Comment Re:Political/Moral (Score 1) 305
OMG. It's economists all the way down....
OMG. It's economists all the way down....
Medicine isn't far behind. People have been complaining about this for years. It is bad/misused stats. The null hypothesis needs to be predicted by your theory. When people use the opposite the logic is messed up, yet this method has been spreading like a disease from educational research, to psychology, to the social sciences, to medicine/biology, and most recently to the historically better sciences of physics and astronomy. I do not know about chemistry.
Medicine and economics have some interesting similarities. They both rely heavily on statistical models since direct experimentation is either impossible or just Frowned Upon. Their practitioners almost uniformly don't really understand statistics (does anyone?). There is a lot of money riding on the outcome and for some odd reason, people seem to think that medicine and economics are important.
The big mistake that economists made is not to offer a special advanced degree in the field. Instead of 'Medical Doctor' they should have had schools devoted to "Doctor Of Outmost Money" or something like that.
Huh. The only 'scientifically valid' law that relates to economic theory is Murphy's Law.
Except these conglomerates were formed by beach humans burning wood and trash and plastic and having the latter melt into the rock. Unless the fish (or other aquatic denizens) are starting fires somewhere, it's not likely to be a general mechanism.
Water is typically considered to be theuniversal solvent rather than the 'ultimate' solvent. But the chemical reactions might take millennia. It's more likely that degradation is due to a combination of bacteria and perhaps UV light or other reactive chemical processes.
Till the Republicans can put forth a candidate that isn't a looney toon the Democrats won't have any incentive to do a thing for this country.
A looney toon would be an improvement. As long as it's not Harper, there are a number of Canadian politicians that would do better than Bush Jr / McCain / Palin / Milt or the rest of the crazies in the Republican primaries. Really guys, if Romney was the absolute best you could do and if anyone is even thinking about Bush III, the democrats are going to win no matter who they stuff up there.
Oh you are quite wrong. The ACA (Obamacare) is not a giveaway to the pharmaceutical industry. That would be very low. It is, in fact, a giveaway to the insurance industry. And the lawyers.
The insurance industry and lawyers are like the laws of thermodynamics - you can't win any battles with them, you can't even battle to a draw, and you have to play with them.
Yes, RAW does. A Nikon D800 RAW file is 36 MB or so. I use 16 GB cards in my cameras and really have trouble filling them in a whole day shooting. If you're shooting between 2 and 5 16 GB cards for still images on a daily you might want to review that. You're shooting too often. Slow down and look. Even if you're only editing 10% of that you have 9 GB of files - that's roughly 250 edited images on a daily basis.
You'll never get out of the basement alive.
I think the tin foil is finally getting to you. You're supposed to swath your body in it, not eat it.
Ah, a typography Nazi.
Slashdot never fails to impress.
90 GB per shoot? Hopefully you're doing 4K video, otherwise you need to work on shot discipline a bit. With that many files you'll never get out of the basement. It's just not healthy at all.
Stack 5 shots of a raw file from a D800 and you'll get to 2 GB, not quite 90
'
Of course there are no 'hard facts' - nothing has happened yet and both Adobe and Apple are renown for not being especially forthcoming.
Yes, Hogan (along with half the planet) doesn't like Adobe. He's been pretty negative about the whole Creative Clown, er Cloud, thing. But his underlying premise is interesting - that this is the first step in Apple rationalizing a photography workflow. It's not 'the' photography workflow and may not fit many professional / prosumer goals - but that doesn't appear to be Apples audience. Perhaps. Hard to say since, again, Apple isn't terribly forthcoming.
But you have two big hitters in this space: Apple and Adobe. It will be interesting to see how this falls out. For my purposes, I've never liked Aperture / iPhoto. The workflow just doesn't fit with how I do things and isn't terribly flexible. I've actually enjoyed Creative Clown as I get to use After Effects and Illustrator for a perfectly reasonable price but YMMV, but I can't stand Lightroom. No matter, Adobe has recently started behaving better. You can now keep old versions running for as long as you like. You can download CS6 - forever. Yes, subscriptions are annoying but so is pretty much everything else these days.
Repeat that after me, Mr. Fjord.
It is expected that there will be areas of happy, mild weather in any scenario you care to imagine. It is to be expected that a bunch of locals in regions suffering from happy, mild weather might not be as concerned about the issue as someone who had their house wiped out by a tornado.
But it the concerns and insights of either set of persons would be irrelevant to the discussion of GLOBAL climate change (hint, the word that is BOLDED is important).
Climate in not weather. Weather is not climate.
If you want a dead Greek guy, I suppose the AMA (Academy of Model Aeronautics) could channel Icarus.
Systems programmers are the high priests of a low cult. -- R.S. Barton