Explain quicksort? Seriously? That borders on cruel unless they're straight out of college.
I'm seven years out of college. Here's how it works. Take the array of elements. Pick one at random. Move all the elements less than this element to the left of that element. Move all the elements greater than this element to the right of that element. Now, recursively do the same thing to the left and right halves.
If that's too confusing for you to understand or remember, once it's been taught to you, you should NOT be programming.
Correct -- if the high tension frequency was different from 60 or 50 hertz, it would have to be frequency-divided down to 60/50 hz by some very expensive components. The VOLTAGE is much higher, for efficiency reasons, but stepping voltages up and down can be done simply with two coils of wire and a piece of iron (i.e. a transformer). The frequency is the same throughout the grid. (Of course, some high tension transmission lines are DC, but radiate essentially nothing at all in the first place)
At 60 hz, the radiation from the transmittion line would have a wavelength equal to the distance light travels in 1/60th of a second -- about 5000 kilometers. Any kind of mesh whatsoever will block it.
It is like the hysteria surrounding cadmium in children's toys that is also this weeks latest worry.
Hysteria? From what I heard on the news, it's not just minor cadmium contamination. Parts of toys were composed of something like 80% cadmium. I have no idea if that's a lie or an exaggeration, but if true, it's absolutely ridiculous. Cadmium is an incredibly toxic metal and there is absolutely no reason for its use in children's toys. Period.
Statistics please. Of the most recent 100 documented terrorist attacks which actually killed anyone, how many were on airplanes? What is the probability that any given death from a terrorist attack occurred on an airplane? Thanks.
How can a security official "bypass" security? Security, by definition, is wherever they happen to be. There is no reason an authorized person should be made to jump through unnecessary hoops (note I said said "unnecessary," not all hoops). What if there is an emergency behind the checkpoint, and the only way for security to actual reach the emergency is to wait in line? That's completely stupid.
The problem is that the METHOD used to allow authorized persons to move quickly is not good enough.
I am not arguing for the existence of a single God, I am arguing against the existence of multiple Gods. You point out that my argument could be extended to argue against even a SINGLE God. Well, that's probably valid.
Just because I'm discussing religion doesn't mean I'm religious, you know.
Jeez, how many serial numbers do you type per day that you need a special key on your keyboard just to make typing serial numbers easier? Is you job title "Serial Number Entry Technician?"
God, the reality, may have nothing to do with God as described in the Bible. If there is a God, I'm pretty sure there's only one. Having multiple omnipotent beings doesn't make a whole lot of sense. If they really are omnipotent, then they have the ability to destroy each other, which means they're not really omnipotent, because they can be destroyed. The only way it makes logical sense is if there's only one.
We don't have 3 such meteorites. There are almost certainly millions of these rocks. The fact that we've found any of them at all is evidence that there are probably a lot of them. It's like finding exoplanets. You're looking for a speck of dust in the huge universe, and you find one -- basically means these specks must be everywhere.
..I'm curious if, based on previous evidence that water existed on Mars at some point before it hit the deep-freeze, does this essentially suggest that water = life everywhere?
Maybe, but an alternative explanation for life on both Earth and Mars is simply their proximity to each other. We've found Martian rocks on Earth, so clearly, material can move from one planet to the other. Of course, it's much easier for objects to fall toward the sun than away from it, so any biological transfer between Mars and Earth would probably originate on Mars. Which would mean life actually started on Mars, then (unintentionally) migrated here. That would be pretty damn awesome.
Re:HTML5 for the win? Sorry, that's not a codec.
on
YouTube Revamp Imminent?
·
· Score: 4, Insightful
"Done?" I don't think you understand this "technology" thing.
Given that the USA has no official language, why should citizenship require knowledge of any particular language? But good job injecting your irrational fear of brown people into a completely unrelated discussion.
I seriously hope that lawsuits NEVER work that way. If I legitimately feel wronged, I should have the ability to ask a court to evaluate the evidence and come to a conclusion, without the fear that I'll receive a million dollar smackdown just because I lost by "a smidge." Remember that civil justice is based on "preponderance of evidence," which means that if your side is 49% convincing and the other side is 51% convincing, the other side wins.
Suppose my entire family dies of cancer, and I suspect the cause is groundwater contamination. I sue for, say, $5 million for wrongful death. Does this really mean I need to be prepared to shell out $5 mil if the big corporation wins? That's bullshit.
My mother in law has a medical condition where exposure to bright sunlight breaks down proteins in her skin. One of the breakdown products generates an auto-immune response. In other words, she's "allergic" to bright sunlight. True, sunlight contains no proteins, but the interaction of sunlight with her skin CREATES proteins to which she is allergic.
I seriously doubt that WiFi radiation could do the same thing, but these processes can't be oversimplified like that.
Why would you reverse engineer the key fob? If you are in possession of the key fob, just press the fucking button and enter the code. I don't think you understand the "Something You Have" factor of authentication. If somebody gets your key fob, then they have Something You Had. Don't let anybody get your authenticator.
I really don't know why so many have a problem with this. If we can start getting people used to using two-factor authentication in a popular online game, maybe it will be easier to convince them to use it for banking or other personal security reasons. The inconvenience is not that much in comparison to the security you get.
The people worried that it will create a killer culture where people are being assassinated left and right to get their personal authenticators is just total paranoia.
Glasses. It would be great to get a screen on the lenses of my sunglasses, most of the time they'd be clear like normal, but info could pop up throughout the day as needed. Or I could sit back and watch a video, and just turn it off if I needed to see something.
The problem is that the glasses are so close to your eye that you wouldn't be able to focus on anything displayed on them, and even if you could, the rest of the world would be out of focus as you shifted your focal length so close to your eyes.
VR headsets, if you remember those, put the screens several inches from the eye, otherwise it would be anatomically impossible to focus on them. Now, if you were projecting light into the eye, you could theoretically manipulate it to make its focal length equal to the focal length of the eye, but that requires somehow measuring the eye's focal length. And even if you could do THAT, an LCD screen doesn't have the ability to do the kind of focusing needed. What would really work is a system of lasers that directly illuminates the retinas, like old vector output displays. But can you imagine putting something like that in a headset?
If the conductor follows a path that keeps the strength of the magnetic field constant, there will be no induced electric current.
Actually, there will be. Any charge moving in a magnetic field, whether that field is constant or not, will experience a force perpendicular to the velocity and the magnetic field. I understand where you might get this idea, because on the surface it makes sense -- if the field is constant, how could an electron "know" that it is moving vs. stationary, since the field doesn't change as it moves. I asked this question myself as an undergrad. The resolution of the problem actually requires special relativity to explain it, but it has to do with the fact that the electric and magnetic fields aren't really separate, but are both manifestations of the electromagnetic field which is a single force. The splitting of the electromagnetic field into electric and magnetic components depends on the velocity of a particle with respect to the field. In some reference frames, the field might be entirely magnetic, but in other frames it will have an electric component.
If you know the math, you can analyze these problems by thinking of the unified electromagnetic field, and predict the motion of the electron by the apparent electric field as it moves. To the electron, everything "looks like" an electric field.
I looked a few things up and was surprised to find that smaller, non-ferromagnetic metal objects can be safely scanned. The thing that is disputed is whether the presence of metal interferes too much with the received image. Metal will absorb some RF but reflect a great deal more, and the RF energy bouncing around could potentially ruin the image, or bounce back into the resonant cavity and even destroy it.
I don't think anybody would ever put somebody with a LARGE metal implant, like a femur, into an MRI though.
My point seems to have become lost. Suppose MS wants to audit you and you refuse. They try to take you to arbitration. You refuse. So they try to sue you. In court, you present the arbitration agreement. Now MS looks stupid, because they agreed to arbitration just as much as you agreed to it, and yet THEY are the ones initiating legal action. You look stupid too, because you refused initial arbitration. At this point the court is probably going to kick BOTH your asses. And at any rate, the issue in question is NOT software licensing, but whether you abided by the arbitration agreement. The financial impact of being found guilty of violating the arbitration agreement is quite possibly less than the financial impact of Microsoft discovering that you have 1000 pirated copies of Windows. The whole thing is just retarded. Why anybody would ever enter into such a contract is beyond me.
Slashdot Mirror
Explain quicksort? Seriously? That borders on cruel unless they're straight out of college.
I'm seven years out of college. Here's how it works. Take the array of elements. Pick one at random. Move all the elements less than this element to the left of that element. Move all the elements greater than this element to the right of that element. Now, recursively do the same thing to the left and right halves.
If that's too confusing for you to understand or remember, once it's been taught to you, you should NOT be programming.
Correct -- if the high tension frequency was different from 60 or 50 hertz, it would have to be frequency-divided down to 60/50 hz by some very expensive components. The VOLTAGE is much higher, for efficiency reasons, but stepping voltages up and down can be done simply with two coils of wire and a piece of iron (i.e. a transformer). The frequency is the same throughout the grid. (Of course, some high tension transmission lines are DC, but radiate essentially nothing at all in the first place)
At 60 hz, the radiation from the transmittion line would have a wavelength equal to the distance light travels in 1/60th of a second -- about 5000 kilometers. Any kind of mesh whatsoever will block it.
It is like the hysteria surrounding cadmium in children's toys that is also this weeks latest worry.
Hysteria? From what I heard on the news, it's not just minor cadmium contamination. Parts of toys were composed of something like 80% cadmium. I have no idea if that's a lie or an exaggeration, but if true, it's absolutely ridiculous. Cadmium is an incredibly toxic metal and there is absolutely no reason for its use in children's toys. Period.
Statistics please. Of the most recent 100 documented terrorist attacks which actually killed anyone, how many were on airplanes? What is the probability that any given death from a terrorist attack occurred on an airplane? Thanks.
How can a security official "bypass" security? Security, by definition, is wherever they happen to be. There is no reason an authorized person should be made to jump through unnecessary hoops (note I said said "unnecessary," not all hoops). What if there is an emergency behind the checkpoint, and the only way for security to actual reach the emergency is to wait in line? That's completely stupid.
The problem is that the METHOD used to allow authorized persons to move quickly is not good enough.
I am not arguing for the existence of a single God, I am arguing against the existence of multiple Gods. You point out that my argument could be extended to argue against even a SINGLE God. Well, that's probably valid.
Just because I'm discussing religion doesn't mean I'm religious, you know.
Jeez, how many serial numbers do you type per day that you need a special key on your keyboard just to make typing serial numbers easier? Is you job title "Serial Number Entry Technician?"
God, the reality, may have nothing to do with God as described in the Bible. If there is a God, I'm pretty sure there's only one. Having multiple omnipotent beings doesn't make a whole lot of sense. If they really are omnipotent, then they have the ability to destroy each other, which means they're not really omnipotent, because they can be destroyed. The only way it makes logical sense is if there's only one.
We don't have 3 such meteorites. There are almost certainly millions of these rocks. The fact that we've found any of them at all is evidence that there are probably a lot of them. It's like finding exoplanets. You're looking for a speck of dust in the huge universe, and you find one -- basically means these specks must be everywhere.
and yet our discovery of them, tests god.
No it doesn't. It tests the accuracy of a particularly old book, which may or may not have anything to do with God.
Maybe, but an alternative explanation for life on both Earth and Mars is simply their proximity to each other. We've found Martian rocks on Earth, so clearly, material can move from one planet to the other. Of course, it's much easier for objects to fall toward the sun than away from it, so any biological transfer between Mars and Earth would probably originate on Mars. Which would mean life actually started on Mars, then (unintentionally) migrated here. That would be pretty damn awesome.
"Done?" I don't think you understand this "technology" thing.
Given that the USA has no official language, why should citizenship require knowledge of any particular language? But good job injecting your irrational fear of brown people into a completely unrelated discussion.
What's to keep it to spreading from other industries
Customers' refusal to buy such devices. Next question?
I seriously hope that lawsuits NEVER work that way. If I legitimately feel wronged, I should have the ability to ask a court to evaluate the evidence and come to a conclusion, without the fear that I'll receive a million dollar smackdown just because I lost by "a smidge." Remember that civil justice is based on "preponderance of evidence," which means that if your side is 49% convincing and the other side is 51% convincing, the other side wins.
Suppose my entire family dies of cancer, and I suspect the cause is groundwater contamination. I sue for, say, $5 million for wrongful death. Does this really mean I need to be prepared to shell out $5 mil if the big corporation wins? That's bullshit.
My mother in law has a medical condition where exposure to bright sunlight breaks down proteins in her skin. One of the breakdown products generates an auto-immune response. In other words, she's "allergic" to bright sunlight. True, sunlight contains no proteins, but the interaction of sunlight with her skin CREATES proteins to which she is allergic.
I seriously doubt that WiFi radiation could do the same thing, but these processes can't be oversimplified like that.
Yes.
Why would you reverse engineer the key fob? If you are in possession of the key fob, just press the fucking button and enter the code. I don't think you understand the "Something You Have" factor of authentication. If somebody gets your key fob, then they have Something You Had. Don't let anybody get your authenticator.
I really don't know why so many have a problem with this. If we can start getting people used to using two-factor authentication in a popular online game, maybe it will be easier to convince them to use it for banking or other personal security reasons. The inconvenience is not that much in comparison to the security you get.
The people worried that it will create a killer culture where people are being assassinated left and right to get their personal authenticators is just total paranoia.
Glasses. It would be great to get a screen on the lenses of my sunglasses, most of the time they'd be clear like normal, but info could pop up throughout the day as needed. Or I could sit back and watch a video, and just turn it off if I needed to see something.
The problem is that the glasses are so close to your eye that you wouldn't be able to focus on anything displayed on them, and even if you could, the rest of the world would be out of focus as you shifted your focal length so close to your eyes.
VR headsets, if you remember those, put the screens several inches from the eye, otherwise it would be anatomically impossible to focus on them. Now, if you were projecting light into the eye, you could theoretically manipulate it to make its focal length equal to the focal length of the eye, but that requires somehow measuring the eye's focal length. And even if you could do THAT, an LCD screen doesn't have the ability to do the kind of focusing needed. What would really work is a system of lasers that directly illuminates the retinas, like old vector output displays. But can you imagine putting something like that in a headset?
If the conductor follows a path that keeps the strength of the magnetic field constant, there will be no induced electric current.
Actually, there will be. Any charge moving in a magnetic field, whether that field is constant or not, will experience a force perpendicular to the velocity and the magnetic field. I understand where you might get this idea, because on the surface it makes sense -- if the field is constant, how could an electron "know" that it is moving vs. stationary, since the field doesn't change as it moves. I asked this question myself as an undergrad. The resolution of the problem actually requires special relativity to explain it, but it has to do with the fact that the electric and magnetic fields aren't really separate, but are both manifestations of the electromagnetic field which is a single force. The splitting of the electromagnetic field into electric and magnetic components depends on the velocity of a particle with respect to the field. In some reference frames, the field might be entirely magnetic, but in other frames it will have an electric component.
If you know the math, you can analyze these problems by thinking of the unified electromagnetic field, and predict the motion of the electron by the apparent electric field as it moves. To the electron, everything "looks like" an electric field.
I looked a few things up and was surprised to find that smaller, non-ferromagnetic metal objects can be safely scanned. The thing that is disputed is whether the presence of metal interferes too much with the received image. Metal will absorb some RF but reflect a great deal more, and the RF energy bouncing around could potentially ruin the image, or bounce back into the resonant cavity and even destroy it.
I don't think anybody would ever put somebody with a LARGE metal implant, like a femur, into an MRI though.
Uhh... Are you retarded or something?
I lose, but how much would I have lost if I'd allowed the audit and they found millions of dollars of infringement? That's my point.
My point seems to have become lost. Suppose MS wants to audit you and you refuse. They try to take you to arbitration. You refuse. So they try to sue you. In court, you present the arbitration agreement. Now MS looks stupid, because they agreed to arbitration just as much as you agreed to it, and yet THEY are the ones initiating legal action. You look stupid too, because you refused initial arbitration. At this point the court is probably going to kick BOTH your asses. And at any rate, the issue in question is NOT software licensing, but whether you abided by the arbitration agreement. The financial impact of being found guilty of violating the arbitration agreement is quite possibly less than the financial impact of Microsoft discovering that you have 1000 pirated copies of Windows. The whole thing is just retarded. Why anybody would ever enter into such a contract is beyond me.