You know what, Slashdot was the first forum I ever posted on, and still the only one I check every day, after seven years or so. And I've posted on a lot of forums over the years.
The spinning bucket thing is related to Mach's princicple, which played a part in Einstein's thinking about the universe... although GR doesn't actually say anything about it.
The mobile phone? Being able to be in instant communication with practically any other person no matter where you or they are in the world? I'd say that's a life-changing invention at least on a par with the internet.
He's correct; you're wrong:) As long as having an appendix isn't fatal (or leads to a decreased chance of having kids) before you pass your genes on, then there's no selection pressure against it.
You seem to have missed out on a lot of it. Klerck came around a good couple of years after the start of sid=trolltalk, which was started by osm and 80md and soon joined by Gnarphlager, Craig McPherson, 70%, jsm, dmg (both English BTW) and some Asian female poster whose name I can't remember. Crapflooding forced the move to sid=k22320inchfan which is where things really took off, and the mailing list started for things like meetups in real life and so on after crapflooders started posting a lot.
By the time Klerck and co had pretty much crapflooded trolls out of the game, we'd all moved on to running Adequacy anyway.
A better idea was what was done a while back - measure the size of gzipped source code, which measures the semantic complexity of the code. Python kicked other languages' arses there.
Nope, that's not true. Here are some comments from the Guardian's website...
Moira Haynes, from the National Association of Citizens Advice Bureau (NACAB), says: "It's a common misconception that people have a right to return goods. That right, as a legal right, doesn't exist."
A shop has no legal obligation to offer you a refund or exchange unless the item is faulty. The big retailers like Marks & Spencer are being remarkably understanding when they offer you a refund or credit note on a non-faulty item.
So, what are your precise rights of return? We put your questions to the retailers and consumer organisations:
1. I haven't got the receipt for this. Can I still get my money back?
NACAB: "You only have a legal right to a refund if the goods are faulty, misleadingly described or unfit for the purpose they're sold. However, some retailers offer additional rights and will give refunds, exchange goods or offer credit notes provided certain conditions are met: for instance, proof of purchase, like a receipt, or goods are returned in a certain time frame - often 28 days."
2. If I have the receipt. Can I demand cash back instead of a credit note?
OFT: "If the law has been breached (that is, the goods are not of a satisfactory quality, are damaged or defected, not fit for their purpose or are not as described) then a consumer is entitled to a full refund, they do not have to accept a credit note."
NACAB: "If the item was faulty, misleadingly described or unfit for the purpose within six years you have a legal right to chose from a repair, a replacement, a partial or full refund or compensation. If you report the fault within six months the retailer has to prove the goods were not faulty when purchased."
3. I bought this present full price for Christmas, but my son already has it. Now it is in the sale: can I get a full refund or do I just get the sale price now?
OFT: "Depends on exchange policy of the company - if there's nothing wrong with the product then there is no automatic right to refund/redress."
4. I bought this present two months ago for Christmas. It turns out my wife did not like it. Can I get my money back?
NACAB: "No, not as a right."
5. This was bought for my daughter but it broke two days after Christmas. Can I get my money back?
OFT: "The law says that goods you buy: must be of a satisfactory quality and be safe; must not be damaged or defective unless the person selling them to you points out a fault. The seller is liable for faulty goods or goods which do not meet the shoppers' rights. In this case the consumer would have the right to a full refund for the faulty goods, they would not have to accept a free repair, a replacement or credit note."
6. I have just bought in the sales, but want to take an item back. Do I have fewer rights?
OFT: "You have the same rights when you buy something in a sale. But sales goods can be sold with a defect. If the defect has been pointed out, you can't ask for a refund. If the shoppers' rights have not been breached then there is no statutory right to a refund or redress."
7. I got some vouchers at Christmas for a shop I'd never go in - can I swap them back for the cash?
OFT: "Depends on the terms and conditions of the voucher, but no automatic right to cash."
If you know about inflationary theory you'd know that our observable Universe is only part of a greater whole anyway - search for the horizon problem.
An an infinite number of big bangs occuring in one spacetime would give rise to differing expansion rates in different parts of the Universe and at different times. The central assumptions of astrophyics are that the Universe is homogenous (same at every point) and isotropic (same in every direction) and your theory would throw them out. While they are just assumptions they seem to be true - we certainly don't see massive variations in red shifts looking at different parts of the Universe.
Hmmm, a pity it's nonsense really. Seeing as the Universe is all of spacetime and gravity is the warping of spacetime you've got a paradox already - what is there "between" these Universes that allows them to gravitationally affect each other? If it's spacetime then it's still part of the Universe - if it isn't then you're not talking about gravity.
Alternatively he could mean an infinite number of big bangs in this Universe, which brings its own load of problems.
The third interpretation you're thinking of is called the "transactional interpretation" which was based on Feynmann's ideas but more fully worked out by John Cramer.
No. As you go from v=0 to v=c the energy required to accelerate goes to infinity. On the other side it's mirrored... as you slow down from v=infinity to v=c the energy required goes to infinity. But time is definitely reversed at all velocities greater than the speed of light:)
As I recall someone made a set of speakers where the cabinet was made from slate just for this reason. I can't remember whether they were ever commercially available though... this was about four years ago I think.
Because stored procedures are kept on the DB side and can be optimised and cached by the DB, and also it means that less stuff needs to be sent from DB machines to other machines - all the processing is done in the DB and just the final results sent out.
No, they think it is most likely to be a combination of four quarks - charm/anti-charm and up/anti-up. This hasn't been seen before but is perfectly valid under the standard model... they've already seen pentaquark states after all.
I can't see why this is a bad idea at all - it will allow potential new users the opportunity to properly evaluate whether or not Linux is for them before actually embarking on the voyage of discovery that is a first-time Linux install.
As a top consultant this is exactly the sort of thing that my clients want to know when they're thinking of switching over their servers and desktops to Linux. As the current flavour of the month people hear an awful lot about how great Linux is from fans, but the same people are silent about the flaws in Linux - poor font support, shoddy program interoperability, a lack of graphics capabilities and a lack of any kind of unified architecture above the kernel level.
Sure it may go out of date soon, but I'm not sure it'll be all that soon - while minor VM bugs are fixed quickly and promptly, some of the bigger issues for users hang around for years because they're not "cool hacks". Hopefully now that Linux has come under the corporate umbrella these things will change for the better, and in time a book like this will no longer be needed.
Slashdot Mirror
You know what, Slashdot was the first forum I ever posted on, and still the only one I check every day, after seven years or so. And I've posted on a lot of forums over the years.
The spinning bucket thing is related to Mach's princicple, which played a part in Einstein's thinking about the universe... although GR doesn't actually say anything about it.
The mobile phone? Being able to be in instant communication with practically any other person no matter where you or they are in the world? I'd say that's a life-changing invention at least on a par with the internet.
He's correct; you're wrong :) As long as having an appendix isn't fatal (or leads to a decreased chance of having kids) before you pass your genes on, then there's no selection pressure against it.
Might've been Craig, he was always a bit odd. Up to and including various attacks on the rest of the mailing list on various sites a few years later.
None of that crap was from the original trolls though. That came a couple of years later.
You seem to have missed out on a lot of it. Klerck came around a good couple of years after the start of sid=trolltalk, which was started by osm and 80md and soon joined by Gnarphlager, Craig McPherson, 70%, jsm, dmg (both English BTW) and some Asian female poster whose name I can't remember. Crapflooding forced the move to sid=k22320inchfan which is where things really took off, and the mailing list started for things like meetups in real life and so on after crapflooders started posting a lot. By the time Klerck and co had pretty much crapflooded trolls out of the game, we'd all moved on to running Adequacy anyway.
Hehehe :)
Arse. I couldn't find it either. But hey, it confirms my existing prejudices in favour of Python so it's all good ;)
Do you have a link for that?
Nope... see my comment above for more details.
Nope, that's not true. Here are some comments from the Guardian's website...
Moira Haynes, from the National Association of Citizens Advice Bureau (NACAB), says: "It's a common misconception that people have a right to return goods. That right, as a legal right, doesn't exist."
A shop has no legal obligation to offer you a refund or exchange unless the item is faulty. The big retailers like Marks & Spencer are being remarkably understanding when they offer you a refund or credit note on a non-faulty item.
So, what are your precise rights of return? We put your questions to the retailers and consumer organisations:
1. I haven't got the receipt for this. Can I still get my money back?
NACAB: "You only have a legal right to a refund if the goods are faulty, misleadingly described or unfit for the purpose they're sold. However, some retailers offer additional rights and will give refunds, exchange goods or offer credit notes provided certain conditions are met: for instance, proof of purchase, like a receipt, or goods are returned in a certain time frame - often 28 days."
2. If I have the receipt. Can I demand cash back instead of a credit note?
OFT: "If the law has been breached (that is, the goods are not of a satisfactory quality, are damaged or defected, not fit for their purpose or are not as described) then a consumer is entitled to a full refund, they do not have to accept a credit note."
NACAB: "If the item was faulty, misleadingly described or unfit for the purpose within six years you have a legal right to chose from a repair, a replacement, a partial or full refund or compensation. If you report the fault within six months the retailer has to prove the goods were not faulty when purchased."
3. I bought this present full price for Christmas, but my son already has it. Now it is in the sale: can I get a full refund or do I just get the sale price now?
OFT: "Depends on exchange policy of the company - if there's nothing wrong with the product then there is no automatic right to refund/redress."
4. I bought this present two months ago for Christmas. It turns out my wife did not like it. Can I get my money back?
NACAB: "No, not as a right."
5. This was bought for my daughter but it broke two days after Christmas. Can I get my money back?
OFT: "The law says that goods you buy: must be of a satisfactory quality and be safe; must not be damaged or defective unless the person selling them to you points out a fault. The seller is liable for faulty goods or goods which do not meet the shoppers' rights. In this case the consumer would have the right to a full refund for the faulty goods, they would not have to accept a free repair, a replacement or credit note."
6. I have just bought in the sales, but want to take an item back. Do I have fewer rights?
OFT: "You have the same rights when you buy something in a sale. But sales goods can be sold with a defect. If the defect has been pointed out, you can't ask for a refund. If the shoppers' rights have not been breached then there is no statutory right to a refund or redress."
7. I got some vouchers at Christmas for a shop I'd never go in - can I swap them back for the cash?
OFT: "Depends on the terms and conditions of the voucher, but no automatic right to cash."
It certainly isn't in the UK. Allowing returns without any fault is purely a courtesy the shops extend to you.
Because if they're outside our range of observation then they're outside the range of any possible gravitational effect...
An an infinite number of big bangs occuring in one spacetime would give rise to differing expansion rates in different parts of the Universe and at different times. The central assumptions of astrophyics are that the Universe is homogenous (same at every point) and isotropic (same in every direction) and your theory would throw them out. While they are just assumptions they seem to be true - we certainly don't see massive variations in red shifts looking at different parts of the Universe.
Alternatively he could mean an infinite number of big bangs in this Universe, which brings its own load of problems.
The third interpretation you're thinking of is called the "transactional interpretation" which was based on Feynmann's ideas but more fully worked out by John Cramer.
Wrong. It is both. Fermions are "matter" particles and include both mesons and baryons.
No. As you go from v=0 to v=c the energy required to accelerate goes to infinity. On the other side it's mirrored... as you slow down from v=infinity to v=c the energy required goes to infinity. But time is definitely reversed at all velocities greater than the speed of light :)
As I recall someone made a set of speakers where the cabinet was made from slate just for this reason. I can't remember whether they were ever commercially available though... this was about four years ago I think.
Because stored procedures are kept on the DB side and can be optimised and cached by the DB, and also it means that less stuff needs to be sent from DB machines to other machines - all the processing is done in the DB and just the final results sent out.
No, they think it is most likely to be a combination of four quarks - charm/anti-charm and up/anti-up. This hasn't been seen before but is perfectly valid under the standard model... they've already seen pentaquark states after all.
Or maybe some folks think that graffetti doesn't have to be a bad spray job that says "dave love's jessica" or "metallica rules!"
Have a look at the work of Banksy for graffiti with a message.
I would like to sugest that the people that wrote your reading material go and do some more reading. They obviously have no clue.
I can't see why this is a bad idea at all - it will allow potential new users the opportunity to properly evaluate whether or not Linux is for them before actually embarking on the voyage of discovery that is a first-time Linux install. As a top consultant this is exactly the sort of thing that my clients want to know when they're thinking of switching over their servers and desktops to Linux. As the current flavour of the month people hear an awful lot about how great Linux is from fans, but the same people are silent about the flaws in Linux - poor font support, shoddy program interoperability, a lack of graphics capabilities and a lack of any kind of unified architecture above the kernel level. Sure it may go out of date soon, but I'm not sure it'll be all that soon - while minor VM bugs are fixed quickly and promptly, some of the bigger issues for users hang around for years because they're not "cool hacks". Hopefully now that Linux has come under the corporate umbrella these things will change for the better, and in time a book like this will no longer be needed.