I used a little humor. But yes, you absolutely have a clear case - you submit something in an intelligent style, and the first pass no one notices, until it accidentally gets picked up and then they slam the original creator.
What for example if that math paper that got hosed last week was *spoofed*? It's bad enough if the original author goofed, but since he got pulverized for "not checking", what if it was a classy defamation attack?
Because this is an Author Tag! (Cue the Serious Stern Face.)
Of course twerps can claim stuff. So far people can just laugh stuff off.
Now the obvious use of the tag is for the copyright police... they're gonna try to make the author tag a statement almost akin to under oath. So all those tv show clips on youtube that don't have the network=author tag are instant slam-bait.
But now the more dangerous case is when Da Gov wants to do False Flag cases, and posts pics of Democrats sharing lingerie, and they put "Author=___Congressman", they fire it away as a "political hit and run" and leave him explaining to the masses that "it wasn't him, I didn't lick".
Remember all these break-in cases? If the hacker breaks into your account, and posts stuff on your account with you as the Author, same thing. "Dammit, that's not my Brittany-CookieMonster mashup!"
In short, by making a tag out of it all, it's a case of something truly awful.
When you switch off an OS you have to examine the entire ecosystem effect. Because XP was the only sane choice for EIGHT YEARS that's what Windows computing grew up with.
Suddenly Win7 hasn't really been out that long, and the early reports of Windows 8 are dubious, so it does suddenly seem like they're trying to make continued use of XP painful like a Pavlov experiment.
I won't switch off XP until the upgrade path through *Windows 9* has shaken out. MS is thrashing pretty badly lately, so I don't want to get caught in the Zune of OS decisions until MS figures themselves out again.
So you can totally spoof random people's names into any webpage? So searches for author=Obama come up with doctored pics of Osama-Obama slash or something?
If they do decide to ditch.net, which last I knew was at least half decent, do you think they have a game plan for a legit successor framework? Or will the devs have to learn yet another environment for Windows 9?
Doesn't that become a hidden cost of dev wear and tear?
Let's suppose Microsoft lurches again and the WinPhoneEsque interface is as obnoxious as the demos make it seem so far.
I set about a "twilight" policy on XP waiting for MS to churn through their bad beta copies of the OS until they made a couple versions with a future. The neat thing about what eventually ended up with XP is that unlike EndOfLife-ing Win98 and even Win2000 was pretty easy, because of the Vista disaster, the entire world has spent eight years on XP where computing essentially came of age. That legacy won't go away for decades.
But what IS the ideal upgrade? (Allow me some visual thinking)
Win2000 -> WinXP ; Pretty simple all things considered. WinXP -> ____ What?
Vista = broken beta Win7 = reports coming in as "almost usable" ; Maybe status. Win8 = "The ugly rectangles, they hurt my eyes!" (Plus some stuff looks like it's deprecating fast!?) Also watch them put more half-baked middleware tech that ends up becoming Vista Revisited.
Do we really have to wait until Windows *9* to know for sure??
"If we wanted to" we could be making leaps in AI. However that would require it shifting from the subconsciously scary area it is now to a National Priority.
We play True Scotsman games on AI. We keep shifting the rules every time a goal is reached.
Huge swaths of life are easy to model. IBM's results are more sudden than your "slow gradual" metric. Chess was the game Comp Sci "grew up on". It took thousands of programmers 30 years to merge into the results they have now. In contrast, IBM just showed up sorta out of the blue and said "Hi. We want to play a game. We'll start with *champions*".
Now they're doing diagnostics as good (or better?) than doctors? The article is a polite way to say that 12 years of med training is being shadowed by a piece of software that anyone can have in three years when Moore catches up on the hardware side.
It takes a lot of work to become a competent person. While we're being distracted by the **AA, we're forgetting that copying works on AI !! So (with a nod to Steve Jackson) all we need is a Generic Universal AI System and just add modules.
You go to college to eat and pay rent. It's a calculated gamble of which major has the best ROI.
You study the fun topics on your own time.
Also, I'm a bit disturbed by the comments all the way down to here. Cue the 10 exceptions to the rule, silent are the thousands who could have gotten midline jobs with midline degrees.
Not counting the games that colleges play, you go to college as a scheduled flow of the information, and hopefully to claw our way out of trouble if you start to slip. Let's assume good profs and office hours, etc.
Also, college is just about raw processing time to learn a couple of fields. Coming out of high school it's easy to fall into the Pink Floyd "we don't need no education" bit that seems to drive this article. Go to college even for a little and see all the weird fields you never even know existed. (Weather variance hedge securities!? Black Swan Silent Evidence Information Modeling!? Psychological History!? Forensic Anthropology? Long Tail and Freemium Economic Theory!?)
Elsewhere there was that article about the guy who thought he proved the hailstone theory, except he didn't take advantage of college resources to vet it, and he's now skunked on the net for a flawed paper. College is supposed to partially prevent you from turning into Timecube Guy.
Hmm, there isn't exactly too much email, it's about what people expect of different type of email.
Gmail(&others) has "mark as read", so we have escaped read receipts because that isn't even correlated to if the email has even been read. I let people send me whatever they want. Half the time I crusade about not getting enough info since I am on lead for documenting stuff. So send me stuff! It's easy to just park it as "document later."
As for the status, I will encourage people to use the Gmail (or other?) Chat Status as their dynamic status marker. Put anything you want there! Baseball results, coordinate pizza parties, monday blues. That means it doesn't send an email as a "status".
Hey, if you're not a genius, figure out something to do with yourself.
A combo I have seen work a lot and I somehow grew into is someone with a Line Job and a Minor in IT. Sure, you leave the weird network stuff to the hotshot, but you can sorta keep the office running answering helpdesk stuff. Then you go back to your regular job.
Accountants end up with this pair a lot because accounting software is some of the trickiest in the business. (You mean Job Cost didn't post because we're more than two accounting months out? Oh. Right. Let's go visit the CFO and hope he doesn't bite my head off!)
Though I am more of a management techinal admin, but the mix is the same. In a small company, being a HelpDesk guy keeps the load off the hotshot IT guy.
The reasons why the theorem may matter is that the notion of a "reasonable" number may not hold up to the quantities of throughput that happen at chip speeds. Think of stack carry-through register operations. On a 64 core chip when all that integrates it may not hold at 10^16 or something with a race condition threatened.
These simple proofs are like Debian - by itself it's unconfigured so it won't play proprietary stuff. But they can be combined to form other results.
As a superfast dirty guess, there's a computing application here somewhere. The conjecture itself deals with binary division, and the +1 part of the other rule has something to do with a power of 2 result being one more than an odd number next to it.
Fast guesses for apps have to do with lowbyte-highbyte number encoding, etc as well as a bunch of other stuff. (Failsafes in fuzzy-AI feel like they are in there somewhere too.)
"Undefined" is math's polite way of saying it's illegal. (Think about it, semantically how can something not be defined?)
Division by Zero is the famous step in those classic 1=2 proofs. Basically, once you allow it in a sequence of operations everything afterward is pure nonsense.
You can either browse them on the site by topic, or even play the fun lottery game I found called "guess the ID number". I'll get you guys started: 8 10 11 13 15 19 21 22 25 30 35 40 41 54 55 56 58 61 63 75 80 81 86 91 92 100 101.
They made the books absolutely as clean as they could, no DRM, it extracts to text for podcasting, and so on. However we have a surprising number of people in the thread under their logged in names saying "meh, it's not a torrent so I can't share it".
We have a variant of the True Scotsman fallacy going on here. This is literally a Million Dollar archive (assuming new horrid academic prices of some $250 average per book). But 30% of the thread comments are "why is this not a torrent?". And there's the secret. Lots of torrenters don't ever plan to exhaust the materials in their torrent. They just like having it like collecting mushrooms in a video game.
"*There are a small number of older reports that never had PDF files and therefore, those reports are not available for download. In addition, there are contractual requirements that preclude NAP from offering some PDF files for free. Those include... books in the Joseph Henry Press imprint."
Their stern language is mostly Anti-Troll. It's about making sure that idiots don't doctor up copies that then somehow get viral exposure thus leaving them to counter 50 media calls about "why does your book say that?"
They encourage pointing friends to direct links. You can make download-link pointer pages. If your friend wants a hard copy, you "make it for him" as a service transaction. "I'll make you a copy from Kinkos for the price of the materials".
Slashdot Mirror
Oh, of course.
I used a little humor. But yes, you absolutely have a clear case - you submit something in an intelligent style, and the first pass no one notices, until it accidentally gets picked up and then they slam the original creator.
What for example if that math paper that got hosed last week was *spoofed*? It's bad enough if the original author goofed, but since he got pulverized for "not checking", what if it was a classy defamation attack?
Because this is an Author Tag! (Cue the Serious Stern Face.)
Of course twerps can claim stuff. So far people can just laugh stuff off.
Now the obvious use of the tag is for the copyright police... they're gonna try to make the author tag a statement almost akin to under oath. So all those tv show clips on youtube that don't have the network=author tag are instant slam-bait.
But now the more dangerous case is when Da Gov wants to do False Flag cases, and posts pics of Democrats sharing lingerie, and they put "Author=___Congressman", they fire it away as a "political hit and run" and leave him explaining to the masses that "it wasn't him, I didn't lick".
Remember all these break-in cases? If the hacker breaks into your account, and posts stuff on your account with you as the Author, same thing. "Dammit, that's not my Brittany-CookieMonster mashup!"
In short, by making a tag out of it all, it's a case of something truly awful.
Canary it.
"Moving, Moving, Moving, STOPPED for no reason."
How Foursquare? "I really like Mile 37 on the highway. You GOTTA see the AWESOME tree!"
See, that's exactly the problem.
When you switch off an OS you have to examine the entire ecosystem effect. Because XP was the only sane choice for EIGHT YEARS that's what Windows computing grew up with.
Suddenly Win7 hasn't really been out that long, and the early reports of Windows 8 are dubious, so it does suddenly seem like they're trying to make continued use of XP painful like a Pavlov experiment.
I won't switch off XP until the upgrade path through *Windows 9* has shaken out. MS is thrashing pretty badly lately, so I don't want to get caught in the Zune of OS decisions until MS figures themselves out again.
The full power of the Copyright SWAT team. Or Slander & Libel.
Summarizing you, you're talking about putting Respected_Author tags on 4chan posts.
Oh dear me, am I missing something?
So you can totally spoof random people's names into any webpage? So searches for author=Obama come up with doctored pics of Osama-Obama slash or something?
I'll try going up the chain to ask about .net
If they do decide to ditch .net, which last I knew was at least half decent, do you think they have a game plan for a legit successor framework? Or will the devs have to learn yet another environment for Windows 9?
Doesn't that become a hidden cost of dev wear and tear?
Let's suppose Microsoft lurches again and the WinPhoneEsque interface is as obnoxious as the demos make it seem so far.
I set about a "twilight" policy on XP waiting for MS to churn through their bad beta copies of the OS until they made a couple versions with a future. The neat thing about what eventually ended up with XP is that unlike EndOfLife-ing Win98 and even Win2000 was pretty easy, because of the Vista disaster, the entire world has spent eight years on XP where computing essentially came of age. That legacy won't go away for decades.
But what IS the ideal upgrade? (Allow me some visual thinking)
Win2000 -> WinXP ; Pretty simple all things considered.
WinXP -> ____ What?
Vista = broken beta
Win7 = reports coming in as "almost usable" ; Maybe status.
Win8 = "The ugly rectangles, they hurt my eyes!" (Plus some stuff looks like it's deprecating fast!?)
Also watch them put more half-baked middleware tech that ends up becoming Vista Revisited.
Do we really have to wait until Windows *9* to know for sure??
Once again Rush beat us to it by 20 years.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XcYP5XP0Rlk
Rush - Supercondutor
"If we wanted to" we could be making leaps in AI. However that would require it shifting from the subconsciously scary area it is now to a National Priority.
We play True Scotsman games on AI. We keep shifting the rules every time a goal is reached.
Huge swaths of life are easy to model. IBM's results are more sudden than your "slow gradual" metric. Chess was the game Comp Sci "grew up on". It took thousands of programmers 30 years to merge into the results they have now. In contrast, IBM just showed up sorta out of the blue and said "Hi. We want to play a game. We'll start with *champions*".
Now they're doing diagnostics as good (or better?) than doctors? The article is a polite way to say that 12 years of med training is being shadowed by a piece of software that anyone can have in three years when Moore catches up on the hardware side.
It takes a lot of work to become a competent person. While we're being distracted by the **AA, we're forgetting that copying works on AI !! So (with a nod to Steve Jackson) all we need is a Generic Universal AI System and just add modules.
He gets at least a +1 Funny mods!
(But metamods always get the comments "mod up parent")
Wow, I hadn't thought of him, but you're right, he passed on.
(Age 62 to some bacterial infection.)
It's the ever eternal push between revenue and purity.
Really though, Florian Mueller and Galen Grumen have signed some nice deals that keep getting limelight.
Slashdot is posting articles lately that force the commenters to fix the damn articles. That's starting to grate on me.
Yep.
You go to college to eat and pay rent. It's a calculated gamble of which major has the best ROI.
You study the fun topics on your own time.
Also, I'm a bit disturbed by the comments all the way down to here. Cue the 10 exceptions to the rule, silent are the thousands who could have gotten midline jobs with midline degrees.
Not counting the games that colleges play, you go to college as a scheduled flow of the information, and hopefully to claw our way out of trouble if you start to slip. Let's assume good profs and office hours, etc.
Also, college is just about raw processing time to learn a couple of fields. Coming out of high school it's easy to fall into the Pink Floyd "we don't need no education" bit that seems to drive this article. Go to college even for a little and see all the weird fields you never even know existed. (Weather variance hedge securities!? Black Swan Silent Evidence Information Modeling!? Psychological History!? Forensic Anthropology? Long Tail and Freemium Economic Theory!?)
Elsewhere there was that article about the guy who thought he proved the hailstone theory, except he didn't take advantage of college resources to vet it, and he's now skunked on the net for a flawed paper. College is supposed to partially prevent you from turning into Timecube Guy.
That's because the best humor is viciously insightful.
Hmm, there isn't exactly too much email, it's about what people expect of different type of email.
Gmail(&others) has "mark as read", so we have escaped read receipts because that isn't even correlated to if the email has even been read. I let people send me whatever they want. Half the time I crusade about not getting enough info since I am on lead for documenting stuff. So send me stuff! It's easy to just park it as "document later."
As for the status, I will encourage people to use the Gmail (or other?) Chat Status as their dynamic status marker. Put anything you want there! Baseball results, coordinate pizza parties, monday blues. That means it doesn't send an email as a "status".
Hey, if you're not a genius, figure out something to do with yourself.
A combo I have seen work a lot and I somehow grew into is someone with a Line Job and a Minor in IT. Sure, you leave the weird network stuff to the hotshot, but you can sorta keep the office running answering helpdesk stuff. Then you go back to your regular job.
Accountants end up with this pair a lot because accounting software is some of the trickiest in the business. (You mean Job Cost didn't post because we're more than two accounting months out? Oh. Right. Let's go visit the CFO and hope he doesn't bite my head off!)
Though I am more of a management techinal admin, but the mix is the same. In a small company, being a HelpDesk guy keeps the load off the hotshot IT guy.
"Hi. You claimed to deliver a package but didn't. I have my 12 hour front door footage to prove it."
Hi AC.
The reasons why the theorem may matter is that the notion of a "reasonable" number may not hold up to the quantities of throughput that happen at chip speeds. Think of stack carry-through register operations. On a 64 core chip when all that integrates it may not hold at 10^16 or something with a race condition threatened.
These simple proofs are like Debian - by itself it's unconfigured so it won't play proprietary stuff. But they can be combined to form other results.
As a superfast dirty guess, there's a computing application here somewhere. The conjecture itself deals with binary division, and the +1 part of the other rule has something to do with a power of 2 result being one more than an odd number next to it.
Fast guesses for apps have to do with lowbyte-highbyte number encoding, etc as well as a bunch of other stuff. (Failsafes in fuzzy-AI feel like they are in there somewhere too.)
Their server is decent too. Considering they survived a slashdotting without blinking, I'm already up to a gig with about 300 books.
"Undefined" is math's polite way of saying it's illegal. (Think about it, semantically how can something not be defined?)
Division by Zero is the famous step in those classic 1=2 proofs. Basically, once you allow it in a sequence of operations everything afterward is pure nonsense.
You're on to something.
You can either browse them on the site by topic, or even play the fun lottery game I found called "guess the ID number". I'll get you guys started:
8 10 11 13 15 19 21 22 25 30 35 40 41 54 55 56 58 61 63 75 80 81 86 91 92 100 101.
They made the books absolutely as clean as they could, no DRM, it extracts to text for podcasting, and so on. However we have a surprising number of people in the thread under their logged in names saying "meh, it's not a torrent so I can't share it".
We have a variant of the True Scotsman fallacy going on here. This is literally a Million Dollar archive (assuming new horrid academic prices of some $250 average per book). But 30% of the thread comments are "why is this not a torrent?". And there's the secret. Lots of torrenters don't ever plan to exhaust the materials in their torrent. They just like having it like collecting mushrooms in a video game.
I think I saw a "continue as guest" option but really, just sign up and get some street cred in the academic circles.
"*There are a small number of older reports that never had PDF files and therefore, those reports are not available for download. In addition, there are contractual requirements that preclude NAP from offering some PDF files for free. Those include ... books in the Joseph Henry Press imprint."
Your example is in the Joseph Henry imprint.
Their stern language is mostly Anti-Troll. It's about making sure that idiots don't doctor up copies that then somehow get viral exposure thus leaving them to counter 50 media calls about "why does your book say that?"
They encourage pointing friends to direct links. You can make download-link pointer pages. If your friend wants a hard copy, you "make it for him" as a service transaction. "I'll make you a copy from Kinkos for the price of the materials".