search for: malpractice

I am working on a function that will remove outliers for regression analysis. I am stating that a data point is an outlier if its studentized residual is above or below 3 and -3, respectively. The code below is what i have thus far for the function x = c(1:20) y = c(1,3,4,2,5,6,18,8,10,8,11,13,14,14,15,85,17,19,19,20) data1 = data.frame(x,y) rm.outliers =

...raise the issue the library is not actually formally published and it does not actually work like a CRAN published library would, I get a vague ?the person who actually did the work left and nobody can maintain the code/fix stuff/finish the job?. As a referee I am trying to weed out what I see as malpractice: the promise that third parties outside the developers might actually use the code because it has been packaged as a R library, a claim that seems to boost publishing chances. Thus my question: when can I consider a library to be properly published and really publicly available? CRAN and BioCondu...

...library is not actually >formally published and it does not actually work like a CRAN published >library would, I get a vague ?the person who actually did the work left >and nobody can maintain the code/fix stuff/finish the job?. > >As a referee I am trying to weed out what I see as malpractice: the >promise that third parties outside the developers might actually use >the code because it has been packaged as a R library, a claim that >seems to boost publishing chances. > >Thus my question: when can I consider a library to be properly >published and really publicly avail...

Hello Jeremy, thanks a million for your help and interest in tracking this down! :-) Am 13.06.2017 um 18:36 schrieb Jeremy Allison: > Can you get comparitive wireshark traces for the two cases ? > > That would help discover what the bottleneck is. I am not at all a network guy, but I hope that - maybe with a little more help from your part once I have tried to do so in practice - I

I'm running up-to-date CentOS 5 w/ Xen. I'm getting tons (tons = 13787 just yesterday, presumably because I have a monitoring system poll every 5 minutes) of log entries of the following: netsnmp_assert index == tmp failed if-mib/data_access/interface.c:467 _access_interface_entry_save_name() and netsnmp_assert rc == 0 failed if-mib/ifTable/ifTable_data_access.c:209

...e permissions for the web content like this: # chown -R apache:apache /var/www/myserver # find /var/www/myserver -type d -exec chmod 0750 {} \; # find /var/www/myserver -type f -exec chmod 0640 {} \; Some time ago a fellow sysadmin (Remi Collet on the fr.centos.org forum) pointed out that this is malpractice in terms of security, and that the stuff under /var/www should *not* be owned by the user/group running the webserver. Which means that for the static website above, I could have something like this, for example: # chown -R microlinux:microlinux /var/www/myserver # find /var/www/myserver -type d -...

...ike this: > > # chown -R apache:apache /var/www/myserver > # find /var/www/myserver -type d -exec chmod 0750 {} \; > # find /var/www/myserver -type f -exec chmod 0640 {} \; > > Some time ago a fellow sysadmin (Remi Collet on the fr.centos.org forum) > pointed out that this is malpractice in terms of security, and that the > stuff under /var/www should *not* be owned by the user/group running the > webserver. Which means that for the static website above, I could have > something like this, for example: > > # chown -R microlinux:microlinux /var/www/myserver > # fi...

...always been silently discarded by the Samba mail servers due to my main mail provider (GMX - a very large German mail provider with millions of customers) having been blacklisted by SORBS. For the time being, SORBS is still unwilling to delist them for unknown reasons (which I consider a clear malpractice by SORBS, as GMX has sophisticated spam/abuse management in place), so I had to switch to another mail provider just in order to be able to post again on the Samba list... :-( Am 13.06.2017 um 19:00 schrieb awl1: > Am 13.06.2017 um 18:36 schrieb Jeremy Allison: >> Can you get comparit...

...ot customized) - wondershaper (v. 1.1a) (from current Debian ''testing'') - Shorewall (v. 2.0.13) also from ''testing'' - 4 Mbit ADSL link via ''modem'' on eth0 thank you in advance! -p -- If economists were doctors, they would today be mired in malpractice suits. - John Ralston Saul

...ally >>formally published and it does not actually work like a CRAN published >>library would, I get a vague ?the person who actually did the work left >>and nobody can maintain the code/fix stuff/finish the job?. >> >>As a referee I am trying to weed out what I see as malpractice: the >>promise that third parties outside the developers might actually use >>the code because it has been packaged as a R library, a claim that >>seems to boost publishing chances. >> >>Thus my question: when can I consider a library to be properly >>published a...

...minor issue but I think would be more useable... -- Mariano Absatz - "El Baby" el.baby at gmail.com www.clueless.com.ar -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- "A system admin's life is a sorry one. The only advantage he has over Emergency Room doctors is that malpractice suits are rare. On the other hand, ER doctors never have to deal with patients installing new versions of their own innards!" -- Michael O'Brien -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- * TagZilla 0.066 * http://tagzilla.mozdev.org

...like this: > > # chown -R apache:apache /var/www/myserver > # find /var/www/myserver -type d -exec chmod 0750 {} \; > # find /var/www/myserver -type f -exec chmod 0640 {} \; > > Some time ago a fellow sysadmin (Remi Collet on the fr.centos.org forum) > pointed out that this is malpractice in terms of security, and that the > stuff under /var/www should *not* be owned by the user/group running the > webserver. Right, this gives Apache write access over *everything*. That means that Apache could potentially change your site code. Many attack vectors rely on changing wordpres...

Thank you for clarifying this point but my main question was about how to modify my code to do the analysis correctly. The code I mentioned :- MyResults <- apply(Mydata, 2, function(x)prop.test(Mydata,c(200,100)) Results in this error : 'x' and 'n' must have the same length in the prop.test(x,n). How can I modify "x' or "n" arguments so the analysis

...has always been silently discarded by the Samba mail servers due to my main mail provider (GMX - a very large German mail provider with millions of customers) having been blacklisted by SORBS. For the time being, SORBS is still unwilling to delist them for unknown reasons (which I consider a clear malpractice by SORBS, as GMX has sophisticated spam/abuse management in place), so I had to switch to another mail provider just in order to be able to post again on the Samba list... :-( Am 13.06.2017 um 19:00 schrieb awl1: > Am 13.06.2017 um 18:36 schrieb Jeremy Allison: >> Can you get comparitive...