I'd buy that for a dollar!
Just so long as they don't ever get involved in Olympic security:
"You have 20 seconds to put down the gun"
"You have 20 seconds to put down the gun"
108 publicly visible posts • joined 25 Jun 2010
Those that say that e.g. " the real cost of publishing ... concerns finding appropriate peer reviewers, editors and proofreaders" because those services are provided free to the journal publisher by academics. Except proofreading, which is all but nonexistent.
Who would have thought that you could make so much money by employing highly qualified people (writers, reviewers etc) for free?
" A Foveon sensor will record it in either the red channel or the green channel, depending on the wavelength, and can't know that it's all gone wrong."
Apart from sodium vapour lamps, no naturally occurring colours are single wavelengths. So an orange light, which actually spreads all the way from say 450nm to 700nm, to varying degrees, will be picked up by both the red and green channels (maybe even the blue, a little). You should be able to calculate a fairly accurate CIE XYZ coordinates from that, which is all you need for colour reproduction.
Otherwise, not interested. Any camera costing more than £200 is too much for me.
Even if they did decide to teach real programming, you can be sure that before you're allowed to write the program, you'll have to
a) Write a full specification for it like the pros do
b) Decide which programming methodology to follow - waterfall, agile etc.
c) Finally write something that doesn't work
d) be graded on a & b, with scant regard for the fact that it didn't work.
Now, apart from the fact that this is good training for working on a large government IT contract, it just isn't how people get _interested_ in programming.
And in case you think this won't happen, my son did a woodwork project where actually making the object was less than 25% of the overall work.
"Even if counterfeit smart cards hadn't existed, it wouldn't have made any difference"
Maybe so, but that misses the point that if Sky colluded with a code-breaking and piracy operation against one of its competitors, even one as incompetent as ONdigital, then what they did was completely illegal.
This is the killer: lack of feedback. "Even while the airline was plunging to earth at 10,000 feet per minute, the pilots were not certain whether it was climbing or falling"
For some reason the pilots were unable to figure out the direction of the most important vector a plane has. Most of the blame here has to go to the avionics and the UI. Pilots can be trained to overcome these issues, but once stress kicks in the extra intellectual effort needed to decipher a poor display simply disappears.
>>After not playing for the second week, the effects were diminished, but not eliminated entirely.
"These findings indicate that violent video game play has a long-term effect on brain functioning," Wang concluded.<<
Since when has one week been defined as long term. Did Dr Wang stop the study at two weeks just in case that the effect would vanish completely at three weeks? The answer, folks, is yes.
I don't see how getting rid of one source of error is enough for a press release. Surely they should wait until they've eliminated all sources of error? After all, science isn't a desperate attempt to grab headlines with iffy results.
No, wait, it is.
[Paris, because she's a desperate attempt to grab headlines]
Well, a variant of the Fermi paradox makes it even more likely that we're alone. If we make a robot probe which a) flies to the nearest star and then b) builds two copies of itself which then fly to the next stars, you can see that once one is built, it won't take long for copies of it to have visited every star in the galaxy (basically just the width of the galaxy (100,000 light years) divided by the flight speed (with magnetic ramjets, a decent fraction of c). If 1/10 c is the best on offer, it would only take 1 million years for these probes to visit every star, including ours.
Hence, alone.
The problem is also that the market for patents is being flooded with essentially worthless ones (swipe to unlock anyone) that nonetheless can cause a great deal of trouble. Quite a bit like all those CDOs, doncha think?
The only winners here are the lawyers. Again, a bit like the financial bubble too.
I said in the pub a year ago that if nokia brought out an android phone, I'd pay a lot to have it. Windows, not so much. I like windows on desktops, but it always seems a bit clunky. Windows phone is better, but not enough.
OK I said it in a pub, so it's not like it has any value or anything. But now I'm sober I stand by it.
1) It focuses on one cause of death. Even if cancer was increased by drinking, maybe strokes or heart disease are decreased? You'd never know. Some big studies show that all-risks death rates are lower for what the NHS would call heavy drinkers (and what the rest of us would consider normal).
2) It lumps all alcohol together, even though some studies also show that wine is better for you, beer is pretty much neutral, and spirits worse.
3) Even if the relative risk was different from 1 (say 2 or so) this still wouldn't amount to very much change in the actual death rate, because it's quite low. You'd have a better impact on your lifespan by being careful when you drive a car, than giving up alcohol.
Try this:
public class Human {
public void setHumourLevel(int level) { ... }
}
public class JavaProgrammer extends Human {
...
}
JavaProgrammer KKaria = new JavaProgrammer();
// obviously not new as in novice.
KKaria.setHumourLevel(10)
Might help a little, though you could throw an out of range exception.
That quote:
"There is nothing about the actions of a madman to change the fact that firearms have been used throughout our history to defend American values and traditions."
must surely have been cut short. It should have read:
"There is nothing about the actions of a madman to change the fact that firearms have been used throughout our history to defend American values and traditions. Yeee-hawr!!!"
I agree that the education system in America is bad. How else could you get to be CEO of a major corporation (Cisco) and still not know what an inflection point is. It could either be a momentary halt in a growth curve or a momentary halt in a decline curve. But it can't mean what he thinks it's supposed to mean - i.e. a turning point, at which you decide to go one way or another. I guess he just thinks "inflection" is a cooler way of saying "turning", in which case he failed English too.