"Can the entire distribution of scholastic aptitude be accounted for by just one general factor?"
Seriously? I mean: seriously? Are we really debating indexes (as in "statistics") and whether they are meaningful? Whoa. Way to go, folks. Words fail me. And here I thought, at least scientists would get the idea of abstracting a complex construct into a single metric.
"Tech for a Small Liberation Army". %-)
Damn campers.
What about "ace" - that's in "facebook", too. Or "ok"?
That, my friend, is called "anecdotal evidence". I doubt that it is much better than no evidence at all.
To quote Jed Bartlet: decisions are made by those who show up.
Of course if the other 94% of the players don't know they should show up, there might be a problem.
This does raise a good question: What is a necessary amount of porn?
And what is porn? And who gets to decide this? Some Las Vegas entrepreneur or a born-again from the bible belt?
The fun thing is: with the selection bias due to how/where the poll is conducted the results may even be accurate. Despite illusory superiority and all that.
Other than the bare physical layer, you will want to think about restoring and reusing the data at some point in the future when the software used to generate the data is no longer available. What good is a RAID 5 of a couple Gigs of data when you can't use it? Or don't know what the data actually meant?
I don't think their search boxes not being big enough is the main improvement they need to work on.
In fact, there is empirical evidence that supports your idea: the average web search query is about 3 words long (depending on which search engine was examined, this varies +- 1 or so).
For example, see this paper: http://portal.acm.org/citation.cfm?id=281250.281253&coll=ACM&dl=ACM&CFID=68253875&CFTOKEN=24736044
I studied in Mexico for a while and it is quite common for many people, especially kids, to go to the neighborhood Internet cafe and pay a small fee to use their computers.
There are places where there is no neighborhood, let alone an internet cafe. This is why the XO has mesh Wifi.
1.) These are poor countries and the devices may be lost/stolen/sold to pay for essentials of life
There wouldn't be any market if everybody had an OLPC and it would be only good for learning.
2.) Not likely to have Internet access at home, may not even have reliable electricity
See above: mesh wifi.
Where would the CPU get the randomness from? Out of thin air?
I don't know if it's just in Information Retrieval or also in other branches of CS, but in IR journals are less prestigious than conferences. So, your first try, in general, is submitting it at a conference. You have to pay admittance to the conference, but I haven't had to waive my copyright yet.
Plagiarism in academics is not a legal problem, but an ethical one. And the tool of choice is a publication. If you can prove that a given text fragment is yours because it first appeared in your paper, then every uncredited quotation will be frowned upon. Nobody checks "the copyright" for this even today. If you use a colleagues text in your paper without properly giving credit for it, that's bad even without an IP lawyer being involved.
I guess the problem is you still have to buy the paper. I don't get the copyright-claim fear cited in TFS, either. For me, it's the idea of having to pay a publisher with tax-money to get access to a paper that one's own government has already paid for, what is ridiculous.
The only difference between a car salesman and a computer salesman is that the car salesman knows he's lying.
