Forgot your password?
typodupeerror

Comment: Re:moderately skeptical (Score 5, Interesting) 695

by DrInequality (#38020420) Attached to: What is Your position on Climate Change?

Multi-year trends in global temperatures are not.

Prove it.

Please, please show proof that any model with 10+ year response times is demonstrably valid.

The problem is that we only have ~100 years of good data and ~200 years of fair data and very poor data prior to that

The fundamental problem that I (as a person with a good knowledge of statistics) have is that all the data pre-processing (a.k.a. faking) that goes on gives unreasonably low estimates of the variance (or standard deviations or confidence intervals).

A good scientist should define a clear model and use all of the raw data to validate the model. Then and only then can the model be used to extrapolate - say to the future or to the causes of climate change.

Comment: Re:Failed attempt. (Score 1) 262

by DrInequality (#36822078) Attached to: Do Two-Screen Laptops Make Sense?

But I think you are on the right track. Solution is to make that external monitor more convenient. You can buy laptop portable versions of just about everything, except monitors (or at least I’ve never seen that). Should be trivial to make a monitor with integrated short cables and where the stand folds into itself and fits nicely into a laptop bag, with maybe some kind of protective cover for the screen. Would seem a much simpler approach than this contraption.

Yes, it's called a second laptop (oh and a decent OS).

Comment: Re:Not Publicly Available Information! (Score 1) 693

by DrInequality (#35074998) Attached to: Bing Is Cheating, Copying Google Search Results

It seems like this is publicly available information.

But it's not, you obviously didn't read the article. Here was the process: 1) Google employee makes sure some fake word does not exist in google or bing search results. 2) Said employee points google's cache results of that word to some random page. 3) Said employee uses Internet Explorer at his desk at Google to make the search appear in Google, then selects the only link as the correct thing he was looking for and Bing somehow acquires this information. 4) Search now appears in Bing.

Well... Step 1 may cause Bing to start trying to index said fake word. The step 3(b) where the Google employee clicks on the Google search result for the non-related page will (via the Bing spybar) associate the fake search term with the non-related page (the fake term will appear in the HTTP_REFERRER field).

Spybar: EVIL

Bing crap: probably.

Bing cheating? Not proved.

They're just using their spybar clickstream data as a source of search info, just as Google initially innovated by using link data as a data source, rather than the contents of web pages.

To conclusively prove cheating, they have to show a statistical correlation between the ranking of faked pages on Google and faked pages on Bing. Shame on you Google!

Biotech

Dolly the Sheep Alive Again 233

Posted by samzenpus
from the bah-bah-clone-sheep dept.
SpeZek writes "Dolly the sheep has been reborn. Four clones have been made by the scientist behind the original research. The quads, which have been nicknamed 'the Dollies,' are exact genetic copies of their predecessor, who was put down seven years ago. The latest experiments were partly carried out to check if improvements to the technique cut the risk of problems in and out of the womb. Named after country and western singer Dolly Parton, Dolly was created from a cell taken from a mammary gland. The rest of the sample of tissue has lain in a freezer since, until it was defrosted to make the Dollies."

"If it ain't broke, don't fix it." - Bert Lantz

Working...