That's why these high-end solutions are now in the form of SSD PCIe cards. Bandwidth.
Well if it takes a Nobel then it sounds like there's an easy fix for people like him: Just run for office as a democrat.
Which part makes this science?/quote. The part where they model the climate of the late Cretaceous period?
So GP is claiming there were other plausible implementations of the same diabolically clever idea. So what.
IMO, testing the null hypothesis shows that it is the idea of combining the religious text with the technical text that is the primary source of interest. To me, the Markov Chains seem to produce more lexically valid outputs, but does not seem to be the prime influence of the humor or revelation in unexpected aptness distribution. One use of the null hypothesis is to show the degree to which the researcher's methods are responsible for the results by providing different methods or explanations for the same or similar results.
The problem is that low quality publications actually represent negative productivity.
There is no such thing as negative effort, only effort. Anti-productivity can be beneficial if properly harnessed. When anti-products collide with normal outputs of productivity the energy released is explosive! --even enough to bring entire businesses to their knees. Re-engineering of entire product lines can create jobs at a geometric rate when analysed in the single dimensional domain. Massive numbers of researchers have dedicated time to advances in product particle research; Especially in the field of advert entangled anti-productivity. This very post and Slashdot itself would not be possible were it not for discovery of the charged anti-product-ion. Indeed, this is why the energetic event resulting from a productive business interacting with an equal or greater anti-production has been dubbed, "The Slashdot Effect".
Unfortunately, due to the nature of quantum entanglement there is no known way to predict an increase or decrease in overall productions due to a business's slashdotting. There is much debate over the degree to which the anti-productivity particles can be deliberately harnessed due to quantum uncertainty: Observation of A.C. currents provide evidence that one can either know when and where the slashdotting will occur (deemed a slashvertizment), or the rate and direction of products, but not both at once.
The patent system ought to be changed so that any patent should be revoked once it is no longer useful for its intended purpose.
If you open source your code, you have fulfilled the intended purpose of the patent system to benefit society, without requiring patents. FLOSS should be immune to patent suits. Furthermore, there is zero evidence that patents themselves fulfill their intended purpose. Indeed, the automotive and fashion industries both innovate in design and sell heavily on design and are very profitable, and yet they are not allowed copyright or design patents. So, there is no evidence that patents are beneficial for society; In fact, I would say we need to prove they are not harmful to society before running the world's economy based on the economically untenable practice of selling ice to Eskimos: Selling ideas to thinking humans; Selling information to folks with computers. You can charge for an igloo to be built, but not the snow. You can charge for a program to be created, but not the bits. You can charge for research to be done, but not the discoveries.
That which is in infinite supply has zero price regardless of cost to create. Leverage your infinite monopoly over your ability to do work, afterwards you have no monopoly on the number of people who can benefit from the work. This is how mechanics, home builders, and every other labor market works: Agree on payment for work (bid), do the work, get paid once for the work. Mechanics don't change each person who drives a car for their benefit. You want more money? Do more work.
Artificial scarcity of information and ideas is counter to the progress of better information and ideas. Think. If you want more information and ideas then would not requiring people to create new works in order to get paid? All speculation such as, "Well if we didn't have patents then companies would X" are evidenced hypothetical bullshit. Those fearing sequestration of ideas are fools: Do not underestimate today's reverse engineers; They have scanning electron microscopes. Access to hardware is game over from a security perspective because the secrets can not be kept from us. Do the damn experiment otherwise we have no evidence to support the current hypothesis.
If you are an engineer or scientist and you are for patents and copyright, then you have rejected the tenets of your craft. There is no evidence to back the belief that patents or copyrights are beneficial. In fact, we know they can be unnecessary, and can be harmful: Engineers do not look for solutions in the patent database because they risk treble damages of foreknowledge of infringement, and risk of a competitor preventing their profit. If it costs less to re-invent the wheel than use established ideas, your patent system is not beneficial to society.
Once people become obese though getting enough exercise to burn any serious calories can be very difficult. They can't walk to the store to do their shopping or spend 20min on the elliptical at home because they'd be exhausted after five.
And the ones who do find a way to exercise still don't lose weight because walking 5k won't even burn enough calories to work off a bagel.
Exercise for strength and health.
Change food intake to lose weight.
SQL, MS Exchange, Virtual Machines, ensuring daily backups complete in a 24 hour period (for large daily delta changes), etc. Yes, I can think of a few important applications for this.
2.8 Gigabytes per second?! Good God, holy mother of.... *floored*
PostgreSQL has allowed functions to be written in plenty of programming languages for at least 10 years.
Also, with Oracle it was possible to use Java in addition to PL/SQL since 2002. I don't know about Sybase but I guess it probably got
Perhaps you failed to notice, but 2002 is only just shy of 12 years ago. The word "decades" (note the fact that this is the plural not the singular) implies at least 20 years. So, the poster you replied to was exactly correct, they did not have this "decades ago".
But the plan and law was heavily politicized, 36 states refused to set up their own exchanges and dumped all of them on the federal exchange. Millions of people who would have gone to medicaid are dumped into exchanges because they refused to expand medicaid.
This is just a straightforward exercise of self-interest at the US state level. It's not the individual state's job to cover inadequacies in federal law or shoulder the costs for their implementation.
Still they are doing it in the right order. Get people to commit to a plan before the dead line. Errors on the back end can be sorted out when they actually file claims,
Can be != will be. It's worth noting here that filing a claim indicates that you will cost an insurance company money. If they then can find an error in your application that let's them selectively disqualify you after the fact, there would be considerable incentive to do so.
Rather they had a better grip on how distance is really measured
Only if you were asking about some place that they went to on a regular basis (and then only if you were departing from a place they went to that place from). One of the interesting things about different parts of the U.S. is that I live in an area where, when asked how far some place is from some other place, the overwhelming majority answer by giving a time, not a number of miles. Most other parts of the country answer that question by giving a number of miles. Where I live how long it takes to get somewhere depends very much on which direction you are going (15 miles in one direction will take 15-30 minutes, 15 miles in another direction will take 30 minutes to an hour, depending on time of day).