inevitable will happen. The wealthy will have to pay more taxes, if for no other reason that soon, they will be the only folks with any money to tax. The problem with the economy is that wealth is already so concentrated in a few hands that there isn't enough money in circulation to support a 350,000,000 person economy. The only real question is whether the wealthy can starve that number down to say 35,000,000 before the 350,000,000 eat them first.
"There are other issues leading to a collapse around 2020 besides OUR money mismanagement. "
You got that right! By 2020, the heat waves will be kicking in a serious way, with virtually no fresh water to be had for irrigation of crops and summer time temperatures in the mid 130's. Looking back on the 2011 debt crisis and the great recession will seem like nostalgia for the good old days.
That would probably bring an anti-trust investigation. As long as Oracle is making money with MySQL, I doubt they would want to risk the publicity. Besides if Postgress or other DBF gets that good, open source users would just fork and move on anyway. Its the open aspect that is the greatest strength of the software, not any temporary benchmarks regarding specific code.
Software is the implementation of math on a computing device. Math can exist without software, but software can not exist without math. Math is abstract and general, whereas software is implementation specific.
But since a society is composed of individuals and can only act via the action of individuals, individuals in society must create and support rules that, at least to some extent, do not benefit the individual but society, assuming of course we are going to have civilization. Indeed, perhaps thats why its called civilization. In a civilization people act in ways that often do not benefit themselves entirely, but benefit through a shared commitment to do things collectively, even though the entire benefit is not to themselves. This may well mean that voting republican and thereby abetting their modus operandi "every man for himself", "less government regulation", and "entirely pure unregulated capitalism" results in a market place of both ideas and of goods that is inimical to civilization, which may explain why the economy always seems to do so poorly either during or immediately after republican control.
Keep in mind that the tax man can show up and demand up to year 7. Beyond that you are in the clear, at least as far as the courts seem to be concerned.
For the important ones I scan them and keep them as.pdf files, stored in directories under the vendor, activity, etc. , subdirectories sometimes by date often helps for things that go on periodically (ie taxes2010, taxes2011, etc). I forget the non-important stuff, since its not worth my time. That works for me and keeps it relatively simple, though not always foolproof. I shred the rest as it just tends to accumulate otherwise.
However, for some things, original are important (signed contracts, certifications, etc.), so I save these. Also, a dual system sometimes helps, when you can't keep up, but generally try to avoid it unless its important to do so. Obviously, backup is important, just like not setting fire to your house. Clearly, whats important depends on to whom and for what purpose and why, which varies from document to document as well as from individual to individual.
Its typically presented as the implication symbol or rule in languages such as Mathematica (->), which can refer to a variety of functions, although is actually more general than the concept of function since they may be multivalued for a given element of the domain. You can think of it as a relation that will be true or false depending upon the elements that make up the input and their "relation" to the elements that make up the output. a -> b will be true if an element a or an element in a set a implies the element b or an element in the set b.
Piecewise functions are a good example, but the concept can be applied to continuous functions as well. The issue is how the domain and range of the relations are defined.
Yes, you are missing something. Concepts such as "if" imply that the range of outcomes is different over different elements of the domain of the universe of all possible inputs. If statements are in essence equivalent to distinguishing between outcomes or range within or outside of a given portion of the entire universe of possible outcomes. Hence, an if statement will be true or false depending upon whether the elements within the domain of elements implied (or defined) by the statement fall within or outside of its range. See the definition of Cartesian product for an understanding of concepts of relation and implication. Keep in mind that the relations and implications need not necessarily be restricted to numbers, but any potential elements of a set, so long as the set is not "too large" as to lead to inherent contradictions (ie the set of all sets that do not contain themselves).
Better to have a socialized, unionized public education system, where teachers are paid what they are able to get in the market place and able to associate with those whom they please and enter into contracts as they please, than no education system at all, which is ultimately what the monk and your comment on the K-12 school system is suggesting. It would be far more stable and likely to last than what one sees in private diploma mills that just raid students wallets and leave them with no mental equipment whatsoever, and they maybe on line with virtually no teaches what so ever, just a website, yet able to obtain huge subsidies out of funds otherwise intended for publication education.
Yet fools wonder why the educational system is broken. Making money off of children is not particularly responsive to their needs, which is to receive the best education possible and he best training to prepare for what comes next. It makes one wonder how people expect things to get better, when they are eager to sacrifice what little of an educational system we have left to the mantra the "private" education is best, As if those that don't get educated because they can't afford it, don't create a cost to society as a whole. Makes one wonder what planet they think they are living on. Doesn't it?
The remarks stemmed from a reference to a Hindu tradition, which took such considerations quite seriously. I can't even read Sanskrit much less spell in it. However, it is spelled it seems as if human history in all cultures are filled with them.
I believe they evolved as a response to the tension created as the mother relinquishes the teat to the infant, who must then on in life fend for themselves. Often what people believe as a result of addressing this early primal fear seems to require the need for comforting figures that can provide meaning and direction when otherwise there is a fear that there may not be one. As modern technologies have advance to facilitate the transition, they have fallen into disuse, but often arise in other guises.
Taylor is really just advocating a return to the Dark Ages, where monks could sit around at ponder philosophies at little expense to their feudal masters. While that might be OK if one's major concerns are debating just how many ferries dance on the head of a pin, this is not true for science. In science, mathematics, engineering and medicine, such specialized technical training is absolutely essential to even begin to understand the issues at the frontiers of science and knowledge. There is simply no way anyone can predetermine what odd fact or phenomenon will be at the heart of the next breakthrough nor learn enough fast enough not to specialize. Who would have thought that the properties of dielectric materials would spawn entire industries and revolutionize the way people communicate when they were first discovered in the 1840's? If you read the comment section of the article, Igor Litvinyuk's response was right on target.
What Taylor calls for is really a dismantling of funding for science under the ruse that it is hurtful to students. It is not at all surprising that Taylor points to the collapse of the research economy in the 1970's. Since this was precisely when the philosophy of Ronald Regan came into being, where "government is viewed as the problem" and the solution is for all power and wealth to be ever more concentrated into the hands of a few ultra-wealthy so that it can "trickle down" to the more deserving. Taylor's piece is little more than a call to return to the Dark Ages, where more and more money that otherwise might be spent on education and expanding the frontiers of knowledge that can be used to solve humanity's many pressing problems go instead toward yet another tax break for the wealth and an other special handout to the already well to do. They want to "reform" the PhD system because there are not enough jobs, by dismantling it. Same old sham, just repeated once again. One would think eventually people would be smart enough to recognize the consequences of such a disastrous philosophy being applied once again to yet another segment of our society.
They want reform because they fear the consequences of a lot of smart people sitting around thinking there has to be a better way. It is a threat that focuses attention on the real cause of the failure in the lack of jobs. Namely, that the ultra-wealthy, in whom we after nearly 40 years of the philosophy of Reaganism have consolidated virtually all the wealth and power, don't want to spend their money on advancing the frontiers of knowledge that might contribute to the solution of the myriad of problems plaguing society, they would rather spend it on themselves and upon maintaining their special, most fortunate status. Unfortunately, it is this system that is truly unsustainable, since the planet groans at the weight of billions all trying to achieve the same status. On such a planet, humanity will only survive if every job soon requires the skills inherent in a PhD. We need more PhD's not less. We need more education not less. To accomplish this we need less concentration of wealth to make it happen. We need more PhD's and fewer crusading monks who only seek a return to feudalism and a return to the Dark Ages. If you really want to solve the PhD job problem, not to mention most other societal, political and environmental problems work to end the consolidation of wealth in hands of a few not educated enough to recognize or just too comfortable not to want to recognize the danger inherent to humanity in the philosophy of Reaganism.
Slashdot Mirror
"Any species that has gained intelligence should be striving to get off the rock they're on and off into space as fast as possible, all our eggs are in one basket right now. "
Don't forget to take your coat and a deck of playing cards. Its mighty cold out there in space and it will take more than a few lifetimes for you to get where you want to go, considering the other nearest star is about 2.3 light years away. Bon Voyage.
You leave out the possibility that they were getting into people's phones through information provided to them by the police, who were given "bonuses" for their "cooperation". There needs to be a fully independent investigation of the full extent of police involvement before this scandal can be cleared up. If it were only phone numbers, this would be one thing, but evidently a lot of other sensitive information that would be known to law enforcement, but that would otherwise not have been either legally or ethically proper for law enforcement to be divulging to News Corporation. It is this "pay for access" aspect of the scandal that is the most injurious to democracy itself, since it permits certain insiders to game and corrupt the system. Just how far down along this road things have gone needs to be clarified and those responsible put either to pasture or in jail. Judging from the multi-million pound size of various lawsuits News Corporation eagerly settled and companies they bought up to keep the lid on the scandal, it is still anybody's guess on who was being paid for what. No doubt there is still a lot concerning the discussions, we still don't know about given the large, but still uncertain number of backdoor visits by Mr. Murdoch and his team to 10 Dowing Street.
In any event, Mr. Clegg seems to have been handed a tremendously stronger hand going forward. An interesting side story is how effectively he will be able to use it.
"as we all know, it's the only news network not controlled by communists "
Obviously, you haven't been paying close attention to the politics of Murdoch's efforts to operate in Hong Kong and what he gives away for the opportunity.
Cancer alwasy starts by first affecting only one cell. This story is still in an exponential growth phase and the formal investigations have hardly started nor have the trials of the underlings, who are being left out to dry. It will take at least 6 months for the FBI investigation to heat up and their will likely be election year hearings in the US Senate.
In the grander scheme of things one would be best to sell News Corporation stock, if for no other reason than to buy it back somtime after the US 2012 elections, when you can be sure, it will be a lot lower than it is now. Legal bills alone are going to bleed shareholders significantly, especially when you consider the hourly rates of the folks they have already hired. Some of these guys get paid thousands of dollars an hour for their services and things have yet hardly started.
Knowing Murdoch, he may have been shorting his own stock, knowing in advance that he would have the company buyback shares after the crash had settled and after he repurchased his shares.
All major hurricanes start first as small storms the size of a teacup.
A settlement of 1.5 million pounds and it was paid out without even questioning why? James Murdoch's excuse is hardly a convincing argumen, especially since its being refuted by his own lawyers. This guy is going down, possibly for perjury, possibly direct complicity in the hacking, or at the very least for an attempted cover up of the hacking. His problem isn't with UK parliament, but with the US justice department as what he is implicated in is a felony under US law, punishable by no less than 5 years in a federal prison.
If the FBI confirms that in addition to the violation of the US Foreign Corrupt Practices Act now clearly established should the confirmation of the hacking of 911 and climategate emails surface, News Corp will have a tough time trying to retain their broadcast license during an election year. Already, the News Corporation underlings, who have been chosen to take the full responsibility for the scandal, are beginning to crack, especially since many may face extradition to the US to face their own felony trials in 2012.
At some point the inevitable will happen. The wealthy will have to pay more taxes, if for no other reason that soon, they will be the only folks with any money to tax. The problem with the economy is that wealth is already so concentrated in a few hands that there isn't enough money in circulation to support a 350,000,000 person economy. The only real question is whether the wealthy can starve that number down to say 35,000,000 before the 350,000,000 eat them first.
"There are other issues leading to a collapse around 2020 besides OUR money mismanagement. "
You got that right! By 2020, the heat waves will be kicking in a serious way, with virtually no fresh water to be had for irrigation of crops and summer time temperatures in the mid 130's. Looking back on the 2011 debt crisis and the great recession will seem like nostalgia for the good old days.
Perhaps the title of the article should read lawyers and doctors create too many patients.
That would probably bring an anti-trust investigation. As long as Oracle is making money with MySQL, I doubt they would want to risk the publicity. Besides if Postgress or other DBF gets that good, open source users would just fork and move on anyway. Its the open aspect that is the greatest strength of the software, not any temporary benchmarks regarding specific code.
It may be a reference to the lack of a sex life.
Software is the implementation of math on a computing device. Math can exist without software, but software can not exist without math. Math is abstract and general, whereas software is implementation specific.
But since a society is composed of individuals and can only act via the action of individuals, individuals in society must create and support rules that, at least to some extent, do not benefit the individual but society, assuming of course we are going to have civilization. Indeed, perhaps thats why its called civilization. In a civilization people act in ways that often do not benefit themselves entirely, but benefit through a shared commitment to do things collectively, even though the entire benefit is not to themselves. This may well mean that voting republican and thereby abetting their modus operandi "every man for himself", "less government regulation", and "entirely pure unregulated capitalism" results in a market place of both ideas and of goods that is inimical to civilization, which may explain why the economy always seems to do so poorly either during or immediately after republican control.
Keep in mind that the tax man can show up and demand up to year 7. Beyond that you are in the clear, at least as far as the courts seem to be concerned.
For the important ones I scan them and keep them as .pdf files, stored in directories under the vendor, activity, etc. , subdirectories sometimes by date often helps for things that go on periodically (ie taxes2010, taxes2011, etc). I forget the non-important stuff, since its not worth my time. That works for me and keeps it relatively simple, though not always foolproof. I shred the rest as it just tends to accumulate otherwise.
However, for some things, original are important (signed contracts, certifications, etc.), so I save these. Also, a dual system sometimes helps, when you can't keep up, but generally try to avoid it unless its important to do so. Obviously, backup is important, just like not setting fire to your house. Clearly, whats important depends on to whom and for what purpose and why, which varies from document to document as well as from individual to individual.
Are we talking about the same patent or is there a misprint here? The two numbers are not the same.
Its typically presented as the implication symbol or rule in languages such as Mathematica (->), which can refer to a variety of functions, although is actually more general than the concept of function since they may be multivalued for a given element of the domain. You can think of it as a relation that will be true or false depending upon the elements that make up the input and their "relation" to the elements that make up the output. a -> b will be true if an element a or an element in a set a implies the element b or an element in the set b.
Piecewise functions are a good example, but the concept can be applied to continuous functions as well. The issue is how the domain and range of the relations are defined.
Yes, you are missing something. Concepts such as "if" imply that the range of outcomes is different over different elements of the domain of the universe of all possible inputs. If statements are in essence equivalent to distinguishing between outcomes or range within or outside of a given portion of the entire universe of possible outcomes. Hence, an if statement will be true or false depending upon whether the elements within the domain of elements implied (or defined) by the statement fall within or outside of its range. See the definition of Cartesian product for an understanding of concepts of relation and implication. Keep in mind that the relations and implications need not necessarily be restricted to numbers, but any potential elements of a set, so long as the set is not "too large" as to lead to inherent contradictions (ie the set of all sets that do not contain themselves).
Better to have a socialized, unionized public education system, where teachers are paid what they are able to get in the market place and able to associate with those whom they please and enter into contracts as they please, than no education system at all, which is ultimately what the monk and your comment on the K-12 school system is suggesting. It would be far more stable and likely to last than what one sees in private diploma mills that just raid students wallets and leave them with no mental equipment whatsoever, and they maybe on line with virtually no teaches what so ever, just a website, yet able to obtain huge subsidies out of funds otherwise intended for publication education.
Yet fools wonder why the educational system is broken. Making money off of children is not particularly responsive to their needs, which is to receive the best education possible and he best training to prepare for what comes next. It makes one wonder how people expect things to get better, when they are eager to sacrifice what little of an educational system we have left to the mantra the "private" education is best, As if those that don't get educated because they can't afford it, don't create a cost to society as a whole. Makes one wonder what planet they think they are living on. Doesn't it?
" I don't agree that we should all be doing cross-disciplinary research. "
Yes, but then how could you turn your water resources project into a vending machine?
"Modern science has come a long way since then, but the institutions and even the notions that shaped science come from medieval universities"
Funny how the present has a way of being derived from the past. Its almost as if, it were always true. Could it really be any other way?
The remarks stemmed from a reference to a Hindu tradition, which took such considerations quite seriously. I can't even read Sanskrit much less spell in it. However, it is spelled it seems as if human history in all cultures are filled with them.
I believe they evolved as a response to the tension created as the mother relinquishes the teat to the infant, who must then on in life fend for themselves. Often what people believe as a result of addressing this early primal fear seems to require the need for comforting figures that can provide meaning and direction when otherwise there is a fear that there may not be one. As modern technologies have advance to facilitate the transition, they have fallen into disuse, but often arise in other guises.
Taylor is really just advocating a return to the Dark Ages, where monks could sit around at ponder philosophies at little expense to their feudal masters. While that might be OK if one's major concerns are debating just how many ferries dance on the head of a pin, this is not true for science. In science, mathematics, engineering and medicine, such specialized technical training is absolutely essential to even begin to understand the issues at the frontiers of science and knowledge. There is simply no way anyone can predetermine what odd fact or phenomenon will be at the heart of the next breakthrough nor learn enough fast enough not to specialize. Who would have thought that the properties of dielectric materials would spawn entire industries and revolutionize the way people communicate when they were first discovered in the 1840's? If you read the comment section of the article, Igor Litvinyuk's response was right on target.
What Taylor calls for is really a dismantling of funding for science under the ruse that it is hurtful to students. It is not at all surprising that Taylor points to the collapse of the research economy in the 1970's. Since this was precisely when the philosophy of Ronald Regan came into being, where "government is viewed as the problem" and the solution is for all power and wealth to be ever more concentrated into the hands of a few ultra-wealthy so that it can "trickle down" to the more deserving. Taylor's piece is little more than a call to return to the Dark Ages, where more and more money that otherwise might be spent on education and expanding the frontiers of knowledge that can be used to solve humanity's many pressing problems go instead toward yet another tax break for the wealth and an other special handout to the already well to do. They want to "reform" the PhD system because there are not enough jobs, by dismantling it. Same old sham, just repeated once again. One would think eventually people would be smart enough to recognize the consequences of such a disastrous philosophy being applied once again to yet another segment of our society.
They want reform because they fear the consequences of a lot of smart people sitting around thinking there has to be a better way. It is a threat that focuses attention on the real cause of the failure in the lack of jobs. Namely, that the ultra-wealthy, in whom we after nearly 40 years of the philosophy of Reaganism have consolidated virtually all the wealth and power, don't want to spend their money on advancing the frontiers of knowledge that might contribute to the solution of the myriad of problems plaguing society, they would rather spend it on themselves and upon maintaining their special, most fortunate status. Unfortunately, it is this system that is truly unsustainable, since the planet groans at the weight of billions all trying to achieve the same status. On such a planet, humanity will only survive if every job soon requires the skills inherent in a PhD. We need more PhD's not less. We need more education not less. To accomplish this we need less concentration of wealth to make it happen. We need more PhD's and fewer crusading monks who only seek a return to feudalism and a return to the Dark Ages. If you really want to solve the PhD job problem, not to mention most other societal, political and environmental problems work to end the consolidation of wealth in hands of a few not educated enough to recognize or just too comfortable not to want to recognize the danger inherent to humanity in the philosophy of Reaganism.