For much of the history of western Christianity, it was considered very important to be buried whole; otherwise God might have trouble resurrecting you. I don't know if this was official teaching, but it was certainly widespread belief.
No, actually, if you read TFA you will see he was buried with other canons (a type of church employee, which he was). They just didn't think there was anything special about him (his book on heliocentricty was printed immediately before his death), and apparently, you had to be important to get a headstone in Poland at that point.
I live in the US and I can do most if not all of those things on my bank's website. However, this is not what the original poster was asking. They want an *API* to do this, so they can write their own code. This an is entirely separate issue.
Hmm, yeah, I am reading the WP page on GPS now, and it looks like it does send out time info. A lot of things are sent, and it is not clear to me from the article how often this time is sent out.
It turns out that GPS doesn't actually send the time. That's just a convenient simplification for explaining how it works. Instead, it sends a long bitstring with minimal repetition, with each satellite sending the same bit in the sequence simultaneously. Receivers compute how far out of sync the bitstrings are with each other to find their location.
While you may agree or disagree, the guiding principle behind this reliance on precedent is that people should know what the law is going to do. Even if a court rules in a way that is completely ludicrous to those in the know, later courts of the same jurisdiction cannot overrule it , or at least are loath to do so, so those subject to the law will know how it will be applied in the future.
The inductive proof will prove that "0." followed by any arbitrarily long sequence of 9s is not equal to 1. However, it does not prove that an inifinite sequence of 9s is equal to 1. In general, induction on the natural numbers will prove some property of all finite naturals, but it doesn't say anything about "infinity". The above proof fails when it assumes that induction on the length of a sequence of 9s will tell us anything about an infinite sequence of 9s.
Very, very roughly, this fails because "infinity" is not a number.
Argh no. You can't use induction on the naturals to prove things about infinite sequences, only about arbitrarily long finite sequences. For infinite sequences you need transfinite induction or coinduction, and, since.999... does actually equal 1, the proof won't go through.
If you read the text of the bill (here), you will see that it also prohibits things like requiring employees to have a microchip implanted as a condition of their employment, which could be reasonably construed as "nonviolent". Actual forcible surgery against someone's will is already assault in many jurisdictions; if someone were to actually implant a microchip against a patient's will, they would be in trouble for a lot more than violating just this law.
Actually, no one is making faster cores any more. We've hit a large technological roadblock in that area, due largely to heat dissipation issues. The fastest commercially available x86 chips have been a little under 4 GHz for about five years now. Current chip design focuses on heat and power issues and increasing the number of cores on the chip.
I made a kill once in Halo with an unmodified Rock Band drum kit. It was completely luck, though; all I could do was jump and shoot, not move in any way.
I'm wondering what sort of more scientific data one could get from a setup like this. Not for actual science purposes, but for my or his own fun. Do the CCDs used have enough intensity granularity that one could detect the red and blue shift differences in spinning galaxies, for instance, and do some dark matter calculations for oneself?
I'm still utterly baffled by what's going on here, and neither article seems to answer my questions. Since, in most cases, Google News only displays a snippet of the article (almost certainly fair use?) and then requires readers to click through to the actual web site of the news source to read the rest of the article, what is preventing those sites from implementing whatever access control scheme they feel like? (This should have nothing at all to do with robots.txt or ACAP which is about whether the *Google spider* can see the content, not whether users linking from Google can.) Am I missing some technical point?
TFA says "Previously, each click from a user would be treated as free," Google senior business product manager Josh Cohen said in a blog post.
So it sounds like (maybe?) the news sites have a policy that says that clickthroughs from Google don't have to be routed through their access control. Why? Is this something Google requires newspapers to do in order to do display links to them on Google News? This seems to be the best theory, but I didn't see anything anywhere that actually said that.
So, in sum, is this a technical or a social/legal/contractual issue, and what, exactly, is it that is preventing these news sites from using their normal access control?
Slashdot Mirror
That sounds like my life when I watched all of BSG in a month...
There was no early adopter status, with people going around implying they were socially superior to you because they had a device.
Oh, I bet the first holders of Gutenberg bibles acted incredibly superior to their friends.
That turns out to already be true. An enormous number of textbooks can be found in P2P networks and torrents.
For much of the history of western Christianity, it was considered very important to be buried whole; otherwise God might have trouble resurrecting you. I don't know if this was official teaching, but it was certainly widespread belief.
No, actually, if you read TFA you will see he was buried with other canons (a type of church employee, which he was). They just didn't think there was anything special about him (his book on heliocentricty was printed immediately before his death), and apparently, you had to be important to get a headstone in Poland at that point.
Whoa, I've seen those. Thanks for telling me what the hell it is!
I live in the US and I can do most if not all of those things on my bank's website. However, this is not what the original poster was asking. They want an *API* to do this, so they can write their own code. This an is entirely separate issue.
Have you tried shooting lasers when it happens?
Sure it can! See nuclear summer.
Hmm, yeah, I am reading the WP page on GPS now, and it looks like it does send out time info. A lot of things are sent, and it is not clear to me from the article how often this time is sent out.
It turns out that GPS doesn't actually send the time. That's just a convenient simplification for explaining how it works. Instead, it sends a long bitstring with minimal repetition, with each satellite sending the same bit in the sequence simultaneously. Receivers compute how far out of sync the bitstrings are with each other to find their location.
This explains why a given item costs the same in Oklahoma and New York City.
While you may agree or disagree, the guiding principle behind this reliance on precedent is that people should know what the law is going to do. Even if a court rules in a way that is completely ludicrous to those in the know, later courts of the same jurisdiction cannot overrule it , or at least are loath to do so, so those subject to the law will know how it will be applied in the future.
The inductive proof will prove that "0." followed by any arbitrarily long sequence of 9s is not equal to 1. However, it does not prove that an inifinite sequence of 9s is equal to 1. In general, induction on the natural numbers will prove some property of all finite naturals, but it doesn't say anything about "infinity". The above proof fails when it assumes that induction on the length of a sequence of 9s will tell us anything about an infinite sequence of 9s.
Very, very roughly, this fails because "infinity" is not a number.
Argh no. You can't use induction on the naturals to prove things about infinite sequences, only about arbitrarily long finite sequences. For infinite sequences you need transfinite induction or coinduction, and, since .999... does actually equal 1, the proof won't go through.
If you read the text of the bill (here), you will see that it also prohibits things like requiring employees to have a microchip implanted as a condition of their employment, which could be reasonably construed as "nonviolent". Actual forcible surgery against someone's will is already assault in many jurisdictions; if someone were to actually implant a microchip against a patient's will, they would be in trouble for a lot more than violating just this law.
Actually, no one is making faster cores any more. We've hit a large technological roadblock in that area, due largely to heat dissipation issues. The fastest commercially available x86 chips have been a little under 4 GHz for about five years now. Current chip design focuses on heat and power issues and increasing the number of cores on the chip.
Yeah, Bob was pretty cool when I was a child. I used to spend hours arranging things in imaginary rooms.
Now I code.
Then it's AWESOME.
I made a kill once in Halo with an unmodified Rock Band drum kit. It was completely luck, though; all I could do was jump and shoot, not move in any way.
I'm wondering what sort of more scientific data one could get from a setup like this. Not for actual science purposes, but for my or his own fun. Do the CCDs used have enough intensity granularity that one could detect the red and blue shift differences in spinning galaxies, for instance, and do some dark matter calculations for oneself?
Man, the real WTF is that I didn't even notice that...
I feel this way too. My theory is that they messed with the color balance enough that it didn't look quite natural.
You do realize that nobody reads post titles, right?
I'm still utterly baffled by what's going on here, and neither article seems to answer my questions. Since, in most cases, Google News only displays a snippet of the article (almost certainly fair use?) and then requires readers to click through to the actual web site of the news source to read the rest of the article, what is preventing those sites from implementing whatever access control scheme they feel like? (This should have nothing at all to do with robots.txt or ACAP which is about whether the *Google spider* can see the content, not whether users linking from Google can.) Am I missing some technical point?
TFA says
"Previously, each click from a user would be treated as free," Google senior business product manager Josh Cohen said in a blog post.
So it sounds like (maybe?) the news sites have a policy that says that clickthroughs from Google don't have to be routed through their access control. Why? Is this something Google requires newspapers to do in order to do display links to them on Google News? This seems to be the best theory, but I didn't see anything anywhere that actually said that.
So, in sum, is this a technical or a social/legal/contractual issue, and what, exactly, is it that is preventing these news sites from using their normal access control?