I think you are speaking of statistics generally. I am speaking of the AP Statistics course. It doesn't matter what statistics is. It only matters what college admissions officers will think when they read the list of AP courses on your transcripts. Or, rather, it matters what parents and students think colleges will think when colleges read their transcripts. For most parents and students, AP Stats is a math course and they've heard it's easier than AP Calculus. Choosing AP courses is a game, with the goal being to get into a good college. Learning something is a secondary objective.
AP stands for Advanced Placement. The program intends to offer college-level courses to high school students. Each course culminates in a standard exam in the spring which is graded on a 1-5 scale. Some colleges award college credit to their students for AP courses they took in high school, depending on the score and the exam.
The role of AP Statistics is to offer an AP 'math' to students who don't stand a chance in AP Calculus, but who demand an AP math class on their transcript. Most do not consider AP Computer Science 'math' enough for it to play that role, hence the surge in AP Statistics. On top of that, AP Computer Science is perceived as being much harder than AP Statistics. For a Junior or Senior looking for a reliably easy AP, Computer Science is not the way to go.
As a further nit-pick, I'd note that icosahedrons are not made from pentagons. I think they mean dodecahedrons, the faces of which are pentagons:
An icosahedron is like a 3-D pentagon, and just as you cannot tile a floor with pentagons, you cannot fill 3-D space with icosahedrons, Royall explained. That is, you can't make a lattice out of pentagons.
Whether or not the policeman was justified in using a taser isn't the issue. The cause of the death is what is in question here.
If the policeman used his gun and killed the suspect then we would say the cause of death was a gunshot wound. We would not change the cause of death to "excited delirium" simply because the action was justified.
In the case of a highway barrier, I imagine we would say that the cause of death was the car's impact with the barrier, regardless of who is at fault.
We used to talk about doing this with performance counters on the intel chips when I was doing OS research. The word was that the performance counters were not good for production code because you didn't know if they were going to be there in the next iteration of the intel processors. So we used them for research purposes, but not as any sort of OS feature. It sounds like AMD is going to assure that these instructions are permanent.
Yes. From an article posted on Wired yesterday: Wendell Belew, a lawyer who represented a now banned Ashland, Oregon Muslim charity, says the government accidentally provided him with proof his conversations were eavesdropped on without a warrant. His case has a hearing in the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals in August. The government wants his, and all the other cases, thrown out, arguing they endanger national security.
If the earth becomes uninhabitable, it will likely resemble a foreign planet anyways. If we really can survive on an inhospitable planet far away, then we can certainly survive once ours becomes inhospitable. If we leave, it has to be either because our planet is going to be destroyed, or because we've discovered some planet almost exactly like earth. We know that planet will have to be far away, so it seems that we'll either need near-lightspeed travel or the construction of a giant Noah's-ark-like ship. Both of these being far off in the distance, and the effects of spaceflight on man being fairly well-explored, I don't see why we can't do all the research needed either on earth or with unmanned craft.
Re:They already pay their "fair share".
on
Net Neutrality or Not?
·
· Score: 3, Insightful
No "Good new law?" That clearly doesn't work. The Consistution is relatively new, and I think that one's pretty OK.
Regulating companies that have any form of a monopoly (I literally have one choice for broadband) is not a bad thing. When the phone monopolies were granted it was under a condition of universal access. The government realized that a monopoly has no interest in reaching every consumer, the way competing companies do. Hence they made universal access a requirement of granting the monopoly. Here we're faced with largely the same issue. Google may have leverage enough to push telcos into not throttling their traffic, but Mom&Pop Inc. doesn't and neither do small grass-roots coalitions of any party or flavor. Until we have total competition in all aspects of the network, I think it will be hard to make any hands-off arguments.
Re:They already pay their "fair share".
on
Net Neutrality or Not?
·
· Score: 5, Insightful
I think the problem (from the telco's point of view) is that Google is paying only one company for the bandwidth it uses. Wouldn't it be nice if they could all get a share by threatening to throttle Google's traffic on their networks? Not only that, you can squeeze out any small-time competition from the market by threatening to take away a big chunk of Google's users if they sign with a smaller company for bandwidth. Only why stop at Google, you could do it to anyone! Heck, maybe even political parties? (So, probably not but the telcos would love to do it anyways, I'm sure.)
Doesn't the quote below indicate that the processor capacity argument overwhelmingly favors the dual G5's? How is the intel iMac mopping up anything when faced with increased parallelism? If anything, shouldn't MacWorld's methodology benefit the new intel iMac's?
Slashdot Mirror
So why did they put their giant shield in front of several of the solar cells? Seems a waste.
I think you are speaking of statistics generally. I am speaking of the AP Statistics course. It doesn't matter what statistics is. It only matters what college admissions officers will think when they read the list of AP courses on your transcripts. Or, rather, it matters what parents and students think colleges will think when colleges read their transcripts. For most parents and students, AP Stats is a math course and they've heard it's easier than AP Calculus. Choosing AP courses is a game, with the goal being to get into a good college. Learning something is a secondary objective.
AP stands for Advanced Placement. The program intends to offer college-level courses to high school students. Each course culminates in a standard exam in the spring which is graded on a 1-5 scale. Some colleges award college credit to their students for AP courses they took in high school, depending on the score and the exam.
The role of AP Statistics is to offer an AP 'math' to students who don't stand a chance in AP Calculus, but who demand an AP math class on their transcript. Most do not consider AP Computer Science 'math' enough for it to play that role, hence the surge in AP Statistics. On top of that, AP Computer Science is perceived as being much harder than AP Statistics. For a Junior or Senior looking for a reliably easy AP, Computer Science is not the way to go.
As a further nit-pick, I'd note that icosahedrons are not made from pentagons. I think they mean dodecahedrons, the faces of which are pentagons:
An icosahedron is like a 3-D pentagon, and just as you cannot tile a floor with pentagons, you cannot fill 3-D space with icosahedrons, Royall explained. That is, you can't make a lattice out of pentagons.Whether or not the policeman was justified in using a taser isn't the issue. The cause of the death is what is in question here.
If the policeman used his gun and killed the suspect then we would say the cause of death was a gunshot wound. We would not change the cause of death to "excited delirium" simply because the action was justified.
In the case of a highway barrier, I imagine we would say that the cause of death was the car's impact with the barrier, regardless of who is at fault.
We used to talk about doing this with performance counters on the intel chips when I was doing OS research. The word was that the performance counters were not good for production code because you didn't know if they were going to be there in the next iteration of the intel processors. So we used them for research purposes, but not as any sort of OS feature. It sounds like AMD is going to assure that these instructions are permanent.
Yes. From an article posted on Wired yesterday:
c ourt-t.html
Wendell Belew, a lawyer who represented a now banned Ashland, Oregon Muslim charity, says the government accidentally provided him with proof his conversations were eavesdropped on without a warrant. His case has a hearing in the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals in August. The government wants his, and all the other cases, thrown out, arguing they endanger national security.
http://blog.wired.com/27bstroke6/2007/07/appeals-
Seriously, is this a slashvertisement or what? Can I promote that as a tag?
That could be a ground loop. Maybe they're hoping you'll get off an ungrounded outlet or change the impedences to make it go away.
If the earth becomes uninhabitable, it will likely resemble a foreign planet anyways. If we really can survive on an inhospitable planet far away, then we can certainly survive once ours becomes inhospitable. If we leave, it has to be either because our planet is going to be destroyed, or because we've discovered some planet almost exactly like earth. We know that planet will have to be far away, so it seems that we'll either need near-lightspeed travel or the construction of a giant Noah's-ark-like ship. Both of these being far off in the distance, and the effects of spaceflight on man being fairly well-explored, I don't see why we can't do all the research needed either on earth or with unmanned craft.
No "Good new law?" That clearly doesn't work. The Consistution is relatively new, and I think that one's pretty OK.
Regulating companies that have any form of a monopoly (I literally have one choice for broadband) is not a bad thing. When the phone monopolies were granted it was under a condition of universal access. The government realized that a monopoly has no interest in reaching every consumer, the way competing companies do. Hence they made universal access a requirement of granting the monopoly. Here we're faced with largely the same issue. Google may have leverage enough to push telcos into not throttling their traffic, but Mom&Pop Inc. doesn't and neither do small grass-roots coalitions of any party or flavor. Until we have total competition in all aspects of the network, I think it will be hard to make any hands-off arguments.
I think the problem (from the telco's point of view) is that Google is paying only one company for the bandwidth it uses. Wouldn't it be nice if they could all get a share by threatening to throttle Google's traffic on their networks? Not only that, you can squeeze out any small-time competition from the market by threatening to take away a big chunk of Google's users if they sign with a smaller company for bandwidth. Only why stop at Google, you could do it to anyone! Heck, maybe even political parties? (So, probably not but the telcos would love to do it anyways, I'm sure.)
Doesn't the quote below indicate that the processor capacity argument overwhelmingly favors the dual G5's? How is the intel iMac mopping up anything when faced with increased parallelism? If anything, shouldn't MacWorld's methodology benefit the new intel iMac's?
Encoding one QuickTime movie:
intel dual core iMac: 97.02 seconds (87% CPU)
g5 quad core powermac: 84.85 seconds (42% CPU)
advantage g5: 14% faster
Encoding two QuickTime movies:
intel dual core iMac: 176.60 seconds (100% CPU)
g5 quad core powermac: 86.25 seconds (87% CPU)
advantage g5: 105% faster