'going to be'?
Okay, I'll admit current freight doesn't typically go 250. But high speed passenger trains don't generally carry hundreds of tons of chlorine, ammonia, insert your other favorite chemical here...
It sounds like what he's arguing is that (e.g.) space elevators can yield a big reward, but rockets cannot. Pushing money at space elevators is riskier than pushing money at rockets, but if rockets aren't going to be able to take you where you want to be, what good are they?
The standard for high schools (at least the ones I've seen) is to have students move from room to room. A telepresence robot is easier to move than a pile of videoconferencing gear, and having the teacher move instead would mess up their whole scheduling system.
It's not "can only use Apple's merchant setup" (yet). So far it's just "has to have Apple's merchant setup as an option", which will of course seem like the easier option and therefore catch a lot of users. They'll make it 'only' later, when they realize that sellers are giving different prices and people are using the cheaper one.
You mean the article containing these two paragraphs?
Lanza recalls bumping up against his company's main competitor, Geron Corporation, when it came to researching stem cells in reversing diabetes, a process he said he had been working on with animals for many years.
"When I came to ACT to try to do it with stem cells I couldn't because the rights to use embryonic stem cells for diabetes had been exclusively licensed to Geron," he said.
I don't see where GP was advocating Google _not returning results_ for a certain search, just that Google doesn't have to _suggest that search_ when the user types the first 3 letters of one of the terms.
So accept that it can happen and plan for it. As soon as an ID collision is detected (either by two same-ID cars meeting each other, or a third car seeing two cars with the same ID but located far enough apart that they wouldn't detect each other), both cars immediately generate new numbers. Using Smart cars (2.5m x 1.5m) you can fit about 217364251 cars in a 10 mile radius; the odds of a (really) randomly generated 122 bit ID matching any of those is around 4e-27 percent.
I'd think 2, maybe 2.5 (kids meals are cheaper) is a more likely number of people at a table, and I hear more people undertip than overtip, so 10% is probably a better average. I don't know about how many tables one person serves at a time, but that's probably a reasonable figure given that lunch and dinner will be busier than the period between. Still, that's 46758/year, plus whatever fraction of minimum wage they get as their hourly pay...
but not nearly as much fun as playing with Lego brand bricks:)
One of the first things I learned is that 0.333... (as an example) is an approximation of 1/3. A fraction such as 1/3 cannot be 100% accurately represented in a decimal system.
Here's one problem. 1/3 cannot be accurately represented in a decimal system _with a finite number of digits_. 0.3 is an approximation; so are 0.333 and 0.3333333 But 0.333... is not a finite number of digits; it is an infinite number of digits, and is in fact an exact representation.
As to your questions...
1. No, just because it's infinite does not make it 1. An infinite series of 9s is not the same as an infinite series of 8s. I would however assert that 0.8... is 8/9, and 0.7.... is 7/9, and 0.34667... is 31201/90000 (there's a theme here, with the 9s in the denominator. Try the divisions for yourself if you like). Following the same pattern, 0.9.... would be 9/9, which is equal to 1.
2. In part. See 3:)
3. The infinite nature relates to the value like so: 0.9999...99 with any finite number of digits (let's call the number of digits X) is demonstrably different from 1; just subtract it from 1 and you get 0.000....1 with (x-1) zeroes after the decimal. Try that with an infinite value for X and you never ever ever get to the 1 after the zeroes, because there is no "after the zeroes". Which leaves you with '1 - 0.9.... = 0', which (by adding 0.9... to each side) becomes '1 = 0.9...'.
Well, look at it like this. Let f(x,y) = sum(n=1..x) of y/(10^n). So f(1,9) is 0.9, f(2,9) is 0.99, etc.
Using this notion, f(x,3) * 3 = f(x,9) for any x. Therefore 0.9... to x digits = 0.3... to x digits, for any x. Now set x to infinity.
Personally, I'd say that the perception that 0.9... and 1 could be different is an artifact of notation, just like a perception that 0.5 and 1/2 could be different.
If it's only a partial solution (implied by "failure of classification") then it's not very interesting, is it? We already have algorithms that can solve _some_ 3SAT problems, just not _all_ 3SAT problems. Wouldn't the latter be necessary to, as Romanov put it in his letter, "The fact of existence of the polynomial algorithm for 3-SAT problem leads to a conclusion that P=NP."?
If the non-voters get up in arms enough to go vote for whoever isn't Republican or Democrat, green guy could have made it. The problem is not that most of the non-voters are in despair, it's that most of them aren't dissatisfied enough to get off their butts.
Right. The court is asking Sony to explain why a California court (where they filed) has jurisdiction, because Hotz's lawyer filed a response saying "What's california got to do with it? He lives in New Jersey".
Slashdot Mirror
yep, supporting detail is everything.
I read of a new one recently (dreamplug... http://hardware.slashdot.org/story/11/02/01/2017219/DreamPlug-ARM-Box-Brings-Power-To-Plug-Computing) that had 2 gigiabit nics (plus wifi).
Hey, that was part of my Driver's Ed class in high school!
'going to be'? Okay, I'll admit current freight doesn't typically go 250. But high speed passenger trains don't generally carry hundreds of tons of chlorine, ammonia, insert your other favorite chemical here...
So "you are not allowed to kill your neighbor and steal his lawn mower" is a bad regulation?
Benevolent dictators are great. The problem is keeping them and their successors benevolent.
NAT allows my network to appear as a single computer to any server outside of my network, how do I achieve that with IPv6?
Out of honest curiosity, why do you want to do this?
It sounds like what he's arguing is that (e.g.) space elevators can yield a big reward, but rockets cannot. Pushing money at space elevators is riskier than pushing money at rockets, but if rockets aren't going to be able to take you where you want to be, what good are they?
Hence the incompatibility. The GPL says you have to be able to do that; the Apple Store terms say you can't.
The standard for high schools (at least the ones I've seen) is to have students move from room to room. A telepresence robot is easier to move than a pile of videoconferencing gear, and having the teacher move instead would mess up their whole scheduling system.
It's not "can only use Apple's merchant setup" (yet). So far it's just "has to have Apple's merchant setup as an option", which will of course seem like the easier option and therefore catch a lot of users. They'll make it 'only' later, when they realize that sellers are giving different prices and people are using the cheaper one.
Lanza recalls bumping up against his company's main competitor, Geron Corporation, when it came to researching stem cells in reversing diabetes, a process he said he had been working on with animals for many years.
"When I came to ACT to try to do it with stem cells I couldn't because the rights to use embryonic stem cells for diabetes had been exclusively licensed to Geron," he said.
I don't see where GP was advocating Google _not returning results_ for a certain search, just that Google doesn't have to _suggest that search_ when the user types the first 3 letters of one of the terms.
So accept that it can happen and plan for it. As soon as an ID collision is detected (either by two same-ID cars meeting each other, or a third car seeing two cars with the same ID but located far enough apart that they wouldn't detect each other), both cars immediately generate new numbers. Using Smart cars (2.5m x 1.5m) you can fit about 217364251 cars in a 10 mile radius; the odds of a (really) randomly generated 122 bit ID matching any of those is around 4e-27 percent.
I'd think 2, maybe 2.5 (kids meals are cheaper) is a more likely number of people at a table, and I hear more people undertip than overtip, so 10% is probably a better average. I don't know about how many tables one person serves at a time, but that's probably a reasonable figure given that lunch and dinner will be busier than the period between. Still, that's 46758/year, plus whatever fraction of minimum wage they get as their hourly pay... but not nearly as much fun as playing with Lego brand bricks :)
One of the first things I learned is that 0.333... (as an example) is an approximation of 1/3. A fraction such as 1/3 cannot be 100% accurately represented in a decimal system.
Here's one problem. 1/3 cannot be accurately represented in a decimal system _with a finite number of digits_. 0.3 is an approximation; so are 0.333 and 0.3333333 But 0.333... is not a finite number of digits; it is an infinite number of digits, and is in fact an exact representation.
As to your questions...
1. No, just because it's infinite does not make it 1. An infinite series of 9s is not the same as an infinite series of 8s. I would however assert that 0.8... is 8/9, and 0.7.... is 7/9, and 0.34667... is 31201/90000 (there's a theme here, with the 9s in the denominator. Try the divisions for yourself if you like). Following the same pattern, 0.9.... would be 9/9, which is equal to 1.
2. In part. See 3 :)
3. The infinite nature relates to the value like so: 0.9999...99 with any finite number of digits (let's call the number of digits X) is demonstrably different from 1; just subtract it from 1 and you get 0.000....1 with (x-1) zeroes after the decimal. Try that with an infinite value for X and you never ever ever get to the 1 after the zeroes, because there is no "after the zeroes". Which leaves you with '1 - 0.9.... = 0', which (by adding 0.9... to each side) becomes '1 = 0.9...'.
Well, look at it like this. Let f(x,y) = sum(n=1..x) of y/(10^n). So f(1,9) is 0.9, f(2,9) is 0.99, etc.
Using this notion, f(x,3) * 3 = f(x,9) for any x. Therefore 0.9... to x digits = 0.3... to x digits, for any x. Now set x to infinity.
Personally, I'd say that the perception that 0.9... and 1 could be different is an artifact of notation, just like a perception that 0.5 and 1/2 could be different.
What if he was responding to "The impact of allied codebreaking during WW2 is vastly overestimated." and ignoring the second sentence?
If it's only a partial solution (implied by "failure of classification") then it's not very interesting, is it? We already have algorithms that can solve _some_ 3SAT problems, just not _all_ 3SAT problems. Wouldn't the latter be necessary to, as Romanov put it in his letter, "The fact of existence of the polynomial algorithm for 3-SAT problem leads to a conclusion that P=NP."?
If the non-voters get up in arms enough to go vote for whoever isn't Republican or Democrat, green guy could have made it. The problem is not that most of the non-voters are in despair, it's that most of them aren't dissatisfied enough to get off their butts.
(I do agree that the headline is poorly worded but it's derived from a technically-correct but also poorly worded line in TFA).
Right. The court is asking Sony to explain why a California court (where they filed) has jurisdiction, because Hotz's lawyer filed a response saying "What's california got to do with it? He lives in New Jersey".
Since he likes Joel, point him to http://www.joelonsoftware.com/items/2007/10/26.html (especially item 3 under "while we're at it": "Don't let managers badger developers into shorter estimates").
I love this idea; I've been wanting to build it into my car now for years.
Why would he mind false positives?