"If there are an infinite number of parallel universes for each possible quantum outcome, why do we only experience -this- one?"
Because this experience is what comes along with the universe that followed this path. In the many-worlds interpretation, there would probably be another universe in which you had a different experience and are also asking the same question. I don't grasp what's compelling about your question.
Amen! Used to, if I wanted something from the store, I'd randomly do things and at some point I ended up at the store and had my item (good luck getting back home though). Now that I've learned about algorithms, I can walk there, get the item, then walk home, all in less than an hour. Algorithms have saved me so much time! What has the world done without algorithms all this time?
'I've searched the web for the caller-ids, and it seems this happens all over
the country.. some folks were successful at tracking down who actually makes the calls
(often a Florida address), and some interrogated the people who picked up when you
'press 1' finding they're just working for some unknown entity out of their basement.
The caller-id numbers are from all over, sometimes local, sometimes from other states,
and others 'Blocked', but often it's the same message."
Check out whocalled.us, if you haven't already. You get a way to connect with others who get the same calls, perhaps organize something.
A survey asked 1,011 American adults how long they would feel OK without going on the Web, to which 15 percent said a just a day or less, 21 percent said a couple of days and another 19 percent said a few days.
Only a fifth of those who took part in an online survey conducted by advertising agency JWT between Sept 7 and 11 said they could go for a week.
They didn't survey whether the people could go without internet, they surveyed whether the people felt they couldn't go without internet. Plus it was apparently only of people who already surf the internet enough to bother taking polls. Sometimes people feel they could eat 10 pounds of food, but ofter eating a fraction of that, find they don't really have the appetite. This is kind of like the error new programmers make of ignoring pointer indirection. Oh, here's the real agenda at the end:
JWT, whose parent company is WPP, has come up with a new advertising category for people whose lives are so tied up with new technology.
It seems to me that taking a BSD-style piece of code and modifying it would allow me to release my modified version under the GPL with the addition of the BSD requirements. Adding the GPL requirements to my modified version doesn't counter anything in the BSD license, and adding the BSD requirements doesn't counter anything in the GPL license. The key point is that any derivations from my modified version would be bound by the GPL, and not just the BSD.
Interesting how the same is true for Nintendo. The portable market is the new frontier, and it's not nearly as held back by legacy compatibility as desktop PCs are, so doing good is more a matter of design and innovation than whether you're a particular company or not.
"Frankly, it was the "we have turned on [....]" press release that finally broke the straw on this camel's back."
Was the camel wearing a straw back-brace or something? Usually it's the addition of straw that finally breaks the camel's back due to the weight of all the staw it's carrying.
Same here. I've never had cable but watching it at someone else's place a few times I was always surprised by how often compression artifacts were quite noticeable. That's why I was surprised that someone would feel cheated by getting analog instead of digital; I figure they'd consider it an extra bonus.
Oh, you can do anything you want with the BSD code.... but we'll publicly shame you for doing things we don't like. But don't look at the BSD license text for a list of these things you shouldn't do. You had better ask for permission when you want to do anything, that's the only way to know.
"Once again, it is American consumers who lose from these tactics." I'll bet a couple of people around here were wondering how they misspelled "loose".
My god did they not have scales in your school? These things compare mass of two objects, thus they work no matter what the gravity is (as long as it's non-zero).
The only things a copyright holder can limit is redistribution/performance of the work. The author can't dictate how you use the work outside of that. Outside of copyright, many software vendors try to make the user believe he is bound to other restrictions.
"This desire to keep the old stuff going is what keeps USA in the cellphone middle ages."
And what keeps computer processors there too. They even had a chance to make a break from x86 with 64-bit but they still kept the same old crap. Sorry, off-topic and a rant, but I hate the x86 architecture.
Furthermore, why is it the FCC's business what format cable operators encode the signals in? Freeing up the public spectrum is one of the FCC's tasks. What if cable operators want to scramble their signals? Will the FCC block that since it makes it incompatible with analog televisions unless they have a convertor box?
Yes, 2/3 of the summary is something that the submitter should have put in a comment. It's like he simply wanted to get his comment in the center stage rather than summarize this constant extension of the "deadline".
Nope, the loop stops at a > numCandidates-1, that is, a = numCandidates, which is past the end of the array.
Not sure what's wrong with the coding style. Restoring the whitespace yields
int maxDonation=0; int bestCandidate=0; for (int a =0; a<= numCandidates-1; a++) {
if (candidates[a].donation > maxDonation)
{
maxDonation = candidates[a].donation;
bestCandidate = a;
} }
candidates[a].CastVote();
About all I'd change is the last line to use bestCandidate, and the for loop to the more common "a lt; numCandidates" (I'm guessing that the original poster simply doesn't regularly code in C++/Java).
Won't happen. There will always be some kind of inherent tradeoff between memory speed and characteristics desirable for mass storage. You can affort a few MB of really fast cache, whereas making this tradeoff for all of your storage would be a waste. It will be nice if/when we can at least merge the mass storage/main memory split and just have mass memory and the processor and its cache.
Slashdot Mirror
"If there are an infinite number of parallel universes for each possible quantum outcome, why do we only experience -this- one?"
Because this experience is what comes along with the universe that followed this path. In the many-worlds interpretation, there would probably be another universe in which you had a different experience and are also asking the same question. I don't grasp what's compelling about your question.
Amen! Used to, if I wanted something from the store, I'd randomly do things and at some point I ended up at the store and had my item (good luck getting back home though). Now that I've learned about algorithms, I can walk there, get the item, then walk home, all in less than an hour. Algorithms have saved me so much time! What has the world done without algorithms all this time?
Article summary could have had a few extra words summarizing what a "mashup" is. To me it sounds like what I do with my potatoes before I eat them.
'I've searched the web for the caller-ids, and it seems this happens all over the country.. some folks were successful at tracking down who actually makes the calls (often a Florida address), and some interrogated the people who picked up when you 'press 1' finding they're just working for some unknown entity out of their basement. The caller-id numbers are from all over, sometimes local, sometimes from other states, and others 'Blocked', but often it's the same message."
Check out whocalled.us, if you haven't already. You get a way to connect with others who get the same calls, perhaps organize something.
They didn't survey whether the people could go without internet, they surveyed whether the people felt they couldn't go without internet. Plus it was apparently only of people who already surf the internet enough to bother taking polls. Sometimes people feel they could eat 10 pounds of food, but ofter eating a fraction of that, find they don't really have the appetite. This is kind of like the error new programmers make of ignoring pointer indirection. Oh, here's the real agenda at the end:
You lost credibility by advertising your site at least twice in this thread. Is it that hard to hold back on promoting in every post?
It seems to me that taking a BSD-style piece of code and modifying it would allow me to release my modified version under the GPL with the addition of the BSD requirements. Adding the GPL requirements to my modified version doesn't counter anything in the BSD license, and adding the BSD requirements doesn't counter anything in the GPL license. The key point is that any derivations from my modified version would be bound by the GPL, and not just the BSD.
"just let me know when they provide a nuclear option"
If you just need the explosive power, Sony's current batteries have that covered pretty well.
Interesting how the same is true for Nintendo. The portable market is the new frontier, and it's not nearly as held back by legacy compatibility as desktop PCs are, so doing good is more a matter of design and innovation than whether you're a particular company or not.
"Frankly, it was the "we have turned on [....]" press release that finally broke the straw on this camel's back."
Was the camel wearing a straw back-brace or something? Usually it's the addition of straw that finally breaks the camel's back due to the weight of all the staw it's carrying.
Same here. I've never had cable but watching it at someone else's place a few times I was always surprised by how often compression artifacts were quite noticeable. That's why I was surprised that someone would feel cheated by getting analog instead of digital; I figure they'd consider it an extra bonus.
The governments of the world don't need easy access to your game saves, apparently.
Indeed!
Oh, you can do anything you want with the BSD code.... but we'll publicly shame you for doing things we don't like. But don't look at the BSD license text for a list of these things you shouldn't do. You had better ask for permission when you want to do anything, that's the only way to know.
They also misspelled Rumpelstiltskin.
My god did they not have scales in your school? These things compare mass of two objects, thus they work no matter what the gravity is (as long as it's non-zero).
The only things a copyright holder can limit is redistribution/performance of the work. The author can't dictate how you use the work outside of that. Outside of copyright, many software vendors try to make the user believe he is bound to other restrictions.
"Is there one for Windows?"
Yes, but no matter how much Windows you put in, nothing comes out. Not sure why.
"This desire to keep the old stuff going is what keeps USA in the cellphone middle ages."
And what keeps computer processors there too. They even had a chance to make a break from x86 with 64-bit but they still kept the same old crap. Sorry, off-topic and a rant, but I hate the x86 architecture.
"Although there is a danger with this idea: that a derivative is better than the original."
Another danger is that culture will be enriched by this derivation. We'd better not take that risk, eh?
Furthermore, why is it the FCC's business what format cable operators encode the signals in? Freeing up the public spectrum is one of the FCC's tasks. What if cable operators want to scramble their signals? Will the FCC block that since it makes it incompatible with analog televisions unless they have a convertor box?
Yes, 2/3 of the summary is something that the submitter should have put in a comment. It's like he simply wanted to get his comment in the center stage rather than summarize this constant extension of the "deadline".
Not sure what's wrong with the coding style. Restoring the whitespace yields About all I'd change is the last line to use bestCandidate, and the for loop to the more common "a lt; numCandidates" (I'm guessing that the original poster simply doesn't regularly code in C++/Java).
Stupid ideas are like an endangered species... with a big government protection program and land set aside for it.
Won't happen. There will always be some kind of inherent tradeoff between memory speed and characteristics desirable for mass storage. You can affort a few MB of really fast cache, whereas making this tradeoff for all of your storage would be a waste. It will be nice if/when we can at least merge the mass storage/main memory split and just have mass memory and the processor and its cache.