I think he's commenting on the fact that the second he tries to make use of his asylum (i.e. by leaving the embassy to make his way to the airport) he will be arrested -- quite legally -- by British police.
So, someone who can't take their eyes off their book is fine, but someone who can't take their eyes off their ebook should be kicked off the flight?
Interestingly, a flight I was on last week (SAS from Copenhagen to Manchester) didn't care about the lady beside me using her kindle. Phones, laptops, etc., all had to be switched off, but her kindle was fine.
I think the slashdot bragging rights were more interesting to him.:)
What an arrogant prick you really are.
He replied to your suggestions telling you that they weren't helpful, and that you should just rip the code out. He was right. Your response? You told him to fork VTE!!!!
Seriously? A shining example of free-software, this is not.
The only evidence for there ever being such a person is the gospels in the bible. Roman records of Jesus do not exist.
Not true. Look for the history of Josephus -- a Jewish historian writing at the time of Christ (or a little after?) for the Romans.
A lot of the other stuff you wrote is pretty interesting, but I thought you'd appreciate hearing that historical records for Jesus exist outside of religious texts.
Yeah, about two seconds after submitting this story, I realised that I forgot to put a question mark at the end of the title as I had originally intended:(
"Faulty Cable to Blame for Superluminal Neutrino Results?" would have been better, right?
But I was a little more accurate with the summary I think.
Filtering isn't even really for advanced amateurs, since the cost of a filter pales in comparison to the cost of the scope. 20-30$ will get you something that will get rid of most of the low-pressure sodium (orange) emissions. Novices, like me, have a small set of filters they use to improve various views of different objects, and a lot of these filters will be completely defeated by white lights. I'm pretty busy, and prefer to do my observing from my backyard, rather than wasting a couple of hours in a car, so actions like this (replacing easily filtered lights with broad-spectrum ones) is a little irritating.
For astronomers that can actually be worse. For one, if they're not reducing the current through the light to take advantage that more of it is going to its intended target, then the increased reflected light from the street still causes light pollution.
More importantly, those white lights emit all over the spectrum, and are incredibly hard to filter out. The ugly orange lights only emit at a couple of frequencies, and is very easy to filter out.
The site they're moving to -- the Gower -- has much darker skies than the glare of Swansea. So, yeah -- they've decided, probably for good reason, that it's not worth paying that much extra for light polluted skies, when they could maintain their costs and increase the quality of their experience.
They survived just fine (obviously), but humans have forced the evolution of cows and other animals so hard & fast that there are many species that quite literally could not survive outside of a farm. Chickens, turkeys, cows (I think) -- look it up.
I had a reply all ready to go about how that statement is wrong since I can quickly prove that pi or sqrt(2) are not rational numbers, but your two word reply is so much more elegant. Absolutely perfect. Bravo!:)
I have two kids, and no TV, and it really isn't so frighteningly difficult to get stuff done that I want to have a TV babysit them. I agree with the GP -- the thought of an 11 month old sitting in front of a TV or a tablet for extended periods really makes me sad.
Zero mass particles don't have a rest frame. Boosting into different frames -- any frame you like -- will only alter their frequency, not their velocity. They move at c in *all* inertial frames.
If you can be bothered reading it, there might be something in this -- http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Historicity_of_Jesus -- and the citations listed there. I think there were other people to mention a historical Jesus, but each and every one (I think) comes with a lot of YMMV warnings.
Personally I don't think it's unreasonable to believe there really was a historical Jesus, but I'm not out to convince anyone, and I don't think there is anything particularly irrational about your belief that he didn't exist. I just wanted to answer your request for a non-Christian source.
I think it's more important to see the difference between the "he existed / he didn't exist" argument, and the "he was the son of God / no he wasn't" argument. The former is a pretty minor leap of faith, while the latter requires abandoning a lot of what we know about the world.
One issue could be the question of the rights of the hybrid. For example, humans have many rights that cows don't, but what about a cow with a human central nervous system?
Or other primates with bits and pieces of human "code" in their brains? If we say that this animal isn't human, and therefore only deserving of the rights normally given to other primates even though it shows clear signs of human intelligence, wouldn't that somehow be wrong? But on the other hand, should they have full human rights, a seat at the UN, etc.?
Stretching things a little, wouldn't it be possible to create a slave-class of creature, with many of the abilities of humans but none of the rights?
There would seem to be a lot of room for a lot of pain to be caused if we don't get this right.
His uncertainty principle doesn't put any limits on how accurately we can know any one number. It puts a limit on how accurately we can know certain pairs of numbers (e.g. position and momentum). There is nothing in his principle that says we can't know one of those numbers *precisely*, as long as we are completely uncertain as to the value of its canonical pair.
Each particle has 5 TeV of kinetic energy. There will be (roughly) 1e12 particles per bunch, and (roughly) 1e3 bunches per pulse.
This works out as ~800 MJ per pulse.
That is the same energy as a 1e6 kg train moving at ~80 mph, so the comparison is not as daft as it would seem.
(Note: Those numbers are all pretty rough, and I'm sure someone will be along soon to correct me soon, but the point is that the LHC beams store waaay more KE than you would imagine.)
Slashdot Mirror
which he has no ability to make use of.
what are you on about?
I think he's commenting on the fact that the second he tries to make use of his asylum (i.e. by leaving the embassy to make his way to the airport) he will be arrested -- quite legally -- by British police.
Actually, I was thinking about the comment immediately above the AC you replied to. The one about allowing periods of silence to emerge in the track.
Don't respond to the AC trolls :)
I was much more interested in seeing your (you are the guy who put this together, right?) reply to the GP post
So, someone who can't take their eyes off their book is fine, but someone who can't take their eyes off their ebook should be kicked off the flight?
Interestingly, a flight I was on last week (SAS from Copenhagen to Manchester) didn't care about the lady beside me using her kindle. Phones, laptops, etc., all had to be switched off, but her kindle was fine.
I think the slashdot bragging rights were more interesting to him. :)
What an arrogant prick you really are. He replied to your suggestions telling you that they weren't helpful, and that you should just rip the code out. He was right. Your response? You told him to fork VTE!!!! Seriously? A shining example of free-software, this is not.
The only evidence for there ever being such a person is the gospels in the bible. Roman records of Jesus do not exist.
Not true. Look for the history of Josephus -- a Jewish historian writing at the time of Christ (or a little after?) for the Romans.
A lot of the other stuff you wrote is pretty interesting, but I thought you'd appreciate hearing that historical records for Jesus exist outside of religious texts.
"Faulty Cable to Blame for Superluminal Neutrino Results?" would have been better, right?
But I was a little more accurate with the summary I think.
Filtering isn't even really for advanced amateurs, since the cost of a filter pales in comparison to the cost of the scope. 20-30$ will get you something that will get rid of most of the low-pressure sodium (orange) emissions. Novices, like me, have a small set of filters they use to improve various views of different objects, and a lot of these filters will be completely defeated by white lights. I'm pretty busy, and prefer to do my observing from my backyard, rather than wasting a couple of hours in a car, so actions like this (replacing easily filtered lights with broad-spectrum ones) is a little irritating.
For astronomers that can actually be worse. For one, if they're not reducing the current through the light to take advantage that more of it is going to its intended target, then the increased reflected light from the street still causes light pollution. More importantly, those white lights emit all over the spectrum, and are incredibly hard to filter out. The ugly orange lights only emit at a couple of frequencies, and is very easy to filter out.
The site they're moving to -- the Gower -- has much darker skies than the glare of Swansea. So, yeah -- they've decided, probably for good reason, that it's not worth paying that much extra for light polluted skies, when they could maintain their costs and increase the quality of their experience.
They survived just fine (obviously), but humans have forced the evolution of cows and other animals so hard & fast that there are many species that quite literally could not survive outside of a farm. Chickens, turkeys, cows (I think) -- look it up.
I had a reply all ready to go about how that statement is wrong since I can quickly prove that pi or sqrt(2) are not rational numbers, but your two word reply is so much more elegant. Absolutely perfect. Bravo! :)
I have two kids, and no TV, and it really isn't so frighteningly difficult to get stuff done that I want to have a TV babysit them. I agree with the GP -- the thought of an 11 month old sitting in front of a TV or a tablet for extended periods really makes me sad.
You must be new here....
Zero mass particles don't have a rest frame. Boosting into different frames -- any frame you like -- will only alter their frequency, not their velocity. They move at c in *all* inertial frames.
If you can be bothered reading it, there might be something in this -- http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Historicity_of_Jesus -- and the citations listed there. I think there were other people to mention a historical Jesus, but each and every one (I think) comes with a lot of YMMV warnings. Personally I don't think it's unreasonable to believe there really was a historical Jesus, but I'm not out to convince anyone, and I don't think there is anything particularly irrational about your belief that he didn't exist. I just wanted to answer your request for a non-Christian source. I think it's more important to see the difference between the "he existed / he didn't exist" argument, and the "he was the son of God / no he wasn't" argument. The former is a pretty minor leap of faith, while the latter requires abandoning a lot of what we know about the world.
Josephus is one -- http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Josephus_on_Jesus -- but I think there is some disagreement about that.
One issue could be the question of the rights of the hybrid. For example, humans have many rights that cows don't, but what about a cow with a human central nervous system?
Or other primates with bits and pieces of human "code" in their brains? If we say that this animal isn't human, and therefore only deserving of the rights normally given to other primates even though it shows clear signs of human intelligence, wouldn't that somehow be wrong? But on the other hand, should they have full human rights, a seat at the UN, etc.?
Stretching things a little, wouldn't it be possible to create a slave-class of creature, with many of the abilities of humans but none of the rights?
There would seem to be a lot of room for a lot of pain to be caused if we don't get this right.
Wow! That was fast! Thanks chill!
sdmolloy at gmail
Pretty please? :)
His uncertainty principle doesn't put any limits on how accurately we can know any one number. It puts a limit on how accurately we can know certain pairs of numbers (e.g. position and momentum). There is nothing in his principle that says we can't know one of those numbers *precisely*, as long as we are completely uncertain as to the value of its canonical pair.
Not a lot of people seem to be complaining about that, but it was one of the first things I noticed. I guess the /. crowd don't like xkcd any more :(
Shit. Accidentally modded you redundant. Posting to negate.
Or maybe there's a guy in Belfast wanting to advertise his films, and he's smart enough to get posted to slashdot?
Can you imagine his disappointment when he realises he only made it to Idle?
Each particle has 5 TeV of kinetic energy.
There will be (roughly) 1e12 particles per bunch, and (roughly) 1e3 bunches per pulse.
This works out as ~800 MJ per pulse.
That is the same energy as a 1e6 kg train moving at ~80 mph, so the comparison is not as daft as it would seem.
(Note: Those numbers are all pretty rough, and I'm sure someone will be along soon to correct me soon, but the point is that the LHC beams store waaay more KE than you would imagine.)