"All it proves is that there's a prime q <= p1*p2*....*p999*p1000+1"
Minor nitpick: q isn't necessarily prime. The smallest counterexample:
2 * 3 * 5 * 7 * 11 * 13 + 1 = 30031 = 59 * 509.
However, it does prove that there are prime numbers larger than the last prime used to construct q, which is sufficient for the purpose of proving there are an infinite number of primes.
However, a California voter is MUCH more likely to swing a presidential election that a Montana voter, simply because they can directly affect 54 electoral votes instead of Montana's 3. The math's a little tougher than simple division, but I'm sure you can find it somewhere on the Web (NFL games are about to start, so I'm not gonna look.)
I'm too lazy to look it up (maybe it's at the Nine Planets website, which I'm also too lazy to look up), but I believe the old measurements of Neptune's orbit were just wrong. It's moving just like we'd expect.
Of course, Gödel had a lot of i-dotting and t-crossing (heck, even o-dotting!) to do to turn that into the Incompleteness Theorem, but that's what it boils down to. Another good lay-person explanation (along with about 200 logic puzzles to boot) is in Raymond Smullyan's What is the Name of This Book?, ISBN 0139550623.
In Mac OS X (10.1.2, anyway), though, typing "America" works (although "amerika" is the common transliteration). It doesn't care about capitalization, and it makes some reasonable guesses for the c_ combos:
ca ->
ci ->
cu ->
ce ->
co ->
cya -> (and so on with the cy_ combos)
What does capitalization do on other editors? The first thing that I can think of is creating the small characters -- OS X uses a leading "x" for that, so can also be typed as "chixya" (or "tixya").
Another weird thing: ESPN.com had a feature in their baseball section about the National League pennant race of 1951. They included excerpts of Don DeLillo's novella "Pafko at the Wall," which was the framework for his novel Underworld. ESPN had a link to Amazon.com selling "Pafko at the Wall," which I clicked because I didn't know it was available separately. It didn't have any reviews, so I looked to see what the readers had to say about Underworld.
Since I've read that book, I probably should've remembered its cover. But, I didn't. Here it is. Compare to this, which got a 2-page spread in Time's special 9-11 issue.
1) According to my user page, my moderation points expire 8/3/2001. I saw someone else has submitted this in SourceForge, so I'll assume it'll get fixed.
2) "Slashdot Overload" still doesn't work properly -- comments 1-50 on page 1, 50-99 on page 2, 100-149 on page 3, etc. Do they care? Noooo!
-----
Bug #106050, was updated on 2000-May-18 10:17
Here is a current snapshot of the bug.
3) Is the fact that I can't see who posted a reply in nested mode a feature, or a bug? I guess that's one less join to make per comment, which is a good thing if needed, but I'd still like to have it.
4) I'd like to have the strikethru tag allowed -- much less geeky^H^H^H^H^H^H illegible.
Actually, all bets (with one exception: a two-line-bet on 0-1-2-3 is really bad) at single-zero roulette in the long run return 97.3% (36/37) of your money. Your system does the same.
Over 37 spins, you'll spend (say) ¥370. Since each number has a 1/37 probability of being hit, each number can be expected to be hit once in that span. Your expected earnings:
12 wins on your 1-12 bet (¥5 at 2:1 odds) = 12*¥15 = ¥180
12 wins on your 13-24 bet (¥4 at 2:1 odds) = 12*¥12 = ¥144
3 wins on your row bet (¥1 at 11:1 odds) = 3*¥12 = ¥36
Total gross in 37 spins: ¥180 + ¥144 + ¥36 = ¥360
I don't think the casinos would have any problem with that.
If you put all your ¥10 per spin on 2 for 37 spins, you can expect 1 win. At 35:1 odds, you'll win ¥360. (By this, I mean that you can expect in the long run to make back ¥360 of your ¥370. You could very easily double your money at some point -- there's a ~40% chance of hitting 2 in 18 spins.)
If you put ¥3 on the 17-18-20-21 intersection, ¥2 on red, ¥2 on the first column, and ¥1 each on the digits in your grandfather's birthdate (12, 15, and 19, in my case) for 37 spins, you'll still win ¥360. The actual math (or, as you might say, "maths") is/are left as an exercise for the reader. (It helps if your grandfather was born between 1900 and 1936.)
As far as maximizing possible earnings, see Duff's comment above. Lots of low-odds bets won't get you far above break-even, and you'll go broke. However, IIRC, single-zero roulette has the best payout of all games against the house unless you're counting cards.
I truly don't know enough about photography to know if this would even be remotely useful for you, but my Sony DSC-S30 (retail value ~$380) has a 37mm threaded lens mount. It doesn't have a removable lens, though, which I'm guessing is what you'd want.
A 37mm to T-ring adapter works for astrophotographical purposes, but I don't know (actually, I doubt) if you could do anything constructive with your nice lens on top of the standard lens (f=6.1-18.3mm).
That problem's intersting, but not quite the same, though -- in the 3 hat problem, everyone guesses simultaneously. Plus, only one person has to be right for the group to win, as long as everyone else passes. Plus, you can't win all of the time, but you can win a lot more of the time than you'd think. -- How many classes do you have to take
Trivia: Emmanuel Goldstein, the name of one character in the hacking group, is a nod to the pseudonym of Eric Corley, publisher of the real-life magazine 2600: The Hacker Quarterly. Corley himself took the handle from a character in George Orwell's novel 1984.
Corley served as a consultant for Hackers.
Granted, I haven't actually seen the movie, but if someone like Corley's involved, it's gotta be quality. If it were in the current poll, I'd be tempted to change my vote from Sneakers. -- How many classes do you have to take
Hopefully it's not like "dynamiting a dead whale on the beach". That can get messy. A fine mist of whale hanging in the air, medium-sized gibs of whale falling at your feet, human-sized slabs of whale crushing cars, etc.
[insert references to petunias and Magrathea here] -- How many classes do you have to take
I'm not really sure how hard it is to go from a picture to a fractal, but it's doable. When you do that, you get a good level of compression. Also, once the picture is encoded as a fractal, you can create much better enlargements than possible with just bicubic interpolation.
Altamira has a Photoshop plugin, Genuine Fractals, that does this. I haven't tested it out yet, but I remember favorable reviews for it. It only requires a "G1" Mac with 32 megs, so the process of generating the fractals can't be too hard (of course, Photoshop users are accustomed to waiting for ages for something to happen).
For a (seemingly exhaustive) survey of the state-of-the-art (as of 1999) in fractal image encoding, check out this page, which Google seems to like a lot. -- How many classes do you have to take
The Endor Holocaust site is part of Star Wars Technical Commentaries, which does make an analysis of the size of the Death Star. There is plenty of evidence for the actual (defined as what's presented in ROTJ) diameter being no smaller than 800 km -- mainly a quote from an ILM guy and the fact that Endor is a habitable planet that's about 11.5 times larger than the Death Star.
Why do people refuse to give credit these days?
The parent post was written by Deborah Brown, and can be found here:
http://www.personalads4free.com/romance.htm
(All of the tips do make sense, of course.) --
Actually, from a purely mathematical standpoint, the probability of failure is much greater than that. (Not a statistician per se, but I could've had a BS/Math if I'd filled out the paperwork.)
There are 6056 out of 6056 safe choices for the 1st wire to fail.
There are 6054 out of 6055 safe choices for the 2nd wire to fail.
There are 6052 out of 6054 safe choices for the 3rd wire to fail.
There are 6050 out of 6053 safe choices for the 4th wire to fail.
Multiply them up, and that's your probability of a safe launch (it was a launch, wasn't it? I read the article yesterday, and haven't reread it). Subtract that from 1, and you get the probability of a failure.
Doing the arithmetic, the probability of failure is 1 in 1,009.25. Almost exactly the same as winning a Pick-3 lotto game, of course.:^) --
The name of the band is Golden Shower. The song is "Video Computer System." The video actually wom MTV Brazil's Best Electronic Video award for 2000. The band's website is here. Yes, that's the right URL. Trust me.:^) It's been completely revamped since when I got the movie. (From memepool? classicgaming? slashdot?) The making of the video (which I think is a recent addition) is here. It was made pretty much like you described it.
Oh, and the "mall game" is Keystone Kapers, by Activision. Google that if you're curious. --
If you go back about 5 years or so, the World Wide Web Consortium's logo consisted of three stacked green W's in what looks like the Optima font. They were green because Robert Cailliau, some guy at CERN, is synaesthetic as well -- he sees different colors for different letters, and all his W's are green. He's even got a full-color alphabet there.
--
Slashdot Mirror
"All it proves is that there's a prime q <= p1*p2*....*p999*p1000+1"
Minor nitpick: q isn't necessarily prime. The smallest counterexample:
2 * 3 * 5 * 7 * 11 * 13 + 1 = 30031 = 59 * 509.
However, it does prove that there are prime numbers larger than the last prime used to construct q, which is sufficient for the purpose of proving there are an infinite number of primes.
Sure do. Ironically*, I read it at the Guardian's website! (about halfway down) I second the recommendation.
*Sorry about that.
However, a California voter is MUCH more likely to swing a presidential election that a Montana voter, simply because they can directly affect 54 electoral votes instead of Montana's 3. The math's a little tougher than simple division, but I'm sure you can find it somewhere on the Web (NFL games are about to start, so I'm not gonna look.)
I'm too lazy to look it up (maybe it's at the Nine Planets website, which I'm also too lazy to look up), but I believe the old measurements of Neptune's orbit were just wrong. It's moving just like we'd expect.
You're thinking of Sengan, who posted this a little before my time:
US and UK unilaterally attack Iraq
As I type this, the +5s are highly anti-Michael; I can't really add anything to them.
(Wow, this could be my very first down-mod ever! I'm so excited!)
"This statement cannot be proved."
Of course, Gödel had a lot of i-dotting and t-crossing (heck, even o-dotting!) to do to turn that into the Incompleteness Theorem, but that's what it boils down to. Another good lay-person explanation (along with about 200 logic puzzles to boot) is in Raymond Smullyan's What is the Name of This Book?, ISBN 0139550623.
In Mac OS X (10.1.2, anyway), though, typing "America" works (although "amerika" is the common transliteration). It doesn't care about capitalization, and it makes some reasonable guesses for the c_ combos:
ca ->
ci ->
cu ->
ce ->
co ->
cya -> (and so on with the cy_ combos)
What does capitalization do on other editors? The first thing that I can think of is creating the small characters -- OS X uses a leading "x" for that, so can also be typed as "chixya" (or "tixya").
I think you're thinking of "Circus on Ice", a short in front of episode 421, "Monster a Go Go." Some more quotes from the bots can be found here.
Since I've read that book, I probably should've remembered its cover. But, I didn't. Here it is. Compare to this, which got a 2-page spread in Time's special 9-11 issue.
1) According to my user page, my moderation points expire 8/3/2001. I saw someone else has submitted this in SourceForge, so I'll assume it'll get fixed.
2) "Slashdot Overload" still doesn't work properly -- comments 1-50 on page 1, 50-99 on page 2, 100-149 on page 3, etc. Do they care? Noooo!
-----
Bug #106050, was updated on 2000-May-18 10:17
Here is a current snapshot of the bug.
Project: Slash
Category: Comments
Status: Closed
Resolution: Wont Fix
Bug Group: Slashcode
Priority: 2
Submitted by: eithkay
Assigned to : cbwood
Summary: 1-off error in "Slashdot Overload"
-----
3) Is the fact that I can't see who posted a reply in nested mode a feature, or a bug? I guess that's one less join to make per comment, which is a good thing if needed, but I'd still like to have it.
4) I'd like to have the strikethru tag allowed -- much less geeky^H^H^H^H^H^H illegible.
5) But, other than that, it's all good (AFAIK).
Over 37 spins, you'll spend (say) ¥370. Since each number has a 1/37 probability of being hit, each number can be expected to be hit once in that span. Your expected earnings:
12 wins on your 1-12 bet (¥5 at 2:1 odds) = 12*¥15 = ¥180
12 wins on your 13-24 bet (¥4 at 2:1 odds) = 12*¥12 = ¥144
3 wins on your row bet (¥1 at 11:1 odds) = 3*¥12 = ¥36
Total gross in 37 spins: ¥180 + ¥144 + ¥36 = ¥360
I don't think the casinos would have any problem with that.
If you put all your ¥10 per spin on 2 for 37 spins, you can expect 1 win. At 35:1 odds, you'll win ¥360. (By this, I mean that you can expect in the long run to make back ¥360 of your ¥370. You could very easily double your money at some point -- there's a ~40% chance of hitting 2 in 18 spins.)
If you put ¥3 on the 17-18-20-21 intersection, ¥2 on red, ¥2 on the first column, and ¥1 each on the digits in your grandfather's birthdate (12, 15, and 19, in my case) for 37 spins, you'll still win ¥360. The actual math (or, as you might say, "maths") is/are left as an exercise for the reader. (It helps if your grandfather was born between 1900 and 1936.)
As far as maximizing possible earnings, see Duff's comment above. Lots of low-odds bets won't get you far above break-even, and you'll go broke. However, IIRC, single-zero roulette has the best payout of all games against the house unless you're counting cards.
--
I truly don't know enough about photography to know if this would even be remotely useful for you, but my Sony DSC-S30 (retail value ~$380) has a 37mm threaded lens mount. It doesn't have a removable lens, though, which I'm guessing is what you'd want.
A 37mm to T-ring adapter works for astrophotographical purposes, but I don't know (actually, I doubt) if you could do anything constructive with your nice lens on top of the standard lens (f=6.1-18.3mm).
Ref: http://home.att.net/~scopetronix/digitalcam.html
--
That problem's intersting, but not quite the same, though -- in the 3 hat problem, everyone guesses simultaneously. Plus, only one person has to be right for the group to win, as long as everyone else passes. Plus, you can't win all of the time, but you can win a lot more of the time than you'd think.
--
How many classes do you have to take
--
How many classes do you have to take
--
How many classes do you have to take
Hopefully it's not like "dynamiting a dead whale on the beach". That can get messy. A fine mist of whale hanging in the air, medium-sized gibs of whale falling at your feet, human-sized slabs of whale crushing cars, etc.
[insert references to petunias and Magrathea here]
--
How many classes do you have to take
Altamira has a Photoshop plugin, Genuine Fractals, that does this. I haven't tested it out yet, but I remember favorable reviews for it. It only requires a "G1" Mac with 32 megs, so the process of generating the fractals can't be too hard (of course, Photoshop users are accustomed to waiting for ages for something to happen).
For a (seemingly exhaustive) survey of the state-of-the-art (as of 1999) in fractal image encoding, check out this page, which Google seems to like a lot.
--
How many classes do you have to take
(with an assist from an old LA Times Sunday crossword)
--
...of course, I thought they were a 1-hit wonder, and not the one you quoted. :^)
--
http://theforce.net/swtc/ds.html#dimensions
http://theforce.net/swtc/ds.html#summary
(The whole SWTC site is fun to read, BTW.)
--
Why do people refuse to give credit these days? The parent post was written by Deborah Brown, and can be found here: http://www.personalads4free.com/romance.htm (All of the tips do make sense, of course.)
--
Actually, from a purely mathematical standpoint, the probability of failure is much greater than that. (Not a statistician per se, but I could've had a BS/Math if I'd filled out the paperwork.)
:^)
There are 6056 out of 6056 safe choices for the 1st wire to fail.
There are 6054 out of 6055 safe choices for the 2nd wire to fail.
There are 6052 out of 6054 safe choices for the 3rd wire to fail.
There are 6050 out of 6053 safe choices for the 4th wire to fail.
Multiply them up, and that's your probability of a safe launch (it was a launch, wasn't it? I read the article yesterday, and haven't reread it). Subtract that from 1, and you get the probability of a failure.
Doing the arithmetic, the probability of failure is 1 in 1,009.25. Almost exactly the same as winning a Pick-3 lotto game, of course.
--
Is that supposed to be Brak's rendition of Eiffel 65's smash hit, "Blue (Da Ba Dee)"? Just curious....
--
Oh, and the "mall game" is Keystone Kapers, by Activision. Google that if you're curious.
--
If you go back about 5 years or so, the World Wide Web Consortium's logo consisted of three stacked green W's in what looks like the Optima font. They were green because Robert Cailliau, some guy at CERN, is synaesthetic as well -- he sees different colors for different letters, and all his W's are green. He's even got a full-color alphabet there.
--