In the long run, my money is on Mandarin.
I think you may have misspelt "Marain" :-)
399 posts • joined 9 Aug 2007
I think you may have misspelt "Marain" :-)
As an experiment, it /is/ an embodiment of the process of validating scientific models. If the experimental analogy works, we all cheer; if it fails, we try to work out why.
I don't doubt that in many cases what you say is true.
However, if one was to believe the well-known quotation: "Give me six lines written by the most honest man in the world, and I will find enough in them to hang him.", then replace "me" by the employer in question, you might also consider that such "delete" actions might just show an element of caution.
As a long time slackware user, headlines referring to some newfangled "slack" thing/app are also irritating, since they are both IT-ish. It's not that I don't quickly get the new context, it's just that "slack" generates a sort of brain interrupt that I could do without unless the article really was slackware related (like, when 14.2 is finally announced, or something).
" I'm going to guess that they applied the film to someone's hand and that the red color you're seeing is the actual sheet itself. "
Your guess is consistent with the relevant figure caption in the article "Images of CuEW-TCEs (duration of the first electrospinning stage t1st = 30 s) transferred to a human hand and ..."
I read that some smaller shareholders were forced to sell once a sufficient majority agreed; they might well be aggrieved at being short changed even if voluntary sellers shouldn't be.
This was covered either in an earlier (semi-recent) Reg article or its comments thread.
I saw the other day a poster for the sequel to Independence Day ... and remembered how ludicrous it seemed that some random ape could hack into a vast starship built by aggressive and intelligent Alien Things, and sabotage it so easily.
But nowadays it seems much more believable :-)
Only because it's parasitic on existing infrastructure. One could hardly say the internet didn't/doesn't require money and sophisticated manufacturing and maintenance capabilities... just that the cyberattackers don't have to pay for it.
Indeed. Only if systemd is killing nohup'd processes is it really misbehaving IMO (although I accept that modern expectations may differ, and notwithstanding systemd's other misbehaviness).
For myself, I can't see it as useful in any sense beyond the superficial. OK, so I suppose some of the shorter emails that I send might be twitterable. But 140 chars is way to short for me to have any kind of technical conversation, even given that a technical conversation is likely to include mathematics of some kind.
I can see how you might do PR for science via twitter, that would work well. But science PR isn't the science itself - even a one page press release on a result isn't science, so however apt the analogy you might use in your tweet (or pr) still isn't a fair representation. Which is not to say the twitterpr is worthless, just that it's a very distinct thing to the necessarily detailed science itself.
Science publishing might be broken to some extent, but I fail to see how any valid scientific article can be usefully replicated on twitter or social media - it seems to me that whatever the failings of journal-style articles, whether in traditional journals or not, twitter is not a replacement. It seems to me you have conflated the actual scientific content with the pr/publicity you would like to achieve for that content.
The conference thing is interesting. For myself, I just read/skim the timetable from the conference site and look up the authors or work independently. Twitter/hashtags might give a sense of 'buzz' around some particularly noteworthy result, which I guess might be helpful. But my projects tend to run over timescales that incline me to prefer to avoid obvious bandwagons and seek out still interesting but less trodden paths. I skim a much wider range of article/conference output than is ever likely to even microtrend on twitter.
oh, very good.
... and not only that, it is very likely possible to combine them in the wrong way so as to enhance any correlations (or make new ones) and so make the randomness worse.
... or, as the article posits, possibly wrenched back from someone else's terminal event...
That gave me a most brilliant idea for a research paper on Quantum Steganography, only I now see that someone's already done it. But I suppose that technically the topic here is anti-steganography, so maybe there's still an angle...
Perhaps the extra hundred+ hours were for grinding it down from a normal sized axe to a tiny micro-axe.
A quick bit of searching confirms my recollection that the Neanderthals had a range in europe/central asia, see e.g.
Not sure what Homo thingius lot might have predated the current native-Australian population, if any. But afaict, not Neanderthals.
The Reg article says "Lead author Simon Chapman, emeritus professor in public health at the University of Sydney, explains at The Conversation..." - i.e. the article in the Conversation was written one of the researchers who worked on the study and wrote the scientific article under discussion. Unless anyone on the Reg is a cancer specialist of some kind it's debatable whether reading the original research article would have helped.
It might be said, however, that the Reg could have contacted some other researcher in the same general field to get an (alternate) opinion.
Is there something about the original research you want to know in particular?
Actually, I think I prefer that even to Boaty McBoatface.
Can we get the voting reopened?
So, we need someone to develop a "write-once" filesystem? Although I suppose even that fs could be subverted, given suitable system privileges, by installing a hacked rw version of the same and mounting (and then altering) the backups filesystem with it.
OK, so all (suitably paranoid) backups should only be to write-once media, then?
I agree there are 10 types of people, but I would like to suggest a small correction. The list is: those who understand binary, those who dont, ... and those who understand Gray code.
Here's an interesting discussion of old astronomical records, and how to preserve them... and their annotations.
The Scientific and Historical Value of Annotations on Astronomical Photographic Plates
Sara J. Schechner, David H. Sliski
The application of photography to astronomy was a critical step in the development of astrophysics at the end of the nineteenth century. Using custom-built photographic telescopes and objective prisms, astronomers took images of the sky on glass plates during a 100-year period from many observing stations around the globe. After each plate was developed, astronomers and their assistants studied and annotated the plates as they made astrometric, photometric and spectroscopic measurements, counted galaxies, observed stellar variability, tracked meteors, and calculated the ephemerides of asteroids and comets. In this paper, the authors assess the importance of the plate annotations for future scientific, historical, and educational programs. Unfortunately, many of these interesting annotations are now being erased when grime is removed from the plates before they are digitized to make the photometric data available for time-domain astrophysics. To see what professional astronomers and historians think about this situation, the authors conducted a survey. This paper captures the lively discussion on the pros and cons of the removal of plate markings, how to best to document them if they must be cleaned off, and what to do with plates whose annotations are deemed too valuable to be erased. Three appendices to the paper offer professional guidance on the best practices for handling and cleaning the plates, photographing any annotations, and rehousing them.
quote: "the inner platinum layer decomposes hydrogen peroxide for self-propulsion"
So, with 2 H2O2 -> 2H2O + O2, presumably the bubbles of oxygen are produced in a way/position so as to push the thing one way (or at least move it around a bit more than otherwise).
More to the point, is there some way to see the rocket better, using portrait? These widescreen formats are just terrible for rocket take-off/landing videos :)
Presumably, pocket computers are "vastly more powerful than pocket computers were before", not " vastly more powerful than current desktops".
So, my 3D electromagnetic simulations /aren't/ maxing out the cpu on my workstation after all? And I don't have to wait for them to finish?
perhaps: s/anybody/most users/
Maybe in about 10 years time, or longer, you'll find out. It might be that these turn out to be a barely remembered oddity, or alternatively they might make the new/next generation of it-types go all misty eyed in the same way as many here do about zx81's, speccy's or Beebs.
Seems to me it's worth a shot at giving kids an easier route to poking about under the shiny graphical eye candy...
Perhaps with the right metadata, and a diverse enough distribution of 8 second clips, you could automatically glue them all back-to-back in the right order and watch the whole game, or most of it :-)
... there's a fair number of other stories written by Leinster on gutenberg, if anyone (else :) is interested in reading some creaky old sf.
I think you need to read the article more carefully, you appear not to have understood what was done.
... something that will be coming soon, to a weekend near you.
Usually scientists don't get to referee their own grant applications.
IME of fortran, most (almost all) weird heisenbugs were due to out-of-bound array references or data size mismatches. Except for the one that turned out to be due to tiny differences in numerical integration, combined with (crossing or not) the branch cut in the complex square root function.
I'll print myself a fake fingerprint, and carry it around to unlock my phone. Then anyone who copies and then tries to use my actual fingerprints will be wasting their time! :-)
I have no idea, but I do remember playing the occasional game of Bosconian there.
n log(92) > (n+1) log(62)
n (log(92)-log(62)) > log(62)
n > log(62) / (log(92)-log(62))
n >= 11 (for integer n)
Did you mean 92^n > 62^(n+1) ?
And what sort of revenge is it the humans have planned, do you think?
... indeed, toasters etc will soon come with integrated powerline networking :-)
But how do they determine "metered"? If my ISP charges per byte between my router and 'net, how (or why) would this necessarily manifest on some hypothetical W10 machine talking (only) via the router?
Does "metered" really mean "mobile/data"?
on that adobe article's byline :-)
... albeit with the occasional added bug or two, if current evidence is anything to go by... :-)
Elsevier do do open access, in at least some of their journals. The authors have to pay them a wodge of money (perhaps £1k - £2k) for that. But it's a not dissimilar sum of money (albeit a bit larger IME) as for the same deal/service in a scholarly society journal such as PRL or NJP.
Scholarly societies already do this - the Institute of Physics has a substantial publication business, for example, as do the US equivalents. Universities could, but as far as I recall mostly they stick to book publishing rather than journals.
From what I read (skimmed) of the work, that isn't addressed in the study.
I just skimmed the article, and it seemed fairly carefully argued; my guess would be its status is more like "not peer reviewed yet", or "in the process of peer review", rather than "not up to peer review standards".
This is not to say that it is beyond reproach, just that to me it shouldn't be dismissed out of hand. And since the text is freely available, you can read it and then make whatever specific technical criticism you feel is relevant.
Becasue you can keep it disconnected from your heating system, and feed it fake data? It'd be like the heating version of those timers you use to turns lights etc on & off to make the house look less unoccupied. :-)
That's a bit hair shirt for me. I prefer this newfangled "mutt" email program I found...
Wow! What kind of presentations do you make that need integrated smartplugs? It'll take libreoffice presenter & latex/beamer a while to catch up with that one :-)