Random means without cause. That's it. It doesn't mean anything with regards to distribution, homogeneity, uniformity, etc. Those things means simply mean we don't notice a cause. Forcing things to meet that criteria, either on the generation end or on the selection end, means you're biasing your shit and you're giving cause to the data chosen. Thus, it is not random.
That's why these clowns keep clinging to quantum this and quantum that for random numbers, secure message passing, etc. They think it's random.
Dude, you literally said, "the missiles are coming". WTF?
I wasn't aware of any substantive limits that the English phrase "are coming" places on time frame.
Then you aren't aware of how English works. To say things are coming means that they are currently coming. They are in the process of coming. They are coming now. If you want to say things are going to come, then say things are going to come, or things will be coming.
That was obvious to anyone who read even a few pages about TPP
Really? You mean the fucking pages they kept locked away, monitored by armed guards 24/7, and prevented most congress members from actually reading? Fuck off, shill.
Both Democrats and Republicans attacked the deal during the president campaign, but many business leaders were disappointed when Mr. Trump withdrew from agreement
The quote expressing skepticism is commiting a slight logical fallacy: Just because this might not be THE single answer doesn't mean it can't be PART of the solution. Anyone who thinks there is a single best solution to CO2 emissions is likely to be extremely disappointed.
Disappointed in the fact that retards won't use the single best solution, nuclear power.
I'd be open to bulldozing some suburbs, planting forests and moving those people into high rise apartments.
Fuck that. We'd be better off bulldozing the overcrowded urban centers while the people were still in them. The scoops are coming. The scoops are coming. Music to my fucking ears.
The very act of classifying data as "random" or "not random" means that neither are random. If I want a random number and I go to your random number generator because you've demonstrated that it's "statistically random", then I'm getting non-random numbers. I'm getting numbers that are homogeneous and well distributed. That is not random.
The very act of trying to achieve randomness, however indirectly, and rejecting methods for not being random enough means that the methods we do accept are inherently not random.
I'm referring to getting the real right click back. Shift + Right Click does it.
As for finding the actual element, right click and inspect element should take you directly to the element you right clicked. If the page has layered and positioned things shittily, you can use the search function in the inspector. Anything that appears as a link (such as src="whatevers") you can CTRL+Click on to open in a new tab.
If you still can't find what you need, you can right click and do View Page Info. From there, go to the media tab and sort by size descending. You'll get the real URL for the resource you're looking for. You can then save that directly or you can open it in a new tab and then hack at the URL a bit to see if there's a better version. (Plenty of sites will only serve a reduced size version of an image, but you can often easily change the URL to get the full size version.)
Nope. Fuchsia is the OS. Their kernel is called Zircon. If they ever ship the thing, come back and remind me so I can laugh at how they ended up copying everything from Linux again. (Hopefully I don't need to find and show you the GNU/Linux / Linux is not an OS copypasta?)
You cannot perform calculations on infinity. You can perform calculations on n and find the limit (if there is one) as n approaches infinity (from both sides!) and get a useful answer for a specific situation. You can sometimes simplify your shit before hand to avoid infinity. But you absolutely cannot compute on infinity and get a meaningful result. (And substituting x for infinity, computing, then substituting infinity for x doesn't work either.)
The same goes for infinite series. There are very limited things you can do when manipulating infinite series in order to evaluate them in a logically consistent manner. Otherwise we get absolute horseshit that people in Numberphile and Mathologer videos trot out. Here's Mathologer taking Numberphile to task https://www.youtube.com/watch?... , but he commits the same sort of bullshit with infinite series/sums all the time.
He even tried to pull anything * 10 is just shifting the decimal over, so 10 * 0.333... = 3.333... 3.333... - 0.333... = 10 * 0.333... - 1 *0.333... 3 = 9 * 0.333... 1 = 3 * 0.333... 1 = 0.999...
FALSE! BULLSHIT! BAD MATHOLOGER!! Shifting the decimal over is an artifact of our base 10 system. 0.333... * 10 is incomputable! You can just as well argue that it would have a 0 at the end of it, so it's 3.333...0, then when you're trying to subtract the original 0.333... from it you're FUCKED! You don't get to drop that zero because the other number, 0.333 has a fucking 3 in every slot, including that infinite+oneth slot where the zero is, and all slots past that.
It's absurd! You can't fucking do that! 0.333... doesn't equal anything but 0.333... . Unless you know how you arrived at the computed result of 0.333... , or otherwise know what's going on within very well-defined circumstances, you absolutely cannot say 0.333... is equal to 1/3 or 0.999... is equal to 1.
Percent literally means per hundred. You don't take percentages relating to group metrics and attribute them to individuals. An all-or-nothing binary distribution shows you how fucking stupid that is in an extreme case. It's just as stupid whenever the thing your modeling isn't following a known distribution (or it does but you're using the wrong model to determine the "average" expected values), or your population size is too fucking low for anything to matter.
The joke your dad's friend gives statisticians a mild ribbing, but they need far more than that.
It used to be an option in Firefox and IE (I believe) whether or not you wanted to allow sites to fuck your context menu. I always turned that shit off. That's my context menu. Fuck your site thinking it should control my context menu.
Sometime back, FF made it impossible to turn off (as far as I know - it's certainly not a user-facing option anymore).
You can do still shift + right click to get your context menu back on shitty fucking sites and "web apps", however.
Translation: Fuchsia is Linux. We took Linux and hacked away at it to make Fuchsia. Because Oracle won in court recently, we're being a bit more careful at covering our tracks this time.
Try again. This is informing users and requiring them to give that data up willingly int he first place. Currently, Facebook et al rape it out of you surreptitiously.
Wrong. They were hiding behind that while facilitating and actively monitoring/editing posts.
You can't eat your cake and have it too. You're either not part of the content and not responsible, or you're part of it and you're responsible. They were actively involved in the content (which advertised illegal things), and tried to claim they weren't responsible. That's why they got shut the fuck down, raided, and charged.
Sorry, but you have to pass the bill to see what's in it. That's according to Nancy Pelosi (D-CA), a noted gargantuan of Democratic party Progressive philosophy.
Anyways, you gonna make congresscritters like Sheila Jackson Lee (D-TX sigh) read bills. Okay then. The next 3000 page Obamacare bill is going to take a while since she reads at the 3rd grade level. And people like Hank Johnson (D-GA) who thought the island of Guam would tip over because too many Marines were there can't even read at all. Your proposed law will never make it out of committee.
You're making great points for why such a bill would pass. All the congresstards who can't/don't read will vote Yes for it if it has a positive name.
Call it the United States Congressional Literacy Act.
All members of the Congress of the United States of America must fully read any and all legislation they vote in favor of. A vote in favor of proposed legislation shall serve as binding certification that the member has read the proposed legislation in its entirety. Should it at any time be admitted or demonstrated that this certification was false, the member shall be immediately tarred, feathered, removed from office, and be considered permanently ineligible to hold any public office, elected or otherwise.
You're implying that existing laws against kidnapping, sex with minors etc weren't sufficient to cope with "the internet". Is there any evidence for that?
Yes. The evidence was that sites like backpage.com existed and did what they did, knowingly, and were not punished for it, because they hid behind the ol' "We're not responsible for the content we host." excuse.
Slashdot Mirror
No they cannot.
Random means without cause. That's it. It doesn't mean anything with regards to distribution, homogeneity, uniformity, etc. Those things means simply mean we don't notice a cause. Forcing things to meet that criteria, either on the generation end or on the selection end, means you're biasing your shit and you're giving cause to the data chosen. Thus, it is not random.
That's why these clowns keep clinging to quantum this and quantum that for random numbers, secure message passing, etc. They think it's random.
Dude, you literally said, "the missiles are coming". WTF?
I wasn't aware of any substantive limits that the English phrase "are coming" places on time frame.
Then you aren't aware of how English works.
To say things are coming means that they are currently coming. They are in the process of coming. They are coming now.
If you want to say things are going to come, then say things are going to come, or things will be coming.
but they're really quite minor once you look at the big picture
No, they aren't. The foreign corporate power over governments bullshit in the TPP is absolutely a bigger deal than any raw sum of money.
That was obvious to anyone who read even a few pages about TPP
Really? You mean the fucking pages they kept locked away, monitored by armed guards 24/7, and prevented most congress members from actually reading?
Fuck off, shill.
TPP is trash.
Who the hell mentioned Democrats? You, and only you? Yup.
Keep on losing!
Both Democrats and Republicans attacked the deal during the president campaign, but many business leaders were disappointed when Mr. Trump withdrew from agreement
Try English, BeauHD.
The quote expressing skepticism is commiting a slight logical fallacy: Just because this might not be THE single answer doesn't mean it can't be PART of the solution. Anyone who thinks there is a single best solution to CO2 emissions is likely to be extremely disappointed.
Disappointed in the fact that retards won't use the single best solution, nuclear power.
Nah, April 19th is when shit goes down.
I'd be open to bulldozing some suburbs, planting forests and moving those people into high rise apartments.
Fuck that. We'd be better off bulldozing the overcrowded urban centers while the people were still in them.
The scoops are coming. The scoops are coming. Music to my fucking ears.
"Statistically random" means "not random".
The very act of classifying data as "random" or "not random" means that neither are random.
If I want a random number and I go to your random number generator because you've demonstrated that it's "statistically random", then I'm getting non-random numbers. I'm getting numbers that are homogeneous and well distributed. That is not random.
The very act of trying to achieve randomness, however indirectly, and rejecting methods for not being random enough means that the methods we do accept are inherently not random.
What is "provably random"?
It is bullshit.
Can you really "prove" that a number is random?
No. See above.
I'm referring to getting the real right click back. Shift + Right Click does it.
As for finding the actual element, right click and inspect element should take you directly to the element you right clicked. If the page has layered and positioned things shittily, you can use the search function in the inspector. Anything that appears as a link (such as src="whatevers") you can CTRL+Click on to open in a new tab.
If you still can't find what you need, you can right click and do View Page Info. From there, go to the media tab and sort by size descending. You'll get the real URL for the resource you're looking for. You can then save that directly or you can open it in a new tab and then hack at the URL a bit to see if there's a better version. (Plenty of sites will only serve a reduced size version of an image, but you can often easily change the URL to get the full size version.)
Nope. Fuchsia is the OS. Their kernel is called Zircon.
If they ever ship the thing, come back and remind me so I can laugh at how they ended up copying everything from Linux again. (Hopefully I don't need to find and show you the GNU/Linux / Linux is not an OS copypasta?)
Infinity * 0.5 is still infinity.
No, it's nonsense.
If you think it makes any sense at all, then please explain:
infinity * 0
infinity - infinity
infinity / 0
infinity / infinity
infinity ^ -infinity
infinity + i
You cannot perform calculations on infinity. You can perform calculations on n and find the limit (if there is one) as n approaches infinity (from both sides!) and get a useful answer for a specific situation. You can sometimes simplify your shit before hand to avoid infinity. But you absolutely cannot compute on infinity and get a meaningful result. (And substituting x for infinity, computing, then substituting infinity for x doesn't work either.)
The same goes for infinite series. There are very limited things you can do when manipulating infinite series in order to evaluate them in a logically consistent manner. Otherwise we get absolute horseshit that people in Numberphile and Mathologer videos trot out. Here's Mathologer taking Numberphile to task https://www.youtube.com/watch?... , but he commits the same sort of bullshit with infinite series/sums all the time.
He even tried to pull anything * 10 is just shifting the decimal over, so 10 * 0.333... = 3.333... ...
3.333... - 0.333... = 10 * 0.333... - 1 *0.333...
3 = 9 * 0.333
1 = 3 * 0.333...
1 = 0.999...
FALSE! BULLSHIT! BAD MATHOLOGER!!
Shifting the decimal over is an artifact of our base 10 system. 0.333... * 10 is incomputable!
You can just as well argue that it would have a 0 at the end of it, so it's 3.333...0, then when you're trying to subtract the original 0.333... from it you're FUCKED! You don't get to drop that zero because the other number, 0.333 has a fucking 3 in every slot, including that infinite+oneth slot where the zero is, and all slots past that.
It's absurd! You can't fucking do that!
0.333... doesn't equal anything but 0.333... . Unless you know how you arrived at the computed result of 0.333... , or otherwise know what's going on within very well-defined circumstances, you absolutely cannot say 0.333... is equal to 1/3 or 0.999... is equal to 1.
Statistically, they were not.
Percent literally means per hundred. You don't take percentages relating to group metrics and attribute them to individuals. An all-or-nothing binary distribution shows you how fucking stupid that is in an extreme case. It's just as stupid whenever the thing your modeling isn't following a known distribution (or it does but you're using the wrong model to determine the "average" expected values), or your population size is too fucking low for anything to matter.
The joke your dad's friend gives statisticians a mild ribbing, but they need far more than that.
It used to be an option in Firefox and IE (I believe) whether or not you wanted to allow sites to fuck your context menu.
I always turned that shit off. That's my context menu. Fuck your site thinking it should control my context menu.
Sometime back, FF made it impossible to turn off (as far as I know - it's certainly not a user-facing option anymore).
You can do still shift + right click to get your context menu back on shitty fucking sites and "web apps", however.
Fuchsia is not Linux
Translation: Fuchsia is Linux. We took Linux and hacked away at it to make Fuchsia. Because Oracle won in court recently, we're being a bit more careful at covering our tracks this time.
No cutting angle will help. Cheese will stick to a flat knife in a hurricane.
LOL, you're an idiot. There's a specific law saying they can't do that kind of crap. Contracts don't trump laws.
Try again. This is informing users and requiring them to give that data up willingly int he first place. Currently, Facebook et al rape it out of you surreptitiously.
Reeeeeeeeeeeeeeetaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaard
"Edge providers would not be allowed to impose "take-it-or-leave-it" offers that require customers to consent in order to use the service."
Wrong. They were hiding behind that while facilitating and actively monitoring/editing posts.
You can't eat your cake and have it too. You're either not part of the content and not responsible, or you're part of it and you're responsible. They were actively involved in the content (which advertised illegal things), and tried to claim they weren't responsible. That's why they got shut the fuck down, raided, and charged.
Sorry, but you have to pass the bill to see what's in it. That's according to Nancy Pelosi (D-CA), a noted gargantuan of Democratic party Progressive philosophy.
Anyways, you gonna make congresscritters like Sheila Jackson Lee (D-TX sigh) read bills. Okay then. The next 3000 page Obamacare bill is going to take a while since she reads at the 3rd grade level. And people like Hank Johnson (D-GA) who thought the island of Guam would tip over because too many Marines were there can't even read at all. Your proposed law will never make it out of committee.
You're making great points for why such a bill would pass. All the congresstards who can't/don't read will vote Yes for it if it has a positive name.
Call it the United States Congressional Literacy Act.
All members of the Congress of the United States of America must fully read any and all legislation they vote in favor of. A vote in favor of proposed legislation shall serve as binding certification that the member has read the proposed legislation in its entirety. Should it at any time be admitted or demonstrated that this certification was false, the member shall be immediately tarred, feathered, removed from office, and be considered permanently ineligible to hold any public office, elected or otherwise.
You're implying that existing laws against kidnapping, sex with minors etc weren't sufficient to cope with "the internet". Is there any evidence for that?
Yes. The evidence was that sites like backpage.com existed and did what they did, knowingly, and were not punished for it, because they hid behind the ol' "We're not responsible for the content we host." excuse.
Last week it was confirmed that Donald Trump was not the subject of a criminal investigation.
How long will he be in jail?
What were the verdict and sentence?
When is the trial?
Where is the evidence?
What are the charges?
Why are you crying?