Hmm... how about this idea: Covering it, so there isn't an evaporation into the atmosphere? Sure, building a 10,000 miles^2 roof is rather difficult, but build small ponds instead, cover them - not nearly as difficult...
Hell - you could probably have one in your back yard, if it's big enough, like a poster mentioned.
Yes, slashbots spend more time blathering about (as I am doing now) than writing code, but, like it or not, this is seen as a major orifice of the OSS community.
And those of us in the know, know which end that orifice is located...
Yeah, I read about that as well - and reading between the lines of the media take, they were forced to drop the issue by the government. Apparently the Prime Minister who don't like "so called" experts telling people what to think, don't really like it, when people take issues with his own handpicked experts.
Since I have not read the (now withdrawn) findings by the Committee, I choose not to base my judgements on their findings.
She also notes in her piece, that he's not actually a statistician like they know them at her department, as he has a M.A in Political Science from Århus Universitet and teaches "Methods" there as well. He is (as is noted) "an associate professor of statistics in the Department of Politital Science".
As to who has the better credentials when it comes to statistics - well, my oppinion is fairly obvious, but I've given you plenty of venues to explore yourself and leave you to draw your own conclusions.
Just to nitpick, we don't use 8 significant digits when using km/l. 1 is more than enough. 8.5 km/l. Anything more is ridiculous, as the number will fluctuate anyway, and is probably rounded from something.
Here on Slashdot we often see posts like
"that's 8.50287411 km/l" followed by "see, this is why we don't want metric - it's too dificult to remember compared to 20 miles/gallon".
Of course we could do it the other way around as well. 8½ km/l 19.993239674108264552443197350831 miles/gallon. This is of course why we metric people hate imperial - it's too difficult to remember compared to 8½ km/l.
This building would be genius if it showed four-dimensions in three.
Well, it does do that for fairly small values of four. Also - it IS dedicated to Bill Gates... did you really expect it to be the epitome of sleek design?
Now that you mention arrays with more than 3 dimensions, I am curious as to how you do that?
I "cheat" so to say. This is gonna look silly I think but here goes:
1 dimension is just a grid with one line. 2 dimensions is a regular table, but can be done by making another one dimensional array for each point in the first one dimensional array. 3 dimensions can be done by making another one dimensional array for each point in the two dimensional array.
Up until here I can visualise what I'm doing.
4 dimensions can be done by making another one dimensional array for each point in the three dimensional array.
n dimensions can be done by making another one dimensional array for each point in the n-1 dimensional array.
But I have absolutely no idea how to visualise the dataset in one go, when n > 3...
MS has been UNABLE to write a decent program in 30 years, so when I see they have failed at their latest effort, I assume that they just do not understand how to do it.
Hey, that's a nice way of putting it. Mind if I use that?
Hey honey? It's not that I'm unwilling to take out the garbage, it's that I'm unable to do so.
Personally when I want to tell people to keep their noses out of my stuff, I just tell them that it's none of their buissness just how big my collection of Dwarf Nun Animal Snuff Porn is.
Before I started doing that people always said "well, what do you have to hide?", now they look at me wondering if I'm being sarcastic or dead serious. And they usually get my point as well.
Well, they do say, that absence of evidence is not evidence of absence.
God exist. We can take this as fact.
God is actually the Devil seen in the Bible, who actually managed to overthrow God in that big battle they had once, but felt it would be smarter to pretend he lost anyway.
Since you cannot disprove this except by using the Bible (which is history, and history is written by the victors - in this case the Devil), you have stepped into a quagmire.
It is a fact that God exists, it is merely one that cannot be proven. It is also a fact that the deity you call God is in fact the Devil, it is merely one that cannot be proven.
Slashdot Mirror
So, in effect, orbit is achieved by falling and missing the ground? I thought that was called flying?!?
Who'd pay $2500 for a clone of an old game from Toyota of all companies?!?
Hell, even if it was a clone of Diablo II - Lord of Destruction, I wouldn't pay more than $15 for it!
Hmm ... how about this idea: Covering it, so there isn't an evaporation into the atmosphere? Sure, building a 10,000 miles^2 roof is rather difficult, but build small ponds instead, cover them - not nearly as difficult ...
Hell - you could probably have one in your back yard, if it's big enough, like a poster mentioned.
No - wait
Well, personally I find that I get upgraded to competent people, if I start out with "I have a PEBKAC problem."
Even when I don't, they usually upgrade me to someone who knows, what they're doing. Not sure why.
I was going to suggest a crossover cable ...
Yeah, I read about that as well - and reading between the lines of the media take, they were forced to drop the issue by the government. Apparently the Prime Minister who don't like "so called" experts telling people what to think, don't really like it, when people take issues with his own handpicked experts.
Since I have not read the (now withdrawn) findings by the Committee, I choose not to base my judgements on their findings.
By the way - I wasn't even thinking of that Committee, but was thinking of a smallish 5 page (I think) dissection (page 12 to 17 of that pdf) of a just a small part of his book - by Inge Henningsen, who is an associate professor at the Statistic Department of the Institute for Mathematical Sciences at Copenhagen University.
She also notes in her piece, that he's not actually a statistician like they know them at her department, as he has a M.A in Political Science from Århus Universitet and teaches "Methods" there as well. He is (as is noted) "an associate professor of statistics in the Department of Politital Science".
As to who has the better credentials when it comes to statistics - well, my oppinion is fairly obvious, but I've given you plenty of venues to explore yourself and leave you to draw your own conclusions.
The Nokia Digital Pen could be the answer to your prayers.
It can store up 100 A5 pages...
I haven't tried it myself, but I would love to.
Just to nitpick, we don't use 8 significant digits when using km/l. 1 is more than enough. 8.5 km/l. Anything more is ridiculous, as the number will fluctuate anyway, and is probably rounded from something.
Here on Slashdot we often see posts like
"that's 8.50287411 km/l" followed by "see, this is why we don't want metric - it's too dificult to remember compared to 20 miles/gallon".
Of course we could do it the other way around as well. 8½ km/l 19.993239674108264552443197350831 miles/gallon. This is of course why we metric people hate imperial - it's too difficult to remember compared to 8½ km/l.
Ah, yes - whitelists. The absolutely surefire way, that the chick who asked for your phone number will NOT be asking you out for a second date.
What? Put HER on a white list? Yeah - like she'll give you her real number. Why do you think she asked for yours in the first place?
Hmm ...
Is sales tax tacked onto the bill, when you lease a car?
I think your sig malfunctioned.
Now that you mention arrays with more than 3 dimensions, I am curious as to how you do that?
...
I "cheat" so to say. This is gonna look silly I think but here goes:
1 dimension is just a grid with one line.
2 dimensions is a regular table, but can be done by making another one dimensional array for each point in the first one dimensional array.
3 dimensions can be done by making another one dimensional array for each point in the two dimensional array.
Up until here I can visualise what I'm doing.
4 dimensions can be done by making another one dimensional array for each point in the three dimensional array.
n dimensions can be done by making another one dimensional array for each point in the n-1 dimensional array.
But I have absolutely no idea how to visualise the dataset in one go, when n > 3
Just curious how other people do it.
That would be a Freedom asteroid to you, you insensitive clod!
Sure .. sounds like a plan.
:-)
Remind me to claim to be chasing a bomb threat the next time I need to know stuff
Hey honey? It's not that I'm unwilling to take out the garbage, it's that I'm unable to do so.
Personally I doubt she'll accept that excuse.
Personally when I want to tell people to keep their noses out of my stuff, I just tell them that it's none of their buissness just how big my collection of Dwarf Nun Animal Snuff Porn is.
Before I started doing that people always said "well, what do you have to hide?", now they look at me wondering if I'm being sarcastic or dead serious. And they usually get my point as well.
Brakes?!? Where we're going, we don't need brakes!
That's not a production-car.
Hint: It's in the "concept car" section.
Well, they do say, that absence of evidence is not evidence of absence.
God exist. We can take this as fact.
God is actually the Devil seen in the Bible, who actually managed to overthrow God in that big battle they had once, but felt it would be smarter to pretend he lost anyway.
Since you cannot disprove this except by using the Bible (which is history, and history is written by the victors - in this case the Devil), you have stepped into a quagmire.
It is a fact that God exists, it is merely one that cannot be proven. It is also a fact that the deity you call God is in fact the Devil, it is merely one that cannot be proven.
Go back to praying to your God.
As far as I can tell, it is different in that you have essentially an FPGA-like chip on the same core as a regular CPU.