Found this in my cache:
http://www.tomshardware.com/cpu/00q4/001120/inde x.html
Record Reader Numbers Ask For Record Responsibility
On the very Monday of Pentium 4's release the web servers of Tom's
Hardware Guide were under extreme load, making it difficult for many
readers to download the pages of the Pentium 4 article. I would like to
apologize for those inconveniences and also thank you for your faith in
Tom's Hardware, as we scored a new record of 1.413 million pages that
day, although slashdot intentionally refrained from giving our Pentium 4
article the recognition it deserved, despite it being amongst many other
remarkable things the only Pentium 4 review with Linux benchmarking
scores. While I daresay that slashdot has most certainly some
politically sinister things going on behind its usually reputable
facade, I would also like to express my awareness of carrying a huge
responsibility towards all those hundreds of thousand faithful readers
who rely on the conclusions of my articles. Unfortunately new results
out of the still ongoing Pentium 4 evaluation have urged me now to
change my stance on how I see Pentium 4 and I want to get the word out
without any hesitation.
Here's a paper showing that the brain can be thought of as a classical mechanical system, not a quantum one. This seems to be relevant criticism of Penrose's theory.
Actually, I don't know. All I know is what Prof. Specker (who himself was only concerned with the purely mathematical part of the theorem in question) told me over dinner.
It seems the assumptions of the no-hidden variables theorem are too strong to rule out all kinds of hidden-variables theories.
Slashdot Mirror
Check out gnustep.org, or more specifically their page about Display Ghostscript.
> I wonder if any other movies have ever been shot in this fashion.
The Lord of the Rings?
And if you're really serious about this, remember that a lot of clever people have tried this before you, and utterly failed.
Good luck anyway!
This is obiously untrue. Consider this:
int main () { return 0; }
You shouldn't have too much trouble proving that
this program terminates on any input.
pkg_version -c > blah
sh blah
Don't search for extraterrestrial intelligence - create them yourselves!
iCalendar is described in RFC 2445. What an iCal capable client is, is left to the reader.
Found this in my cache:e x.html
http://www.tomshardware.com/cpu/00q4/001120/ind
Record Reader Numbers Ask For Record Responsibility
On the very Monday of Pentium 4's release the web servers of Tom's
Hardware Guide were under extreme load, making it difficult for many
readers to download the pages of the Pentium 4 article. I would like to
apologize for those inconveniences and also thank you for your faith in
Tom's Hardware, as we scored a new record of 1.413 million pages that
day, although slashdot intentionally refrained from giving our Pentium 4
article the recognition it deserved, despite it being amongst many other
remarkable things the only Pentium 4 review with Linux benchmarking
scores. While I daresay that slashdot has most certainly some
politically sinister things going on behind its usually reputable
facade, I would also like to express my awareness of carrying a huge
responsibility towards all those hundreds of thousand faithful readers
who rely on the conclusions of my articles. Unfortunately new results
out of the still ongoing Pentium 4 evaluation have urged me now to
change my stance on how I see Pentium 4 and I want to get the word out
without any hesitation.
What exactly does this "danger" consist of? That you might accidentally buy a BMG cd?
Please compare this to the original advisory.
What's your point? Debian is easy on newbies? hahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahaha thank you.
Here.
It's type safe.
There's an accessible description of .NET in the MSDN magazine.
Here's a paper showing that the brain can be thought of as a classical mechanical system, not a quantum one. This seems to be relevant criticism of Penrose's theory.
Non-commutative Differential Geometry comes to mind
It seems the assumptions of the no-hidden variables theorem are too strong to rule out all kinds of hidden-variables theories.
PS: "Finite Precision measurement nullifies the Kochen-Specker theorem"
Hidden Variable interpretation has been proven to be false in 1967 by Kochen and Specker.
Do you think the Grand Unified Theory (if there ever is one) will be based on M-theory, or will it require a fundamentally different approach?