When will the mathematicians give up on Pi as some sort of grand benchmark.... couldn't they do better things to benchmark their systems... like running a folding@home client, or some such thing?
Honestly.. the first thing I thought when I saw this was... wow.. how.. uncreative...
How is this going to help them beat out Google and MS again ?
Not to bash on Yahoo.. they were once a great service/company... but they're quickly becoming a has-been. What they desperately need, and what everyone in this sector needs, is creativity. This sort of horn tooting doesn't really impress me, so much as it depresses me that people are benchmarking their systems on the same old problem again and again.
Warning.. movies appear to be in crap-tastic Indeo 5 format
Available here free of charge:
If you actually read the journal article, all you will find is a LOT of criticism of Monsanto's statistical methodology (which may be valid), but very little (if any) of any actual evidence of toxicity.
Basically , they claim (which may be correct): Monsanto didn't do their studies properly! They should've used more rats, for longer, and with more measured parameters !
And THEN they turn around and claim... even though the study is statistically unsound (according to their own argument), we're going to draw some conclusions that are weak to begin with, even within the weak frame of this supposedly faulty study !
It just doesn't make much sense.... from a professional scientists' standpoint (mine), this amounts to a lot of hemming and hawing about experimental methods, but absolutely nothing in the way of conclusions !
The time spent on any item of the agenda [of a finance committee] will be in inverse proportion to the sum involved. -- C.N. Parkinson