No the asshat is not saying that if you cannot get the same results it's not science (in fact the exact opposite), but rather that if you cannot demonstrate that the experiment itself is replicable then it is not science. The contention in the article that in social sciences this lack of replication of experiment may just be a reality up with which we must put IS the reason why whatever you want to call it, it is not science.
"Those who oppose funding for behavioral science make a fundamental mistake: They assume that valuable science is limited to the "hard sciences." Social science can be just as valuable, but it's difficult to demonstrate that an experiment is valuable when you can't even demonstrate that it's replicable."
No, those of us that oppose the funding of this crap recognise that if you cannot replicate your "study" then it is not an experiment. If what you are doing cannot be proved (one way or the other) by experiment then IT IS NOT SCIENCE. I don't really care what it gets called and some of it may even be valuable for some values of valuable however the amount of dross that is produce by social researchers that try and call themselves scientists is truly extraordinary and a plague on our world.
Absolutely. Soooo doomed. You cannot guarantee that the UDP packets even get across the wire to your NIC what difference does it matter whether you software gets them all out of the NIC
In addition to sleep, meals are quite important. I highly recommend taking your meals at destination times as long as possible before the flight, likewise when you land eat when the locals eat not when you are just hungry it will help to align your sleep as well. Ignore the plane food unless you can get it at a decent time (they only feed you to keep you in your seat !!!).
I have found that with this strategy (and the sleep one mentioned above). I can limit jet lag to feeling a little extra tired about late afternoon for a day or two.
Look at the cost of collecting fares and the percentage of the cost of the service that fares actually provide. When taken in conjunction with the fact that the poorest people often have the highest cost of transport (live furthest away) there is a very strong argument that you should just forget about collecting fares at all and make the service a free for all. Just pay for it out of consolidated revenue or another "distributive" tax.
While true, your statement also assumes he had a choice...
Not a bad doctor. Go and ask an anaesthetist how anaesthetic works. They don't know. The action is still an area of intensive research and my moderately well informed understanding is that there is no accepted model for "how" they work.
I find it completely plausible that the same can be true for other medications whilst still having great efficacy.
I completely agree. However, we have some complete nutters now declaring an anti-vaccination position as a religious practice and thus getting exemptions to these requirements on the basis of religious freedom / anti discrimination. WTF!!!!!
regarding your experience with immigration controls, my theory is that the more strict the immigration check point the easier it is to exist in that country illegally. For example, Switzerland, you can't rent a video without the right government papers; and at these checkpoints, they look at your passport and if it looks like it might be one, they let you in. Whereas in the uk or usa, once you're in you could live there forever, so very suspicious checkpoints there. as for the guns and body armor, well that's the Americans for you
Whilst I accept that the car thing is true. One needs to be careful about just how "the same" these cars actually are. I discovered that there are often some very subtle difference between exactly the same model of car in two different markets. Not just equipment levels, but engineered elements as well. The one example that sticks in my mind was a Mazda 2 or Corolla or something where there was an entire cross member at the rear of the chassis (to the extent that there is even a chassis in these cars) that was just not included in the cars exported into some market. this had implications for their "safety rating" and the cost of repair for 0kph accidents where the cross member would protect the rest of the chassis from requiring repair in such impacts. So the line price of the car was 5% less but a tiny bingle was many times more expensive to repair. Likewise airbags etc are very rapidly dropped out of cars to hit a target price in a given market
Completely agree re: geometrically placed desktops. Gnome2's implementation was just good enough for my needs (my other required feature is the ability to 'raise/lower' a window, mapped to a key). The one reason I can't accept XFCE as a gnome2 alternative is that it seems to insist on arranging desktops linearly. I want my two dimensions, dammit.
The only thing that makes me reluctant to go back to fvwm is that configuring it was always rather unpleasant.
I haven't posted a journal here in almost three years, because I couldn't find the button to start a new entry.
So... hi, Slashdot. I used to be really active here, but now I mostly lurk and read. I've missed you.
Yeah, this is a great idea because we all know how a company mandated monopoly supplier has such a great track record of providing cost effective services!!!
The real reason I Hated our IT people was that when I asked for something to help me meet my clients needs. I would be told "can't be done". Half a day of my own research later and I would posit a solution that was acceptable. That's not my fucking job it's theirs. And then they charge me criminal amounts of money for their "services". Morons!
We are pleased to announce the birth of the Canterbury distribution. Canterbury is a merge of the efforts of the community distributions formerly known as Debian, Gentoo, Grml, openSUSE and Arch Linux to produce a really unified effort and be able to stand up in a combined effort against proprietary operating systems, to show off that the Free Software community is actually able to work together for a common goal instead of creating more diversity.
Canterbury will be as technologically simple as Arch, as stable as Debian, malleable as Gentoo, have a solid Live framework as Grml, and be as open minded as openSUSE..
Arch Linux developer Pierre Schmitz explained:
Arch Linux has always been about keeping its technology as simple as possible. Combining efforts into one single distribution will dramatically reduce complexity for developers, users and of course upstream projects. Canterbury will be the next evolutionary step of Linux distributions.
This will without a doubt put pressure on Ubuntu."
Link to Original Source