Thank you for taking the time to correct my misuse of a sixty year old acronym in an off-hand quip replying to a fart joke. It is this level of attention to detail which makes slashdot what it is.
I had an unhackable computer, but unfortunately I tried to ship it to the USA on an unsinkable ship. Now I'll just have to transmit details of it to you using my unbreakable code.
Not being American, I didn't realise PATRIOT (as in Act) was an acronym - yuck, forced or what?
I had to resort to AcronymFinder, and one of the alternatives (presumably referring to the SAM) was 'Phased Array Tracking Radar Intercept On Target', which kind of re-enforces your point.
I beg of you not to confuse "average" and "median".
This has come up before. "average" is an indistinct term covering any number of measures of central tendancy (including the median). It does not specifically refer to the arithmetic mean, however much some people would like it to. News reports quoting "average" house prices and salaries almost always refer to median values.
Anadin at the time was aspirin, not paracetamol (not that it makes a difference to your point). I seem to remember a lame joke when the advert came out - "I took nothing, and they're right, it does work faster than Anadin"
He makes perfect sense. Transmission losses are lower for DC at equivalent Voltage/Current because of inductive losses with AC. Historically this has been offset by the greater transformer losses incurred by DC, but modern equipment means that, for long-distance power lines, HVDC is already more efficient than traditional AC distribution.
especially since PC has been used as synonymous with "windows-based home computer" since 1981.
That would be four years before the release of Windows 1.0, and about nine years before anybody really used it, but yeah, s/windows/microsoft/ and that is pretty much true, especially in an unqualified context.
If the context makes it clear that hardware is being referred to, then I don't think it has ever implied a specific OS, just an x86 (and now also x86-64) machine.
I am not a scientist. I can't see why 'top' and 'bottom' are in any way better than 'beauty' and 'truth', especially as names for types of quark. I don't know if the discarded names are a reference to the last lines of Keats' 'Ode to a Grecian Urn', although I suspect they are. Either way they are far cooler names, and cool is always good.
I assume that 'top' and 'bottom' were chosen because they share charge and spin with 'up' and 'down' respectively, but if this case, why weren't 'charm' and 'strange' renamed to something like 'heaven' and 'earth', or 'sky' and 'ground'? Looks like inconsistent nomenclature to me.
Dephlogisticated Air obviously had to go with the demise of phlogiston theory, but I'm sticking with 'Oil of Vitriol' for H2SO4, especially since we now have to spell 'sulphuric' with an 'f' (curse you, IUPAC and damn you RSC)
His rather prolific theological works are also not held as in high regard as his mathematical work.
My point still stands. Newton took several college classes in Philosophy and Mathematics, and yet clearly had a problem with logically inferring the Trinity from scripture. This is a counter-example to your stated assertion, thereby showing it to be false.
I always wondered that if all human knowledge/evidence was lost, books, video clips etc. (With one exception) and a handful of humans survived, with no prior knowledge of anything before themselves except a grasp of English, and these people were to find the only surviving books, a complete works of J. R. R. Tolkien, what the hell religion would be like then.
Wonder no longer, just get your ass over to Iceland.
I also first saw this story in relation to crows, I think it was in a book about imagery in Celtic mythology. I can't remember the quoted source, or even the book, but 'Russian' rings a faint bell. Wikipedia quotes a very similar story, with a count of 7, in the Bird Intelligence article, but with no citation. I would love to know if this is actually documented behavior, or just an urban (rural?) myth.
There seems to be plenty of well documented stuff about corvid intelligence in general, and tool use by New Caledonian Crows in particular, but solid evidence for the counting story seems hard to find.
Perhaps a suggestion for the next series of Mythbusters?
Slashdot Mirror
That's not pedantry, it's rigour.
Thank you for taking the time to correct my misuse of a sixty year old acronym in an off-hand quip replying to a fart joke. It is this level of attention to detail which makes slashdot what it is.
I had an unhackable computer, but unfortunately I tried to ship it to the USA on an unsinkable ship. Now I'll just have to transmit details of it to you using my unbreakable code.
Not being American, I didn't realise PATRIOT (as in Act) was an acronym - yuck, forced or what?
I had to resort to AcronymFinder, and one of the alternatives (presumably referring to the SAM) was 'Phased Array Tracking Radar Intercept On Target', which kind of re-enforces your point.
Don't be obtuse - he obviously means his Ship-Bourne Dive-Bombers.
I beg of you not to confuse "average" and "median".
This has come up before. "average" is an indistinct term covering any number of measures of central tendancy (including the median). It does not specifically refer to the arithmetic mean, however much some people would like it to. News reports quoting "average" house prices and salaries almost always refer to median values.
Sack the third guy - he was so busy trying (and failing) to be clever, he fscked up the logic. Unforgivable.
( The 'ne' should be a 'eq')
Anadin at the time was aspirin, not paracetamol (not that it makes a difference to your point). I seem to remember a lame joke when the advert came out - "I took nothing, and they're right, it does work faster than Anadin"
He makes perfect sense. Transmission losses are lower for DC at equivalent Voltage/Current because of inductive losses with AC. Historically this has been offset by the greater transformer losses incurred by DC, but modern equipment means that, for long-distance power lines, HVDC is already more efficient than traditional AC distribution.
especially since PC has been used as synonymous with "windows-based home computer" since 1981.
That would be four years before the release of Windows 1.0, and about nine years before anybody really used it, but yeah, s/windows/microsoft/ and that is pretty much true, especially in an unqualified context.
If the context makes it clear that hardware is being referred to, then I don't think it has ever implied a specific OS, just an x86 (and now also x86-64) machine.
That works fine for 28/56/84 year "anniversaries" but once you cross 100 things start getting wonky, especially once you cross 1582 (the year).
You early adopters can get off my lawn. I (and the *nix 'cal' program) didn't go Gregorian until September 1752.
And while we're at it, everybody get a magic marker and 'correct' your record collection to read
They're not 'wrong' names, they're noms de plume, there is a difference.
(Free virtual coconut to anyone who gets them all without looking them up)
I fell asleep at a Rush gig in the 80s. At Bingley Hall, Staffordshire. That's an all-standing venue.
That's what the E.T. on the sub-etha radio told us to do - ".....the secret is to bang the rocks together, guys"
(OK, so they're not rocks exactly, but close enough..)
Wonder what their naming convention is. Simpsons characters or types of curry just won't cut it.
It's France (mostly), so I'm guessing Asterix characters - there's plenty of those.
I am not a scientist. I can't see why 'top' and 'bottom' are in any way better than 'beauty' and 'truth', especially as names for types of quark. I don't know if the discarded names are a reference to the last lines of Keats' 'Ode to a Grecian Urn', although I suspect they are. Either way they are far cooler names, and cool is always good.
I assume that 'top' and 'bottom' were chosen because they share charge and spin with 'up' and 'down' respectively, but if this case, why weren't 'charm' and 'strange' renamed to something like 'heaven' and 'earth', or 'sky' and 'ground'? Looks like inconsistent nomenclature to me.
Dephlogisticated Air obviously had to go with the demise of phlogiston theory, but I'm sticking with 'Oil of Vitriol' for H2SO4, especially since we now have to spell 'sulphuric' with an 'f' (curse you, IUPAC and damn you RSC)
Homepage is here.
yeah, it's called (surprise, surprise) 'tree'
Included in slackware, available for ubuntu (sudo apt-get install tree), and written by Steve Baker (ice@mama.indstate.edu)
Odd socks don't go 'missing', they crawl into dark wardrobes and, after a short larval stage, emerge as fully-formed wire coat-hangers.
His rather prolific theological works are also not held as in high regard as his mathematical work.
My point still stands. Newton took several college classes in Philosophy and Mathematics, and yet clearly had a problem with logically inferring the Trinity from scripture. This is a counter-example to your stated assertion, thereby showing it to be false.
Also been done, as evidenced by 390,000 Brits stating their religion as 'Jedi' in the 2001 census.
I always wondered that if all human knowledge/evidence was lost, books, video clips etc. (With one exception) and a handful of humans survived, with no prior knowledge of anything before themselves except a grasp of English, and these people were to find the only surviving books, a complete works of J. R. R. Tolkien, what the hell religion would be like then.
Wonder no longer, just get your ass over to Iceland.
Isaac Newton was famously anti-trinitarian, but then everyone knows he was terrible at logical inference.
No, I can't sell what doesn't exist.
Doesn't seem to stop Futures traders...
I also first saw this story in relation to crows, I think it was in a book about imagery in Celtic mythology. I can't remember the quoted source, or even the book, but 'Russian' rings a faint bell. Wikipedia quotes a very similar story, with a count of 7, in the Bird Intelligence article, but with no citation. I would love to know if this is actually documented behavior, or just an urban (rural?) myth.
There seems to be plenty of well documented stuff about corvid intelligence in general, and tool use by New Caledonian Crows in particular, but solid evidence for the counting story seems hard to find.
Perhaps a suggestion for the next series of Mythbusters?
They prefer to have everything decided for them.
This kind of choice can lead to anarchy or marijuana use.
Miguel de Icaza
Sooo glad that isn't an exclusive or.