I don't see how any of that stuff makes the calorie "broken". Sure, "Differences in metabolism and digestive efficiency add sizable error bars." etc etc. Gasoline has 30MJ/L of energy, and the fact that cars have different fuel efficiencies doesn't mean that isn't useful data, or that the joule is "broken" either.
Is it really news to anybody that you need to take account of more than just pure calorie intake when monitoring your diet?
Exactly. I'm not sure why the summary mentioned Jurassic Park as if it started an era of gratuitous CGI. The CGI in Jurassic Park was *impressive* in 1993, and there are a lot of movies now with CGI that doesn't look as good. But more importantly, Jurassic Park used physical animatronics for the close up dinosaurs, the CGI was used for stuff that couldn't be done any other way, i.e. large flocks of dinosaurs etc, it didn't use CGI just for the sake of it.
I'm surprised Apple hasn't bought a search engine of its own. Several decent search engines have fallen by the wayside in recent times, so I'm sure they could pick something up pretty cheap if they didn't want to create one from scratch. Sure, the $1 billion + 34% of search revenue from Google is nice, but presumably 100% of search/ad/data mining revenue would be even nicer.
To be fair, that mistake does not originate in the blackmail letter. You'll be shocked to know that the grammatical error came either from the submitter or the slashdot "editor" responsible for putting up the story.
In the letter, it says "All you have to do to prevent me from using this information against you, [redacted], is to pay me $2000" and "If you do not want me to destroy your life then send $2000 in bitcoin..."; lacking in poetry, but grammatically sound enough.
The headline takes what he said out of context a little, and makes it seem like some kind of pompous pronouncement. He was answering a question, and while it's not clear from TFA exactly what the question was, it seems perfectly likely that what he said is a reasonable answer. What he seems to be saying is that while in the long term, science and technology will give our species survival advantages by dint of allowing us to spread to other planets or into space, and thus not have all our eggs in one basket, the period we are currently in where we have increasingly powerful technology but haven't yet made the leap to spreading off the Earth is potentially hazardous. It's not particularly insightful, common sense really, but you can only answer the questions you're asked.
It seems that quote may have been adapted from the Wikipedia article on Katherine Johnson, which says "The practice in 1960 would have been not to list the female contributors as formal co-authors [citation needed]", rather than from the article linked in the summary.
I get the feeling it's built more as a curiosity/collector's item than something anybody is going to use on a daily basis now, much less into the future. No mention of the weight, but the thing looks huge and costs $5000, so I suspect whichever desks it gets parked on, it's staying there. In this age of thin, light devices, I really can't see many people wanting to heave that behemoth around. And as a curiosity or collector's item, it doesn't really matter much how future-proof it is.
The visa waiver is not automatic, you have to apply to travel via ESTA. That can be denied, in which case you have to apply for a visa. It's not just "criminals and those with suspect pasts" that are denied authorisation via ESTA, there is little transparency about why the DHS flag people, and sometimes it seems almost random. Don't forget that Ted Kennedy got put on the no-fly list by the DHS, and there was never any explanation other than that it was a "mistake". You can bet there are a lot more such "mistakes" for people with arabic-sounding names though, and for people who aren't US senators, the chances of the mistake ever being corrected are low.
I guess it does demonstrate the enduring power of a marque though. Sure, WinAmp hasn't been relevant for ages, but people still remember it. I remember even making a skin for the music player I used on my PocketPC PDA (gsplayer I think it was) to make it look like WinAmp, mustv'e had way too much time on my hands.
Sure, it's hard to see how WinAmp could be brought back to prominence. Certainly not in the same form as it was; if you want that, just download the old versions. But it's not impossible; I can't say I'm 100% happy with the music players I use, the online radio apps I use, or the streaming services on the market. So there's room for someone to do better, and if it happened to have the WinAmp name attached it wouldn't hurt.
I was wondering the same thing. Tried it when first upgrading a couple of machines to Windows 10, ignored it ever since. From a quick search, Edge seems to be roughly in the 1.7-2.8% market share range (e.g. netmarketshare) this month, which actually seems seems high to me; since Windows 10 has 9% of the desktop OS market share for the same timeframe, that means fully a quarter of Windows 10 users are finding Edge good enough to stick with it. Then again, I guess for basic web browsing by non-technical users, it probably does the job; that segment of users probably wouldn't know about or use the features that Edge is missing even if it had them, so that's probably reasonable.
I was about to post exactly this; since when are Android, iOS or.net programming languages? And yeah, measuring flaws per MB of source code - surely there are pretty large differences in source code "density" (i.e. how many characters of source code it takes to get a job done) between the things which actually are programming languages, so that's not really a valid measurement IMO.
That's a strange argument; it's not about banning or not banning, it's about a) ensuring that some players don't have an unfair advantage over others, and b) that the sport doesn't simply become a technological arms race. That doesn't mean that you stop all development, otherwise tennis players would still play with wooden raquets, for example, and we wouldn't have innovations like hawkeye and TV referees. But you place restrictions on equipment so that new technology is allowed when it's readily available to all players, and when it genuinely adds something to the sport, making it a better spectacle or whatever.
This curling issue is a perfect example; it would be impossible to have a fair competition with these directional fabric brooms right now, because even if all players got them, the ones that haven't been using them to date won't have so much time to figure out how to best use them. So they're banned for now. In the future, the curling governing bodies may look at them again, and decide that they make the sport a better spectacle, and as long as they're going to be readily available to all players they might then choose to allow them.
It's no different than prescribing a placebo, which does have a proven effect, although I expect it costs a lot more to see a homeopathy "specialist" than it does for a regular doctor to prescribe some do-nothing pills.
Similar topic came up on Ars Technica recently about Microsoft withdrawing the unlimited SkyDrive accounts; one user had reportedly used 75TB so far, for example. I got downvoted for suggesting that either you are the 75TB guy, or you're subsidising the 75TB guy, and that's exactly why "unlimited" plans can't work. I guess I'll get hammered for it here too, but it's just a statement of fact if you ask me. Whether it's mobile data or cloud storage, if you call it "unlimited", sooner or later some people are going to use it beyond the point of profitability, so either you're going to jack up the prices for everybody to make up for what those few are costing you, or you get rid the "unlimited" plan and go back to something a bit more sensible.
Professor Kevin Warwick AKA Captain Cyborg never went as far as putting an implant in his brain, so I think that Phil Kennedy now deserves the nickname, and in a less ironic sense than it was applied to Prof Warwick. Much respect for hacking your own cranium.
That was meant to read "No matter how you slice it, the bread puns in this thread are getting a bit out of hand". Now I look like a right numpty. I'll get the hang of touch-screens one of these days.
"Michael Faraday was the first to propose (in an 1846 lecture entitled "Thoughts on Ray Vibrations") that light should be interpreted as a field, much like the magnetic fields on which he had been working for several years. The phrase light field was coined by Alexander Gershun in a classic paper on the radiometric properties of light in three-dimensional space (1936)."
My VW diesel has a claimed 55mpg, and I get 50mpg on a short (15 minute, half town, half highway) commute, as long as I obey the speed limit. It can drop to 40 if I'm in a hurry. I don't really know exactly what driving conditions the "combined cycle" mpg figure is meant to represent, but to me 50mpg seemed pretty close to the claimed figure, to be honest. If their other infringements were that marginal, I don't think they'd be in so much trouble.
However VW denies the vehicles have software designed to cheat tests.
Instead the company says that cars with the 3.0 litre diesel V6 engines "had a software function which had not been adequately described in the application process".
If VW wants to get past this scandal, they really need to adopt a full-transparency, maximum mea culpa stance right now, and this kind of statement does not appear to be helping. If there's a software function that seems to the EPA to be cheating on emissions tests, well, if it walks like a duck and quacks like a duck...
Slashdot Mirror
Any water will kill you if you drink enough of it.
I don't see how any of that stuff makes the calorie "broken". Sure, "Differences in metabolism and digestive efficiency add sizable error bars." etc etc. Gasoline has 30MJ/L of energy, and the fact that cars have different fuel efficiencies doesn't mean that isn't useful data, or that the joule is "broken" either.
Is it really news to anybody that you need to take account of more than just pure calorie intake when monitoring your diet?
Exactly. I'm not sure why the summary mentioned Jurassic Park as if it started an era of gratuitous CGI. The CGI in Jurassic Park was *impressive* in 1993, and there are a lot of movies now with CGI that doesn't look as good. But more importantly, Jurassic Park used physical animatronics for the close up dinosaurs, the CGI was used for stuff that couldn't be done any other way, i.e. large flocks of dinosaurs etc, it didn't use CGI just for the sake of it.
I'm surprised Apple hasn't bought a search engine of its own. Several decent search engines have fallen by the wayside in recent times, so I'm sure they could pick something up pretty cheap if they didn't want to create one from scratch. Sure, the $1 billion + 34% of search revenue from Google is nice, but presumably 100% of search/ad/data mining revenue would be even nicer.
To be fair, that mistake does not originate in the blackmail letter. You'll be shocked to know that the grammatical error came either from the submitter or the slashdot "editor" responsible for putting up the story.
In the letter, it says "All you have to do to prevent me from using this information against you, [redacted], is to pay me $2000" and "If you do not want me to destroy your life then send $2000 in bitcoin..."; lacking in poetry, but grammatically sound enough.
The headline takes what he said out of context a little, and makes it seem like some kind of pompous pronouncement. He was answering a question, and while it's not clear from TFA exactly what the question was, it seems perfectly likely that what he said is a reasonable answer. What he seems to be saying is that while in the long term, science and technology will give our species survival advantages by dint of allowing us to spread to other planets or into space, and thus not have all our eggs in one basket, the period we are currently in where we have increasingly powerful technology but haven't yet made the leap to spreading off the Earth is potentially hazardous. It's not particularly insightful, common sense really, but you can only answer the questions you're asked.
It seems that quote may have been adapted from the Wikipedia article on Katherine Johnson, which says "The practice in 1960 would have been not to list the female contributors as formal co-authors [citation needed]", rather than from the article linked in the summary.
I get the feeling it's built more as a curiosity/collector's item than something anybody is going to use on a daily basis now, much less into the future. No mention of the weight, but the thing looks huge and costs $5000, so I suspect whichever desks it gets parked on, it's staying there. In this age of thin, light devices, I really can't see many people wanting to heave that behemoth around. And as a curiosity or collector's item, it doesn't really matter much how future-proof it is.
"I'd like to prosthelytize further, but..."
You're trying to convert people to believe in artificial limbs?
The visa waiver is not automatic, you have to apply to travel via ESTA. That can be denied, in which case you have to apply for a visa. It's not just "criminals and those with suspect pasts" that are denied authorisation via ESTA, there is little transparency about why the DHS flag people, and sometimes it seems almost random. Don't forget that Ted Kennedy got put on the no-fly list by the DHS, and there was never any explanation other than that it was a "mistake". You can bet there are a lot more such "mistakes" for people with arabic-sounding names though, and for people who aren't US senators, the chances of the mistake ever being corrected are low.
I guess it does demonstrate the enduring power of a marque though. Sure, WinAmp hasn't been relevant for ages, but people still remember it. I remember even making a skin for the music player I used on my PocketPC PDA (gsplayer I think it was) to make it look like WinAmp, mustv'e had way too much time on my hands.
Sure, it's hard to see how WinAmp could be brought back to prominence. Certainly not in the same form as it was; if you want that, just download the old versions. But it's not impossible; I can't say I'm 100% happy with the music players I use, the online radio apps I use, or the streaming services on the market. So there's room for someone to do better, and if it happened to have the WinAmp name attached it wouldn't hurt.
I was wondering the same thing. Tried it when first upgrading a couple of machines to Windows 10, ignored it ever since. From a quick search, Edge seems to be roughly in the 1.7-2.8% market share range (e.g. netmarketshare) this month, which actually seems seems high to me; since Windows 10 has 9% of the desktop OS market share for the same timeframe, that means fully a quarter of Windows 10 users are finding Edge good enough to stick with it. Then again, I guess for basic web browsing by non-technical users, it probably does the job; that segment of users probably wouldn't know about or use the features that Edge is missing even if it had them, so that's probably reasonable.
I was about to post exactly this; since when are Android, iOS or .net programming languages? And yeah, measuring flaws per MB of source code - surely there are pretty large differences in source code "density" (i.e. how many characters of source code it takes to get a job done) between the things which actually are programming languages, so that's not really a valid measurement IMO.
That's a strange argument; it's not about banning or not banning, it's about a) ensuring that some players don't have an unfair advantage over others, and b) that the sport doesn't simply become a technological arms race. That doesn't mean that you stop all development, otherwise tennis players would still play with wooden raquets, for example, and we wouldn't have innovations like hawkeye and TV referees. But you place restrictions on equipment so that new technology is allowed when it's readily available to all players, and when it genuinely adds something to the sport, making it a better spectacle or whatever.
This curling issue is a perfect example; it would be impossible to have a fair competition with these directional fabric brooms right now, because even if all players got them, the ones that haven't been using them to date won't have so much time to figure out how to best use them. So they're banned for now. In the future, the curling governing bodies may look at them again, and decide that they make the sport a better spectacle, and as long as they're going to be readily available to all players they might then choose to allow them.
It's no different than prescribing a placebo, which does have a proven effect, although I expect it costs a lot more to see a homeopathy "specialist" than it does for a regular doctor to prescribe some do-nothing pills.
This won't work. The crocs could actually be your way out. If you're really good, you won't even get your trousers wet :).
Similar topic came up on Ars Technica recently about Microsoft withdrawing the unlimited SkyDrive accounts; one user had reportedly used 75TB so far, for example. I got downvoted for suggesting that either you are the 75TB guy, or you're subsidising the 75TB guy, and that's exactly why "unlimited" plans can't work. I guess I'll get hammered for it here too, but it's just a statement of fact if you ask me. Whether it's mobile data or cloud storage, if you call it "unlimited", sooner or later some people are going to use it beyond the point of profitability, so either you're going to jack up the prices for everybody to make up for what those few are costing you, or you get rid the "unlimited" plan and go back to something a bit more sensible.
Professor Kevin Warwick AKA Captain Cyborg never went as far as putting an implant in his brain, so I think that Phil Kennedy now deserves the nickname, and in a less ironic sense than it was applied to Prof Warwick. Much respect for hacking your own cranium.
That was meant to read "No matter how you slice it, the bread puns in this thread are getting a bit out of hand". Now I look like a right numpty. I'll get the hang of touch-screens one of these days.
No matter http://developers.slashdot.org... you slice it, the bread puns in this thread are getting a bit out of hand.
Not so new.
"Michael Faraday was the first to propose (in an 1846 lecture entitled "Thoughts on Ray Vibrations") that light should be interpreted as a field, much like the magnetic fields on which he had been working for several years. The phrase light field was coined by Alexander Gershun in a classic paper on the radiometric properties of light in three-dimensional space (1936)."
wikipedia
Or its mpg for that matter
My VW diesel has a claimed 55mpg, and I get 50mpg on a short (15 minute, half town, half highway) commute, as long as I obey the speed limit. It can drop to 40 if I'm in a hurry. I don't really know exactly what driving conditions the "combined cycle" mpg figure is meant to represent, but to me 50mpg seemed pretty close to the claimed figure, to be honest. If their other infringements were that marginal, I don't think they'd be in so much trouble.
Forgot to link the source of that quote: here.
However VW denies the vehicles have software designed to cheat tests.
Instead the company says that cars with the 3.0 litre diesel V6 engines "had a software function which had not been adequately described in the application process".
If VW wants to get past this scandal, they really need to adopt a full-transparency, maximum mea culpa stance right now, and this kind of statement does not appear to be helping. If there's a software function that seems to the EPA to be cheating on emissions tests, well, if it walks like a duck and quacks like a duck...
It can't get any worse than Enterprise.
Then again, I thought it couldn't get any worse than Voyager, so I could be wrong.