|
2009/5/4-6 [Politics/Domestic/California, Politics/Domestic/California/Prop] UID:52938 Activity:high |
5/4 Why does The Netherlands have such a sustained lower unemployment \_ Why is it The Netherlands? Is it like an LA Freeway? rate and higher growth than the US? Maybe we can replicate their success here. \_ Start by not spending all your money on military and prisons. \_ They don't have as large a population of illegal immigrants -jblack \_Lots of Euro countries don't have this problem, they still mostly have double digit unemployment. \_ Timely Question: http://www.nytimes.com/2009/05/03/magazine/03european-t.html \_ jeesh, They really should not be paying this guy by the word. \_ So the government taxes you to death and then gives some of the money back if you have kids, for vacations, and so on. This "Big Brother" sort of society in which the government claims to know what you need more than you do is very anti-American to me, although staunch Democrats must love it because they could tell people what to do with their money. \_ My mother is Dutch and I still have family there. It's a wealthy nation, but very small. I don't see many opportunities to parallel their policies here successfully. \_ Why not? We should have economies of scale that they do not. \_ Because we are much larger and more diverse. I'm not sure that economies of scale play a large part in this. For instance, are there economies of scale for educating 1 million kids versus 100 kids? I'd argue not. In fact, I'd argue it would be cheaper (per kid) to educate the smaller number. \_ It is certainly cheaper to build 100 miles of road, than 10 roads, each 10 miles long. Why do you think that it is cheaper to educate smaller numbers of children? You can get some kinds of economy of scale even in education, with things like standard tests, school books, etc. \_ Examples of why it might cost more to educate more: higher administrative overhead higher probability of kids with special/unique needs more disparate learning abilities and backgrounds harder to find/recruit so many well-trained teachers. \_ Why would there be a higher percentage of kids with special needs? And why harder to find teachers? It should be the same percentage of population in both cases. \_ Because you don't judge these by percentage. Imagine there is a special need which occurs 1/10000th of the time. The school with 100 kids probably doesn't have to deal with it at all (or rarely), whereas the school with 1 million kids probably needs a whole program created to address it. For an example of this consider bilingual education. The Japanese kids at my public school did not have a class dedicated to them, but the South American kids did even though both were small percentage-wise. did. A single Spanish-speaking kid isn't a burden to instruct, but 1,000 is. \_ There is a lot of evidence (and probably literature) on the diseconomies of scale in education. Anecdotally, it explains why property values are significantly lower in parts of LA that are part of LAUSD, one of the largest and most inefficient school districts in the nation. (e.g. San Pedro vs. PV, Culver City vs. Palms, etc). Another way to look at the diseconomies of scale problem is to think of all the complaints against big government (gubment = BAD) or big companies (startups = rewl). \_ If there are diseconomies of scale, why are small private schools so much more expensive than public schools? -tom \_ It's not linear. There can be economies of scale which then translate into diseconomies. Do you really think that LAUSD is more efficient than, say, Berkeley USD? Tangentially related is the whole cherry-picking, charter school and/or voucher concept. Voucher/Charter folks like to really against large districts, but they get to cherry pick students. That said, I think http://greendot.org is pretty awesome and there is a lot to learn from these guys. They fix a lot of standard inner city problems just by "caring". I think it's hard to scale caring. \_ 1. They often provide a better product. 2. It varies by state and district, but many times private schools aren't more expensive for a similar product. California spent $8496 per student in 2005-2006, which was 29th in the nation. The US average was $9100. This figure excludes capital outlay, interest on school debt, and other subsidies. (Source: link:tinyurl.com/cyg468 I believe for example that most private schools (unless they are religious) pay property tax on their land while public schools do not. For this price you can find plenty of private schools for your kids to attend and this discounts scholarships that are often offered. I could not find the average cost of a private school in California, but nationwide in 2003-2004 (latest year I could find) it was $6400 for elementary schools and $13300 for high schools. (Source: http://tinyurl.com/cog8wj Clearly, this figure is not too different from the $9100 average for public schools. \_ You can't compare private schools in Des Moines to public schools in San Francisco. For example: Head-Royce school in Oakland is $19k/year for K-5, $21k/year for 6-8, $27k/year for high school. -tom \_ I am comparing the average national public expenditures to the average national private expenditures. I am not comparing Des Moines to SF. However, I assure you that you can find plenty of private schools even in urban California for less than $10K/year. The schools charging $20-30K per year are elite schools providing much more to their students than public schools do and that's why they cost more. My neighbor's son goes to Saint Francis High School in La Canada. It's a pretty good school. Tuition is $10324. I bet that's not much different from what the local public HS spends. Mater Dei tuition is $10950. Don Bosco Tech is $8600. Not every school is some elitist academy that costs more than Stanford. \_ Parochial schools may be subsidized by the church--you can't just look at tuition to know their costs. -tom \_ They may be, but they may not be and it's not clear to what extent. I went to a Christian school and it wasn't. Public schools receive money from other sources, too, like the PTA fundraisers and gifts. (The public middle school my nephew goes to just received $400K from a donor for a new tennis court.) Also, many students at private schools pay *less than* tuition because they receive financial assistance. I think it's reasonable to compare tuitions because public schools receive a lot of subsidies and private schools have expenses public schools do not (like advertising). I would argue they all wash out, which is why the average private tuition and public school expenditures are so similar to each other. \_ Even Communist Mainland China has a sustained higher growth rate than the US. \_ http://delong.typepad.com/sdj/2009/05/upward-mobility-reality-and-illusion.html \_ This one is great, take that Gold Bugs: link:tinyurl.com/d4lsch |
2009/5/4-6 [Computer/SW/OS/Linux, Computer/SW/OS/FreeBSD] UID:52939 Activity:moderate |
5/4 I would appreciate a reliability ranking between: 1) OpenBSD 2) OpenSolaris 3) FreeBSD 4) Debian-Stable 5) Suse Linux Enterprise Server \_ No RedHat? \_ This is going to depends greatly on the applications you are \_ This is going to depend greatly on the applications you are running. All of these operating systems are going to be reliable out of the box, at least as compared to MacOS or Windows. Relative to each other I'm not sure there's much difference. I think you are asking the wrong question to make your decision. Other factors are going to be far more important. \_ Think you'll also get a lot easier support if you use RedHat or one of its many incarnations like CentOS since it seems to be the most common enterprise Linux out there. \_ it no longer matters for most of applications. I would urge you look at other factors, such as software avaliability, etc. \_ Reliability has a lot more to do with the quality of your process than the OS you run on, at least if you run on a reasonable non-M$ OS like any of the above. |
2009/5/4-6 [Computer/Companies/Google] UID:52940 Activity:nil |
5/4 http://torrentfreak.com/google-custom-search-cuts-utorrent-off-090430 "[Google+uTorrent] seems like a win-win situation for everyone, but for reasons unknown, Google no longer allows uTorrent to use the custom search program." Shyeah right, it's win-win for pirates, and "reasons unknown?" Give me a *(#@$ break. \_ pirates? Somali pirates? |
2009/5/4-6 [Consumer/Camera] UID:52941 Activity:nil |
5/3 I'm in the market for a functional Leica IIIc Luftwaffe rangefinder camera. I'm wondering where I should go to find it? eBay is full of fake knockoffs from Russia. \_ Also, which screw mount lenses are better? Summicron? Elmar? Planar? Summilux? |
2009/5/4-6/5 [Computer/SW/OS/Linux, Academia/Berkeley/CSUA] UID:52942 Activity:nil 55%like:49792 |
Linux soda 2.6.26-2-686 #1 SMP Thu Mar 26 01:08:11 UTC 2009 i686 GNU/Linux Welcome to Soda Mark VII, a dual Xeon 2.8GHz, please enjoy your stay. |
2009/5/4-6 [Computer/SW/RevisionControl, Academia/Berkeley/CSUA/Motd] UID:52943 Activity:moderate |
5/4 When is kchang coming back? I miss him... he was so annoying but at least he had some initiative. If he were around, I'd ask him to chart the MOTD usage patterns over time. My guess is that postings peaked in '95. \_ I'm here! You can just go to the main page and see how many posts there are in a year (top column). Keep in mind I grabbed posts randomly between 93-99, relied on mehlhaff's RCS logger between 99-03, and logged myself afterwards. -kchang \_ Welcome back! Unfortunately, you've probably matured in the past five years. Tell me it ain't so. \_ Maybe I'm just a ficticious character -kchang \_ please don't sign under my name -real kchang \_ This is why motd sucks. |
2009/5/4-6 [Consumer/Camera] UID:52944 Activity:high |
5/4 Which Canon dSLR should I buy? \_ The cheapest one you can get away with, and the most expensive glass you can afford. Camera body depreciates 1/2 every 18-24 months. Plastic kit lenses depreciate at about 15-20% each year till they're worthless in about 3-5 years. Good glass (constant f/2.8 and below) hardly ever depreciate, and some actually go up in value. \_ This general rule is good for film SLR, where the film is not a function of the body. But is it also true for dSLR, where the image sensor is a function of the body? Cheap bodies might not have high-enough image resolution, low-enough noise ratio, etc., to appreciate your premium lens. -- yuen \_ I beg differ. This rule is still applys for most people. Most beginners don't care about noise ratio and for most people, high resolution is more of burden. Most of cheapo body has sensor that is identical to the mid range camera. kngharv \_ When Nikon D300 ($1800 prosumer) came out, it blew away all APS-C competition with the Sony sensor. Many Canon 40D and 50D users weep because they lust for D300's amazing low light capability (engineering trade-offs -- Canon opted for resolution while Nikon opted for high ISO and low noise). Over a year later, the D90 ($999 high end consumer) came out using the exact same sensor and takes exactly the same image qualities, though with only 11 point AF (vs. 51 on the 300D), less FPS, and other pro features). This year, cheap D5000 came and again, using the exact same sensor. It is a lot cheaper. So as you can see, there is a trickle-down effect on sensors. You don't have to spend a lot of money to get the best sensor quality. Unless you need massive AF and FPS and other pro features, a cheap body will do just fine. You can just wait 1-2 years before a pro-quality sensor trickles down into consumer end bodies. P.S. Canon used to win the DSLR sensor race, but for the past 2 years the Nikon D3, D3x, and D300 have been winning. I'm sure next few years, Canon will have an upper hand. It's a rat race, and an exciting one it is. Like I said, camera bodies get obsolete as fast as CPUs. But innovations in lens is slow... huge optical innovations ended since the 50s, and optically innovation-wise we're about the same as the 70s and 80s. All that Nikon N (nanocoating) and Canon flouride coating is just marketing BS. Optical the same as the 70s and 80s. All that Nikon N (nanocoating) and Canon flouride coating is just marketing BS. Optical innovations are slow hence glass retain their values. The only new things we have these days is just stuff built on and around the lens, like silent ultrasonic focus, G-ring electric aperture rings, VR/IS. P.S. Nikon D400 is coming out. \_ The one that fits your needs. \_ LOL it doesn't matter. When you are married, have a house and a baby, your priority will change and photography will no longer be part of your life. Most married men sell off their extensive photographic equipments after they're on the marriage track. \_ I mostly want this to take pictures of the kids. \_ Why limit yourself to Canon? \_ Are there other good choices? What else would you consider? \_ I agree with the first followup. But would add "what problem are you trying to solve" and "where are you starting from?". If you are "getting into photography", which is what I assume from your question, you should fix your budget for the whole kit. A colleague of mine bought more body than he needs and has cheapo lenses and then rents higher end lenses ... a decision I thought was crazy. This will likely mean you are picking from 2-3 Canon bodies ... if you are looking at $5k bodies, you are certainly not going to be looking at $500 bodies. More practically you not going to be looking at $500 bodoes. More practically you might be looking a $600 body and wondering if the $1.4k body is worth the difference. Also, you should mention whether there is some special considerations ... like "my sister just moved to mombasa and i am going to visit her and squeeze in a safari" vs. "i want to take pictures of my new child" or "i want to take pix of my band" or "i want to take pix of my award winning roses", "i am an avid birdwatcher and want to start taking pix of what i see on birding trips." "i want to take a photography class". BTW, i would stick with canon if: 1. you dont come in with a large investment in fancy glass 2. you are not on a super-low budget. \_ I want to take pictures of my children. I currently have an SD750 which is okay, but I want something better. \_ If you want to "take pictures of your children," you're probably better off getting one of the Digital ELPH cameras than an SLR. You'll save money and you'll have something that you'll always carry with you, instead of a big wad of equipment that sits at home. Pictures of the kids are more about opportunity than quality. If you want to do your own portraiture, the XSi with a decent portrait lens (like the 35mm f/2.0) should be fine. -tom \- while it may be usable for protraits, that is not a portrait lens, at least for headshot type pix. you need big app and reasonably long focal length to get parallel rays. probably want to go at least 80mm ... 180mm is probably overkill for home portraits. my 105 is a double purpose macro and portrait. it's a little long on digital. 50 f1.4 will probably be better and is generally a nice lens. 50 1.8 might be better and is usually a cheap lens with decent optics [although sometimes build quality isnt the best, but not that big a deal on a forgiving lens]. \_ Assuming this isnt a troll: you probably arent going to get a Canon 1-series [high end pro bodies]. So you are likely looking at Canon 3digit, 2digit or 5x. So look at the price and features of the Digital Rebel (<$800), the 50d ($1200) and 5D (+$2500) ... that should reduce this to a question 5D (+$2500) ... that should greatly reduce this to a question about specific bodies ... at which point you can make trade off within your budget and pushing your budget envelope outwards by a little. \_ I have a huge 70-200mm f/2.8L IS body on a Rebel XS. I know people laugh at it, and it looks funny, but you know, I take better pictures than a bunch of dumbasses with a 5Dmk2 with a kit lens. Now, who is the dumbass here? \_ I'm shooting with a Rebel XSi; it's a totally capable camera. There's a pretty small range of shots that would be easier to capture with a better body. But a lot depends on your shooting; most of mine is landscapes taken while riding/hiking, so light weight is a significant consideration; if I were shooting concerts a heavier body with better low-light performance would be better. -tom \_ If you're just taking daytime landscape while traveling, a high quality P&S will do just fine. In fact you can't really tell image difference under those conditions (slower shutter, 100 ISO, f/8-11, bright light). Let me dig up an article from a famous pro who carries both a DSLR and a Canon G10 (Lumix LX3 does a good job too). Seriously, can you tell the difference? If a pro can't tell the difference, neither can 99.5% of the people out there. A Canon XSi on a bike is just too cumbersome. Go with the best point and shoot. http://www.luminous-landscape.com/reviews/kidding.shtml http://www.luminous-landscape.com/reviews/cameras/lx3.shtml \_ Well, actually I use a Canon PowerShot S5 if I'm cycling without specific photography opportunities in mind. -tom \_ Oh ok, you're set then. Cool. -pp \_ I took a G10 and a Nikon SLR on my last vacation trip. I took maybe 50x as many pictures with the G10 ... here are the main limitations: 1. for landscapes, I didnt have quite the field of view i'd have liked ... compared to my 18mm. 2. i dont own a polarizer for the G10 ... i believe it is a pretty expesnive addon it is a pretty expensive addon 3. biggest problem: too much depth of field [LX3 is better in this regard, but still not as good as a fast lens] 4. big, big win of the G10 was the really nice image stabilization. there were a lot of pix it took in a museum without a flash which I took in a museum without a flash which might be say 6.5/10, which i could have taken might be say 6/10, which i could have taken at 8/10 if i could control the lighting, but since i could not control the lighting, the pix with my SLR would have been 0-2/10. 5. and of course eventhough the G10 is pushing the outer limits of "pocket camera", i could and did carry it almest everywhere, where as i only took the "big gear" on a could of occasions where i was doing "serious photography" [Monte Alban]. |
2009/5/4-6 [Computer/SW/Languages/Java] UID:52945 Activity:nil |
5/4 The Scalia gets pwned: http://www.abajournal.com/weekly/fordham_law_class_collects_scalia_info_justice_is_steamed |
2009/5/4-6 [Science/GlobalWarming, Science/Physics] UID:52946 Activity:nil |
5/4 Next-generation stealth technology :-) http://www.boingboing.net/2009/05/04/art-student-creates.html |