In this particular case, I doubt there's any life in that globular cluster. That's because (if I'm remembering correctly) planets do not have stable orbits around stars that are that densely packed. Besides, if those stars are 13 billion years old, their metalicity is very low, meaning there probably weren't enough heavy elements to form planets at that time.
The place to look for life-bearing planets is probably around stars that formed in the arms of spiral galaxies. I'm told there's such a star about nine light-minutes from us.
As has been pointed out in postings above, if you have a device that returns the correct factorization half the time, then by running it multiple times, you can easily determine the factors of a composite number--because it's easy and fast to _check_ the answers with a classical computer.
Or if you don't know whether the number is composite or prime, then by running it N times and checking the answer each time, you can reduce the uncertainty that a number which happens to be prime is prime to 1/2**N.
In both cases, you can arrive at negligible error rates in reasonable time.
(BTW, I believe factoring has been shown *not* to be NP hard, but it has some similarities: hard to come up with answers, easy to verify them.)
Replying to myself. The one thing that has never worked well in any version of Word is section numbering. I think Word2003 was the closest to having a working numbering system; Word2007 took that away. Try to get "legal" numbering to work, you have to go through huge shenanigans to set it up, when it should work out of the box.
> Right-click network icon in systray > Troubleshoot problems. > I can see why you need a degree in particle physics to understand that.
Because it *never* works?
I have had lots of problems connecting my Win7 laptop to hotel wireless nets, and not once have I seen the troubleshooter provide a shred of useful advice. Usually the issue turns out to be some setting, but the troubleshooter doesn't have a clue.
"The trash needs to be taken out. They want to have ice cream." Yeah, my trash doesn't want to be taken out, either. It's much happier smelling up the kitchen.
You might ask what kind of things your son wants to program, i.e. does he have any other interests. If he's interested in natural languages, for instance, there's a lot of good Python code, e.g. the Natural Language Toolkit (NLTK). I would imagine that other fields have their own programming languages--R for statistics (probably a stretch for an 11 year old), something else for gaming. (You can tell where I'm coming from;-).)
...or maybe it was ARPANET back then, I don't remember. Anyway, I had an account through my employer (Boeing Computer Services, which no longer exists as a separate entity). My wife wanted a dishwasher. I told her she had married one, but she wanted to replace me. The predecessor to Craig's List back then was usenet, so I followed the postings in the wanted.wa (can't recall the exact name, but it was postings by would-be buyers/ sellers, with the.wa indicating the poster was located in Washington state). Sure enough, someone posted a used dishwasher for sale ad within a few miles of us. I contacted the seller, who was (obviously, back then) another computer geek, and we completed the transaction. I think our respective wives were amazed that this newfangled computer network was actually useful.
The dishwasher was portable, with wheels and a quick-connect to the water faucet (over the sink, so the waste water went down the drain). When we moved to Colombia a couple years later, we shipped it; when we left there, we sold it for roughly the original purchase cost + shipping. So somewhere in Colombia, there may still be a dishwasher bought from the Internet in 1986.
I ain't seen, I only heard; but just to be sociable, I'll take your word.
But all seriousness aside, what makest thou think that "I seen" is in error? Wouldst thou that we all spake Shakespeare's English? If not, prithee what be wrong with "he don't"? Forsooth after some years more shall it be the new way to speak the Queen's English.
Or mayhaps thou shouldst see if Chaucher hath yet a blog.
Iceland would be better than Denmark, I think. "Descend into the crater of the Jokull of Sneffels, Which the shadow of Scartaris falls upon before the calends of July, Bold traveler, and you will reach the center of the Earth. Which I have done, Arne Saknussem."
Fortunately, there are after-market products for some of their mistakes. Like Classic Shell (free) to replace the dumbed-down "I know what you want better than you do" Start Menu in Win7. And I haven't used Windows Explorer for eons, there are numerous free tools that do much better. (I use FreeCommander, which is far better even though it hasn't been updated for a long time.)
One oddity about the new Windows Explorer is that it seems to have much more space between filenames (I prefer the "details" view, I refuse to use the icons view); so you don't get to see as many files as you used to. At least that's my impression. It was also much easier to use the old Windows Explorer, with its menus; the new one seems to have commands scattered all over the place: some menus on the left, icons over on the right, still other icons next to the path. Why aren't all the menus together in one place, where you can find them more easily? And it isn't obvious how to copy the path any more--it's a bunch of icons instead of a copyable string. (Turns out you can still do Alt-D Ctrl-C and get the path, but that's not the default view, and I didn't realize you could do that until I tried the old method just now: talk about making it hard to discover!)
Amen, brother, preach it! Hieroglyphics went out over 2000 years ago in most of the Old World (China and Japan and to some extent Korea had something else), replaced by alphabetic writing. And there's a reason for that. Why software makers think they have to bring hieroglyphics back is a mysterification.
If you're talking under the hood, sure. But we're talking about the control mechanisms. The steering wheel is still in the same place, the rear view mirror is still in the same place, the gas pedal is still in the same place, the brake pedal is still in the same place, the clutch pedal (if you have one) is still in the same place, the turn signal lever is still in the same place, the windshield wiper lever is still in the same place (but usually with extra controls added), the horn is still in pretty much the same place, the seats are still in the same place (although most cars now have bucket seats in front, so you get 1/2 point for that), the radio is still in the same place (but with various other gizzies added to it), the glove compartment is still in the same place. I guess the ash trays aren't there any more, and I have cup holders now.
I would have said the shift lever was still in the same place (or one of the two places where it was standard in 1962), but it isn't there on my Prius. And my parent's car in 1962 had push-button automatic shift to the left of the wheel; which lasted a few years, I think, until they went back to the standard design.
I just looked at the original post, and saw that he was claiming 100 years. I guess that's a bit of a stretch, I was thinking 50. But 50's not bad.
Slashdot Mirror
Yes, but that's a different point from the posting I was replying to, namely the putative need for "negligible error rates."
In this particular case, I doubt there's any life in that globular cluster. That's because (if I'm remembering correctly) planets do not have stable orbits around stars that are that densely packed. Besides, if those stars are 13 billion years old, their metalicity is very low, meaning there probably weren't enough heavy elements to form planets at that time.
The place to look for life-bearing planets is probably around stars that formed in the arms of spiral galaxies. I'm told there's such a star about nine light-minutes from us.
As has been pointed out in postings above, if you have a device that returns the correct factorization half the time, then by running it multiple times, you can easily determine the factors of a composite number--because it's easy and fast to _check_ the answers with a classical computer.
Or if you don't know whether the number is composite or prime, then by running it N times and checking the answer each time, you can reduce the uncertainty that a number which happens to be prime is prime to 1/2**N.
In both cases, you can arrive at negligible error rates in reasonable time.
(BTW, I believe factoring has been shown *not* to be NP hard, but it has some similarities: hard to come up with answers, easy to verify them.)
Yes, I'm reporting back from next year: we have time machines. (No replicators or transporters yet.)
Case in point: the Ribbon.
Didn't Data try that?
Replying to myself. The one thing that has never worked well in any version of Word is section numbering. I think Word2003 was the closest to having a working numbering system; Word2007 took that away. Try to get "legal" numbering to work, you have to go through huge shenanigans to set it up, when it should work out of the box.
Agreed, except that the ribbon is worse than worthless, it's far less usable than the menu that it replaced.
> Right-click network icon in systray > Troubleshoot problems.
> I can see why you need a degree in particle physics to understand that.
Because it *never* works?
I have had lots of problems connecting my Win7 laptop to hotel wireless nets, and not once have I seen the troubleshooter provide a shred of useful advice. Usually the issue turns out to be some setting, but the troubleshooter doesn't have a clue.
"The trash needs to be taken out. They want to have ice cream." Yeah, my trash doesn't want to be taken out, either. It's much happier smelling up the kitchen.
s/Vista ver.//
(wasn't Windows 2.0 tiled?)
No, that was Marty McFly.
And in my neck of the woods, travellling.
You might ask what kind of things your son wants to program, i.e. does he have any other interests. If he's interested in natural languages, for instance, there's a lot of good Python code, e.g. the Natural Language Toolkit (NLTK). I would imagine that other fields have their own programming languages--R for statistics (probably a stretch for an 11 year old), something else for gaming. (You can tell where I'm coming from ;-).)
No dace, sucker, your accusations are bassless. What a piker! Surely you can trout out some fresh ideas. If not, quit carping.
...or maybe it was ARPANET back then, I don't remember. Anyway, I had an account through my employer (Boeing Computer Services, which no longer exists as a separate entity). My wife wanted a dishwasher. I told her she had married one, but she wanted to replace me. The predecessor to Craig's List back then was usenet, so I followed the postings in the wanted.wa (can't recall the exact name, but it was postings by would-be buyers/ sellers, with the .wa indicating the poster was located in Washington state). Sure enough, someone posted a used dishwasher for sale ad within a few miles of us. I contacted the seller, who was (obviously, back then) another computer geek, and we completed the transaction. I think our respective wives were amazed that this newfangled computer network was actually useful.
The dishwasher was portable, with wheels and a quick-connect to the water faucet (over the sink, so the waste water went down the drain). When we moved to Colombia a couple years later, we shipped it; when we left there, we sold it for roughly the original purchase cost + shipping. So somewhere in Colombia, there may still be a dishwasher bought from the Internet in 1986.
> Who decided "full screen apps" was the way of the future again??
> Could we please hop in the Delorean and take care of them??
back to the time of Windows 2, right?
I bet Arnold could afford a ticket.
Wait, hasn't he already bought his ticket and gone there?
I ain't seen, I only heard; but just to be sociable, I'll take your word.
But all seriousness aside, what makest thou think that "I seen" is in error? Wouldst thou that we all spake Shakespeare's English? If not, prithee what be wrong with "he don't"? Forsooth after some years more shall it be the new way to speak the Queen's English.
Or mayhaps thou shouldst see if Chaucher hath yet a blog.
Iceland would be better than Denmark, I think.
"Descend into the crater of the Jokull of Sneffels,
Which the shadow of Scartaris falls upon before the calends of July,
Bold traveler, and you will reach the center of the Earth.
Which I have done, Arne Saknussem."
No.
Preach it, brother!
Fortunately, there are after-market products for some of their mistakes. Like Classic Shell (free) to replace the dumbed-down "I know what you want better than you do" Start Menu in Win7. And I haven't used Windows Explorer for eons, there are numerous free tools that do much better. (I use FreeCommander, which is far better even though it hasn't been updated for a long time.)
One oddity about the new Windows Explorer is that it seems to have much more space between filenames (I prefer the "details" view, I refuse to use the icons view); so you don't get to see as many files as you used to. At least that's my impression. It was also much easier to use the old Windows Explorer, with its menus; the new one seems to have commands scattered all over the place: some menus on the left, icons over on the right, still other icons next to the path. Why aren't all the menus together in one place, where you can find them more easily? And it isn't obvious how to copy the path any more--it's a bunch of icons instead of a copyable string. (Turns out you can still do Alt-D Ctrl-C and get the path, but that's not the default view, and I didn't realize you could do that until I tried the old method just now: talk about making it hard to discover!)
"Infernal", preach it!
Amen, brother, preach it! Hieroglyphics went out over 2000 years ago in most of the Old World (China and Japan and to some extent Korea had something else), replaced by alphabetic writing. And there's a reason for that. Why software makers think they have to bring hieroglyphics back is a mysterification.
If you're talking under the hood, sure. But we're talking about the control mechanisms. The steering wheel is still in the same place, the rear view mirror is still in the same place, the gas pedal is still in the same place, the brake pedal is still in the same place, the clutch pedal (if you have one) is still in the same place, the turn signal lever is still in the same place, the windshield wiper lever is still in the same place (but usually with extra controls added), the horn is still in pretty much the same place, the seats are still in the same place (although most cars now have bucket seats in front, so you get 1/2 point for that), the radio is still in the same place (but with various other gizzies added to it), the glove compartment is still in the same place. I guess the ash trays aren't there any more, and I have cup holders now.
I would have said the shift lever was still in the same place (or one of the two places where it was standard in 1962), but it isn't there on my Prius. And my parent's car in 1962 had push-button automatic shift to the left of the wheel; which lasted a few years, I think, until they went back to the standard design.
I just looked at the original post, and saw that he was claiming 100 years. I guess that's a bit of a stretch, I was thinking 50. But 50's not bad.