Try installing or maintaining most Linux distros with a air gap. Not only do most distros assume a internet connection, but they assume that you don't mind big downloads all the time. Tools to keep it up to date without a internet connections just are not out there.
The good news is that so far the media companies have demonstrated there ineptitude for picking at peer reviewed algorithms. So far everything they have tried has been trivially broken or almost trivially broken. Its the difference between using cryptography folk over engineers.
And how do you know that it wasn't a parent that brought the whole thing to the administrators attention? Also I do believe that they have a right to be facebook users as well. What if they just ran into the pictures by chance? They have a obligation to do something.
Engineering(Electrical), navigation, communications, GIS and now just 100% pure scientific programming. I did do some Web stuff and databases with the banks, and hated it. The general level of code for that company was also very low.
It really does depend on what you do. But do we really want universities just to push out programmer lackeys or fully trained Computer Scientist? I think that was TFA point. That universities are not just training trade folk. They need to be capable of more senior level science when they finish there degree. That means at least some basic math.
Remember that I am talking quite basic math really. Only one level up from high school. I like so see that people at least know how to solve a system of linear equations using say linpack for example. Or at least knows enough math to know what to look up for more complicated problems. All just IMHO of course.
I guess i depends on what you do. I have used it a lot in programing. ie PID controllers and kinematics etc. Calculus really means to calculate (kind of). I used it as a example because its more practical than some other branches of math. Note that linear algebra is related to basic calculus. Even a GPS program i worked on needed proper spherical geometry corrections that the other programmers just didn't get.
My programing experience was 100% self taught in physics. You have a experiment/problem to solve. You get marked on the answer not the code. Fortunately I learnt reasonably good coding style, but dam my supervisor would win a C obfuscation contest in matlab! The newer generation are defiantly better at producing readable code.
When employing people in the past, I have not considered them from lack of mathematics. Calculus is in fact used a lot, and is very necessary in many areas that involve programming. This is why I often favor Math and Physics Majors for programing work. The understand the problem, not just the programming. Hell even game programing often needs basic calculus (Thats above High School level).
As someone who programs mainly in java, I have to say they have a point. Surely a degree in CS should get someone familiar with all forms of higher order programing (both OO and functional). They should also have a reasonably solid understanding of basic hardware architecture and how that affects programs.
Unfortunately this does not seem to be the case at least in NZ. Some don't even know about basic complexity ideas and often have little to zero mathematics under there belt.
I did not do CS but physics. I was required to do Assembly,basic,C,matlab,R,Lisp,Java,C++,Haskell and a bunch of others I don't care to mention (Like PLC's and FPGA stuff).
Well this is/. When I troll or flam I get modded informative (including all the spelling errors). I take my time and craft a carefully worded and researched reply and i get modded offtopic|troll|flambait|overrated . But i find a totally random modding is not so bad really. Don't panic, we all know that the mods that a post does not reflect its quality or lack thereof.
The jury is made up of people who weren't smart enough to get out of jury duty Can't remember where the quote came from and can't be bothered googling.
And you saying its not credible makes it un-credible because you are credible? Please back up your claim.
Over half of the people survived the crash. How many survive 747 crashes? Perhaps the 100+ tons of JET fuel in the wings and under the floor is not safer than hydrogen after all?
This is the norm for scientific papers; you can get the raw data by writing to the authors or the journal. Not when the sample size is so dam small. This is not the norm outside medical circles. I would cut the "preliminary" findings apart if I was reviewing it. When I'm involved (often now with cross discipline work) the data would appear in tabulated form or as supplementary material. Readers and reviews should have all the data needed to be able to find any mistakes. Getting the raw data from author should not be required as when you ask the data is often not available by then or they just take a long time to "get around to it".
Your kind of criticism is what I mean by "scientific illiteracy": you miss the technical details of the data analysis, and you don't understand what the conclusions are actually saying. I do this for a living at university. I get good reviews on my papers and I frequently consult on the statistics in other literature. A lot of Medical research is sloppy at best and this "preliminary" result is a good example of that and is very typical of "radiation" studies.
Which part of small sample size don't you understand? Wheres the bootstrap/jackknife. How do I know that the results aren't caused by outliers? etc. All could be solved with either making the data available (just a table of 71 rows!) or not making the claim in the first place.
The Data is missing. Only summary statistics are presented. If you know your statistics you will know why this is a problem. The group size give problems for statistical power in the result.
If the teacher also had a recording? This is unfortunately the best answer I can come up with. At many places of work there is 24/7 survalence. Its a public place (more or less) so there really is no expectation of privacy. Have the room recorded or taped for both the students and teachers.
At a movie theater that i worked they put cameras everywhere. Its was the only proof I had that I didn't take the money that management accused me of taking (3000 dollars). So its saved me once.
Its not a perfect solution, but i can't see anything else working really. Some type of digital watermarking to make forging hard would be nice. But then again I don't know of any workable scheme at this stage.
Well I didn't review this paper. But i do review quite a few in a year... Just as quite a few of my papers get reviewed.
In this particular paper there is not enough information to replicate the results. As per other posts in here.
If you are in science you will no doubt be aware of the different standards or "cultures" in different fields. Some of the medline stuff is bad. Drawing conclusions when you are in the noise is not publishable as results. Note the data is still publishable, just not unsupported conclusions.
There are almost never enough details in any experimental scientific paper to know whether the experimenters handled the experiment properly or not. I sorry but you are wrong here. Many journals require that there is enough details to independently replicate the results from the paper and references. All my papers have this level of detail. Proper statistical analysis of the results are mandatory in many/most fields of science.
Unfortunately in medical research circles your claim is very accurate. Most of the Med paper I have read don't do statistical analysis because the results are insignificant due to the very small sample size and lack of other effects being considered.
Calling bad science bad is justified and claiming that its OK because thats the way its done is bunk. Sensationalizing the results or claiming more certainty than the results give is IMO fraudulent science, unless done 100% by the media.
I'm with you in principle. I think that most folk here problably think the same. There is nothing wrong with copyright as a idea, but its the terms and the fair use provisons (or lack there of).
5 years sounds good to me. But if one comes up with a copyright term then it should be decided in a logical way. Futhermore i would like to corperations ablity to use patents and copyrights drasticaly reduced. Since the get a amount of liablitly protection that indidiuals don't get then well they should have some other rights reduced as well.
I always say that if the music is so bad why do people download it? And if folk think its really all crap, why do they even care about RIAA or Sony rookkits? Its not like it will affect them now is it.
Some of the bands that are comming out now are not that bad, and some are pretty good. IMO
In a world where C/C++ are still the dominate "fast" languages, your comments are falling on deaf ears. Lets face it, what we know from academics vers what we use commercially are so different. Most software projects are well over budget and over time and the resultant code full of bugs (its not just windows). Yet the industry still thinks that its some how working? Imagine car manufactures producing cars as reliable as OS?
But the other side of the coin is a lot of these higher languages simply don't have very mature compilers yet. The error messages are very cryptic and often not even correct. Example macros in Scheme. Is it the calling code thats wrong or a bug in the macro? What about when you have macros of macros. I remember having similar problems with Haskell. The bulk part of commercial programing is reasonably simple algorithms and the higher level languges haven't made sense yet.
Having said that, I believe the future (unfortunately distant) is higher level langs where the compilers and VM do all the work.
We are even further behind than that. We don't even understand regulation of a single cell. It will come, but its going to take a long time, require massive computing power and enormous amounts of data from the field.
Slashdot Mirror
Try installing or maintaining most Linux distros with a air gap. Not only do most distros assume a internet connection, but they assume that you don't mind big downloads all the time. Tools to keep it up to date without a internet connections just are not out there.
The good news is that so far the media companies have demonstrated there ineptitude for picking at peer reviewed algorithms. So far everything they have tried has been trivially broken or almost trivially broken. Its the difference between using cryptography folk over engineers.
And how do you know that it wasn't a parent that brought the whole thing to the administrators attention? Also I do believe that they have a right to be facebook users as well. What if they just ran into the pictures by chance? They have a obligation to do something.
I think you will its much closer to asking a very *finite* set of monkeys.
Engineering(Electrical), navigation, communications, GIS and now just 100% pure scientific programming. I did do some Web stuff and databases with the banks, and hated it. The general level of code for that company was also very low.
It really does depend on what you do. But do we really want universities just to push out programmer lackeys or fully trained Computer Scientist? I think that was TFA point. That universities are not just training trade folk. They need to be capable of more senior level science when they finish there degree. That means at least some basic math.
Remember that I am talking quite basic math really. Only one level up from high school. I like so see that people at least know how to solve a system of linear equations using say linpack for example. Or at least knows enough math to know what to look up for more complicated problems. All just IMHO of course.
I guess i depends on what you do. I have used it a lot in programing. ie PID controllers and kinematics etc. Calculus really means to calculate (kind of). I used it as a example because its more practical than some other branches of math. Note that linear algebra is related to basic calculus. Even a GPS program i worked on needed proper spherical geometry corrections that the other programmers just didn't get.
My programing experience was 100% self taught in physics. You have a experiment/problem to solve. You get marked on the answer not the code. Fortunately I learnt reasonably good coding style, but dam my supervisor would win a C obfuscation contest in matlab! The newer generation are defiantly better at producing readable code.
When employing people in the past, I have not considered them from lack of mathematics. Calculus is in fact used a lot, and is very necessary in many areas that involve programming. This is why I often favor Math and Physics Majors for programing work. The understand the problem, not just the programming. Hell even game programing often needs basic calculus (Thats above High School level).
There going to plenty of flames on this topic.
As someone who programs mainly in java, I have to say they have a point. Surely a degree in CS should get someone familiar with all forms of higher order programing (both OO and functional). They should also have a reasonably solid understanding of basic hardware architecture and how that affects programs.
Unfortunately this does not seem to be the case at least in NZ. Some don't even know about basic complexity ideas and often have little to zero mathematics under there belt.
I did not do CS but physics. I was required to do Assembly,basic,C,matlab,R,Lisp,Java,C++,Haskell and a bunch of others I don't care to mention (Like PLC's and FPGA stuff).
So what is your area of expertise again?
Hydrazine (H2N2) would be both a better fuel and better at cleaning you. Even the vapors will clean you!
Well this is /. When I troll or flam I get modded informative (including all the spelling errors). I take my time and craft a carefully worded and researched reply and i get modded offtopic|troll|flambait|overrated . But i find a totally random modding is not so bad really. Don't panic, we all know that the mods that a post does not reflect its quality or lack thereof.
And you saying its not credible makes it un-credible because you are credible? Please back up your claim.
Over half of the people survived the crash. How many survive 747 crashes? Perhaps the 100+ tons of JET fuel in the wings and under the floor is not safer than hydrogen after all?
Um, Helium does not become a liquid until it gets down to 4K (-269C). It never becomes a liquid in the suggested design.
Getting the raw data from author should not be required as when you ask the data is often not available by then or they just take a long time to "get around to it". Your kind of criticism is what I mean by "scientific illiteracy": you miss the technical details of the data analysis, and you don't understand what the conclusions are actually saying. I do this for a living at university. I get good reviews on my papers and I frequently consult on the statistics in other literature. A lot of Medical research is sloppy at best and this "preliminary" result is a good example of that and is very typical of "radiation" studies.
Which part of small sample size don't you understand? Wheres the bootstrap/jackknife. How do I know that the results aren't caused by outliers? etc. All could be solved with either making the data available (just a table of 71 rows!) or not making the claim in the first place.
Just what is your area of expertise?
The Data is missing. Only summary statistics are presented. If you know your statistics you will know why this is a problem. The group size give problems for statistical power in the result.
If the teacher also had a recording? This is unfortunately the best answer I can come up with. At many places of work there is 24/7 survalence. Its a public place (more or less) so there really is no expectation of privacy. Have the room recorded or taped for both the students and teachers.
At a movie theater that i worked they put cameras everywhere. Its was the only proof I had that I didn't take the money that management accused me of taking (3000 dollars). So its saved me once.
Its not a perfect solution, but i can't see anything else working really. Some type of digital watermarking to make forging hard would be nice. But then again I don't know of any workable scheme at this stage.
Well I didn't review this paper. But i do review quite a few in a year... Just as quite a few of my papers get reviewed.
In this particular paper there is not enough information to replicate the results. As per other posts in here.
If you are in science you will no doubt be aware of the different standards or "cultures" in different fields. Some of the medline stuff is bad. Drawing conclusions when you are in the noise is not publishable as results. Note the data is still publishable, just not unsupported conclusions.
Unfortunately in medical research circles your claim is very accurate. Most of the Med paper I have read don't do statistical analysis because the results are insignificant due to the very small sample size and lack of other effects being considered.
Calling bad science bad is justified and claiming that its OK because thats the way its done is bunk. Sensationalizing the results or claiming more certainty than the results give is IMO fraudulent science, unless done 100% by the media.
What is emc? I assume its some CNC controller software. Google did not bring up anything that looked like what you are talking about.
I'm with you in principle. I think that most folk here problably think the same. There is nothing wrong with copyright as a idea, but its the terms and the fair use provisons (or lack there of).
5 years sounds good to me. But if one comes up with a copyright term then it should be decided in a logical way. Futhermore i would like to corperations ablity to use patents and copyrights drasticaly reduced. Since the get a amount of liablitly protection that indidiuals don't get then well they should have some other rights reduced as well.
Well said.
I always say that if the music is so bad why do people download it? And if folk think its really all crap, why do they even care about RIAA or Sony rookkits? Its not like it will affect them now is it.
Some of the bands that are comming out now are not that bad, and some are pretty good. IMO
In a world where C/C++ are still the dominate "fast" languages, your comments are falling on deaf ears. Lets face it, what we know from academics vers what we use commercially are so different. Most software projects are well over budget and over time and the resultant code full of bugs (its not just windows). Yet the industry still thinks that its some how working? Imagine car manufactures producing cars as reliable as OS?
But the other side of the coin is a lot of these higher languages simply don't have very mature compilers yet. The error messages are very cryptic and often not even correct. Example macros in Scheme. Is it the calling code thats wrong or a bug in the macro? What about when you have macros of macros. I remember having similar problems with Haskell. The bulk part of commercial programing is reasonably simple algorithms and the higher level languges haven't made sense yet.
Having said that, I believe the future (unfortunately distant) is higher level langs where the compilers and VM do all the work.
We are even further behind than that. We don't even understand regulation of a single cell. It will come, but its going to take a long time, require massive computing power and enormous amounts of data from the field.