The only reason I have Silverlight installed is to be able to access Project Tuva. Feynman is as good a reason as it gets. Otherwise, I wouldn't bother.
You can file a civil lawsuit only. This isn't the same as filing charges, the latter usually means a criminal case. If random people could file criminal charges, the courts would make hell look like a quiet, desirable, low-key place to be.
I used the term "attorney working for a government" in a broad sense. An attorney needs to be licensed to practice law in a given jurisdiction, and needs to be authorized by given government to file charges on government's behalf. Whether it's state or district attorney depends on what court one speaks of. I don't think that a state AG could overrule a DA, since the latter is appointed by the federal government, and the former by the state government. They work in different courts pretty much by definition.
?! Last I checked, in the U.S. the only ones who can file any criminal charges are attorneys working for some government. You can let such an attorney know about what happened by filing a report, but that's it. You can't file criminal charges as a member of the public.
No, it doesn't. You don't get in trouble for accidentally taking a nudie of a kid
In most jurisdictions in the U.S., you get classified as a sex offender simply for peeing in a public park, even if nobody besides the cop saw you. What you say makes sense, but U.S. lawmakers disagree. Sorry.
Pictures of naked anyone don't have to be pornographic in nature. If they are, though, here's no helping you under U.S. law. Pornography laws are blind to intent. Same as with drug possession laws: intent or lack thereof is no excuse.
So, to you it's impossible to have life outside of school, because obviously I can only go to parties with classmates. I went to school to learn shit. I had life and family outside of school. Grad school classmates were a distraction. I would not want any of them at any party I went to, thankyouverymuch. Undergrad classmates were some of the coolest people I've ever met, though, some of them became friends for life.
I think that if you start factoring in productivity, safety (think code running an elevator) and employee morale, we seriously need a statically compiled successor to C++. I do plenty of embedded system development and frankly said C sucks big donkey balls, and C++ is not much better. Good luck getting C++0x support for lower-end CPUs. If the vendor doesn't base the toolkit on LLVM, they'll have jolly good time porting their gcc held together by string and chewing gum unless they use a mainstream architecture that's supported by gcc out-of-the-box and is being maintained.
I'm really longing for a language that will enable producing good quality compiled code while still enabling compile-type computation a-la lisp. This would let us, among other things, have domain specific languages (DSLs) and custom introspection in our projects.
C/C++ compilers treat a bunch of functions in a special way, but won't extend the courtesy to others. Think of a line such as y = sin(1.3). Modern compilers know that the sin function is a special function, and they hard-code how to obtain the constant result during compile-time. It's a big fucking shame that this is not possible for arbitrary pure functions.
Modern CS concepts (read: only recently come mainstream) need a language and a platform to try things out. I do know that you can teach everything using LISP, but it is somewhat useful, IMHO, to show that those concepts also apply in widely deployed platforms like F# on top of CLR, C#, etc.
It is language agnostic to a point. Ultimately you need to do examples in some language. I hope I won't rain on anyone's parade by mentioning, just in passing, that the CLR and the languages that run on it often provide reasonably state-of-the-art functionality when it comes both to back-end compiler features and front-end language design. And I'm not a MS fanboy, just somewhat worried by stagnated state of C++ and ObjC.
I second that. You can add metadata (Spotlight comments) to any file, and that metadata is searchable, so if you're thinking of tagging files, that's easy.
FedEx has been seemingly in cahoots with USPS for quite a while. In my area, nearly every USPS location has a FedEx drop box installed on the property.
Do they even have any legal standing to enforce using of a trademark to identify their own product? I mean, if they don't want it called an iPod, maybe they should have called it something else to begin with? If I want to promote my company be giving away free iPods, good luck with convincing anyone that I can't state it as a fact.
So, ha, I learned something again. I never thought about how a spinning disc in a rotating frame of reference will be affected, and that there will be a torque on it. I've found the derivations already done. I would have to redo them since I'm not 100% sure that I understood what is meant by torque (is the torque meant to be a component along the axis of rotation). It looks hopeful, tough.
Alas, all that it takes to fix the problem is -- apparently -- to make the gyro spherical.
I may be rusty on my dynamics, but will the flywheels actually lose energy if they are being constantly reoriented by applying radial force to their shafts via the maglev bearing? If you look at the kinetic energy of the flywheel, it is constant in spite of changes in angular momentum. Changing angular momentum requires zero net work when you integrate over proper time period(s).
The assembly would also need to be made non-conductive, otherwise I presume that the presence of Earth's magnetic field will slowly brake it due to eddy currents.
"Tehran, Iran. In an unprecedented move towards improving the quality and safety of food supply, Iran today has officially opened two new centrifuge isotope separation plants. With existing facility in Natanz, those will cover Iran's needs for non-radioactive potassium. The clean potassium has been in distribution for some time now as various salts used as food supplements growing in popularity. With the latest plants coming online, within a year most potassium consumed in Iran will be free of the dangerous radioactive isotope. [...]"
Most of the rat studies have, um, phenomenally low samples. You'd think that with today's technology they could run thousands of experiments for each group (cage, control, exposed). The results are really touch-and-go in all the papers you mentioned. Of course they have statistical validity, but the degree to which they are valid (likelihood of same outcome happening by random) leaves something to be desired IMHO.
Alas, that's not where the main issue is. The main issues I have is with blaming GSM specifically, and are as follows, and if you have any citations that address those I'd love to hear:
1. Did anyone test with continuous, wideband noise with same overall absorption? 2. Did anyone test with wideband noise pulse-modulated to typical GSM envelope? 3. Did anyone test with penetrating longwave infrared radiation (from a laser), at same absorption, running with same GSM envelope? 4. Did anyone consider that the effects may be of thermo-mechanical origin, where the envelope causes repetitive thermal shock?
At this point it's very unclear what is to blame, and at best the results indicate that a whole lot of other research needs to be done.
Couldn't agree more. Javascript is like early RISC chips. People joked that RISC meant 'relegate impossible stuff to the compiler'. We've since figured out how to handle RISC instruction sets well, but Javascript compilers are at the same early stage it seems. Javascript is an "impossible" language to compile into fast code. It requires significant advances in JIT type inference, whole program profile-guided optimization, etc. The theory for all that has been mostly worked out long ago, it's just a matter of efficient implementations that don't take 1GB to JIT a piece of 90s vintage cross-compiled C that used to run in 8MB and compiled in just as much... Javascript's architecture, unfortunately, requires very nontrivial code analysis. My expectation is that a well done Javascript engine will use more memory while JITting than the heap used by the target code itself. There's very little one can do to help in this department methinks.
Slashdot Mirror
The only reason I have Silverlight installed is to be able to access Project Tuva. Feynman is as good a reason as it gets. Otherwise, I wouldn't bother.
You can file a civil lawsuit only. This isn't the same as filing charges, the latter usually means a criminal case. If random people could file criminal charges, the courts would make hell look like a quiet, desirable, low-key place to be.
I used the term "attorney working for a government" in a broad sense. An attorney needs to be licensed to practice law in a given jurisdiction, and needs to be authorized by given government to file charges on government's behalf. Whether it's state or district attorney depends on what court one speaks of. I don't think that a state AG could overrule a DA, since the latter is appointed by the federal government, and the former by the state government. They work in different courts pretty much by definition.
?! Last I checked, in the U.S. the only ones who can file any criminal charges are attorneys working for some government. You can let such an attorney know about what happened by filing a report, but that's it. You can't file criminal charges as a member of the public.
No, it doesn't. You don't get in trouble for accidentally taking a nudie of a kid
In most jurisdictions in the U.S., you get classified as a sex offender simply for peeing in a public park, even if nobody besides the cop saw you. What you say makes sense, but U.S. lawmakers disagree. Sorry.
Pictures of naked anyone don't have to be pornographic in nature. If they are, though, here's no helping you under U.S. law. Pornography laws are blind to intent. Same as with drug possession laws: intent or lack thereof is no excuse.
So, to you it's impossible to have life outside of school, because obviously I can only go to parties with classmates. I went to school to learn shit. I had life and family outside of school. Grad school classmates were a distraction. I would not want any of them at any party I went to, thankyouverymuch. Undergrad classmates were some of the coolest people I've ever met, though, some of them became friends for life.
I think that if you start factoring in productivity, safety (think code running an elevator) and employee morale, we seriously need a statically compiled successor to C++. I do plenty of embedded system development and frankly said C sucks big donkey balls, and C++ is not much better. Good luck getting C++0x support for lower-end CPUs. If the vendor doesn't base the toolkit on LLVM, they'll have jolly good time porting their gcc held together by string and chewing gum unless they use a mainstream architecture that's supported by gcc out-of-the-box and is being maintained.
I'm really longing for a language that will enable producing good quality compiled code while still enabling compile-type computation a-la lisp. This would let us, among other things, have domain specific languages (DSLs) and custom introspection in our projects.
C/C++ compilers treat a bunch of functions in a special way, but won't extend the courtesy to others. Think of a line such as y = sin(1.3). Modern compilers know that the sin function is a special function, and they hard-code how to obtain the constant result during compile-time. It's a big fucking shame that this is not possible for arbitrary pure functions.
Modern CS concepts (read: only recently come mainstream) need a language and a platform to try things out. I do know that you can teach everything using LISP, but it is somewhat useful, IMHO, to show that those concepts also apply in widely deployed platforms like F# on top of CLR, C#, etc.
It is language agnostic to a point. Ultimately you need to do examples in some language. I hope I won't rain on anyone's parade by mentioning, just in passing, that the CLR and the languages that run on it often provide reasonably state-of-the-art functionality when it comes both to back-end compiler features and front-end language design. And I'm not a MS fanboy, just somewhat worried by stagnated state of C++ and ObjC.
Different people learn in different ways. To me classmates were, at best, a distraction.
Oh, yes, this. Brings back fond memories of a troll extraordinaire.
I second that. You can add metadata (Spotlight comments) to any file, and that metadata is searchable, so if you're thinking of tagging files, that's easy.
FedEx has been seemingly in cahoots with USPS for quite a while. In my area, nearly every USPS location has a FedEx drop box installed on the property.
Do they even have any legal standing to enforce using of a trademark to identify their own product? I mean, if they don't want it called an iPod, maybe they should have called it something else to begin with? If I want to promote my company be giving away free iPods, good luck with convincing anyone that I can't state it as a fact.
So, ha, I learned something again. I never thought about how a spinning disc in a rotating frame of reference will be affected, and that there will be a torque on it. I've found the derivations already done. I would have to redo them since I'm not 100% sure that I understood what is meant by torque (is the torque meant to be a component along the axis of rotation). It looks hopeful, tough.
Alas, all that it takes to fix the problem is -- apparently -- to make the gyro spherical.
I may be rusty on my dynamics, but will the flywheels actually lose energy if they are being constantly reoriented by applying radial force to their shafts via the maglev bearing? If you look at the kinetic energy of the flywheel, it is constant in spite of changes in angular momentum. Changing angular momentum requires zero net work when you integrate over proper time period(s).
The Coriolis effect doesn't affect the energy stored in a closed system, right?
The assembly would also need to be made non-conductive, otherwise I presume that the presence of Earth's magnetic field will slowly brake it due to eddy currents.
This may give someone an idea, though:
"Tehran, Iran. In an unprecedented move towards improving the quality and safety of food supply, Iran
today has officially opened two new centrifuge isotope separation plants. With existing facility in Natanz,
those will cover Iran's needs for non-radioactive potassium. The clean potassium has been in distribution
for some time now as various salts used as food supplements growing in popularity. With the latest
plants coming online, within a year most potassium consumed in Iran will be free of the dangerous
radioactive isotope. [...]"
I think that DDT is fairly harmless when eaten, isn't it? Perhaps it was just a bad choice of an example.
And this is the comment I was looking for! Thank you!
Most of the rat studies have, um, phenomenally low samples. You'd think that with today's technology they could run thousands of experiments for each group (cage, control, exposed). The results are really touch-and-go in all the papers you mentioned. Of course they have statistical validity, but the degree to which they are valid (likelihood of same outcome happening by random) leaves something to be desired IMHO.
Alas, that's not where the main issue is. The main issues I have is with blaming GSM specifically, and are as follows, and if you have any citations that address those I'd love to hear:
1. Did anyone test with continuous, wideband noise with same overall absorption?
2. Did anyone test with wideband noise pulse-modulated to typical GSM envelope?
3. Did anyone test with penetrating longwave infrared radiation (from a laser), at same absorption, running with same GSM envelope?
4. Did anyone consider that the effects may be of thermo-mechanical origin, where the envelope causes repetitive thermal shock?
At this point it's very unclear what is to blame, and at best the results indicate that a whole lot of other research needs to be done.
I only compared the compiler-"unfriendliness" aspect, not any measure of complexity.
Couldn't agree more. Javascript is like early RISC chips. People joked that RISC meant 'relegate impossible stuff to the compiler'. We've since figured out how to handle RISC instruction sets well, but Javascript compilers are at the same early stage it seems. Javascript is an "impossible" language to compile into fast code. It requires significant advances in JIT type inference, whole program profile-guided optimization, etc. The theory for all that has been mostly worked out long ago, it's just a matter of efficient implementations that don't take 1GB to JIT a piece of 90s vintage cross-compiled C that used to run in 8MB and compiled in just as much... Javascript's architecture, unfortunately, requires very nontrivial code analysis. My expectation is that a well done Javascript engine will use more memory while JITting than the heap used by the target code itself. There's very little one can do to help in this department methinks.