But seriously, why do they always want to single out engineering to artificially stuff the talent supply with imports? For example, it's obvious from the quality of our current congress that this country has a severe shortage of qualified candidates for public office. If they weren't flagrant hypocrites, they'd pass a law to issue visas to thousands of foreign politicians so that they could come here and compete for their seats, and in the process strengthen America's competitiveness and increase the quality of its laws.
And you can speak only for yourself. Each person's brain works differently.
In my case, I'm not strong on "I/O", so if I'm taking notes, I'm clogging up channels that would be better used to absorb the lecture in the first place.
I figured this out gradually during college. The first year, I took copious notes and filled thick notebooks. After realizing that the note taking was counterproductive for me, the last couple of years, I took essentially no notes. My GPA remained the same, but my stress level dropped.
For people like myself, "active" learning is best kept to lab experiments and writing papers.
No static type checking. Move along, nothing to see here.
Yeah, it would be better make most of the code you write boilerplate like copy constructors and redundant interface declarations in order to comply with a static type system. Then, once you realize that you still can't do what you need with static typing, run everything in a bloated "bean" container to get dynamic typing without having to admit it. And as an added benefit, you get a generous dose of XML to go with that!
High-speed ions would actually be easier and more efficient to use for generating electricity than conventional thermal energy. You set up an opposing electric field with a voltage that corresponds to the ions' energy in MeV, and capture them once they've slowed down. This creates a direct electric current at that high voltage, without the need for Carnot cycles, steam equipment, heat exchangers, etc.
One of the attractions of aneutronic fusion is that most of the energy is released in the form of charged ions that can be harnessed in this way.
Because everyone in the open source community has this insufferable "Me, too!" attitude, resulting in half a dozen needlessly duplicative efforts.
That's right. Open source developers should take a cue from the commercial database market: The vendors like IBM, Microsoft and Oracle don't waste resources on duplicate efforts, but instead they collaborate on the one single commercial SQL database engine available on the market today.
These citizens are not homogenous no matter how badly you think things are gerrymandered
Irrelevant. All they have to listen to is the subset of people in their own district who comprise more than 50% of voters who actually show up. They can and do totally ignore all other viewpoints. Districts have been carefully engineered to ensure that situation exists.
The Senate is indeed somewhat less affected by this, but there are still plenty of states that are solidly on one side or the other. Given that it effectively takes a 60% supermajority to get anything done in the Senate, they end up being no more effective than the House, even without boundaries drawn up using sophisticated data mining.
but trying to understand the most important issues in your home district/state and listening to your constituents should never be considered one of them.
Why not? With the current gerrymandered districts, it's not hard to figure out exactly what the majority of constituents in each one think that they want. That's the easy part.
The hard part is for congress to come up with some kind of common national plan of action rather than deadlock. That would generally require each member of congress to spend *less* time holed up in their own echo chambers and *more* time thinking about the country as a whole.
They already spend too much time in their home districts. Jet air travel allows them to constantly return to their home base, where they get constant earfuls of whining from their gerrymandered constituents (whatever the political slant of the particular district). So they pop back briefly into DC to work with colleagues who they now barely know, and with no motivation to compromise on *anything*.
Hence, nothing gets accomplished, least of all steering this country away from financial crises.
Presumably, this country was set up as a republic for a reason. One of those would be for the members of congress to actually spend time working together, for the good of the country as a whole.
Now, if they want to improve how congress works, it would be better to pass a constitutional amendment prohibiting *lobbyists* from interacting with members of congress in person. Trackable email and video calls only.
Whether a subsidy is delivered via a tax deduction or by cutting a check, the outcome is completely indistinguishable. At the end of the day, all parties end up with the same amounts of money.
Yes, most things benefit from some level of government subsidy.
If you are competing with one of those, and you don't have *any* subsidies, then you're not economically viable because you have higher cost relative to your competition.
Fossil fuels and nuclear power enjoy generous government subsidies, in areas including tax loopholes, military security support for oil producers, cut-rate socialized liability insurance for nuclear risks that private insurers wouldn't touch with a hundred-foot pole, saddling the public with the costs of environmental damage... the list goes on and on. If solar power gets no subsidies relative to all that, of course it can't compete.
If you somehow magically removed *all* government subsidies on everything, then solar power might be "economically viable" again. But thousands of years of history, and human nature in general, show that it is just not going to happen in the real world. Ever, Deal with it.
Success or failure is measured by a balance of all the factors.
You have a list of moderate, but not earth-shattering successes. Unfortunately, those are completely outweighed by Nixon's instigation of the biggest constitutional crisis since the Civil War era.
After adding up both columns, the bottom line is: Epic Fail.
are you one of these crazy old people who still repairs stuff?
I am. I have a ~7 year old Samsung 1600x1200 monitor that still looks nice. I like this form factor, and it's hard to get in these days of HDTV LCDs. Unfortunately, Samsung was known for using shoddy capacitors in that time period, and a few years ago my monitor started blacking out shortly after power up.
I found a video on YouTube where they showed how to fix my exact model, and I fixed mine with $5 of new caps. Now it's still going strong.
But the OP is talking about using C, not those other nice languages.
At any rate, I'm sure that it would have been much easier to write those bindings if GTK had chosen a more sane API with less "OO envy". The Sqlite API comes to mind as a clean, easy to use example of a C API.
C code doesn't have to be procedural. You can implement classes and objects and what's more, you can actually understand how they work when you do. You can create just about anything you want (not everything, but very near.) You'll know what you are writing. You won't be including incredibly overweight code that bloats your app and slows it down. You can manage memory intelligently, you can construct very maintainable code, and you can be quite concise about it.
Ok, but on the other hand you can also end up with things like GTK.
So we have a planetoid enveloped in a vaporous cloud of mysterious matter, which is unknown to science.
Well, I've seen enough old Star Trek episodes to know that it's almost certainly a malevolent disembodied life form, which was left imprisoned on that desolate moon eons ago to keep it from threatening other civilizations throughout the galaxy.
Unfortunately, the Huygens probe has probably now provided it with the tools it needs to transport itself off the moon, most likely in a bid to attack and take over our planet Earth. Since it's probably invulnerable to any technology we posess, our only hope is to cleverly lure it into some kind of trap where it will destroy itself, most likely in a large explosion.
No, it's the same gravity, which affects both normal matter and dark matter the same.
The difference is that if dark matter interacted by any force other than gravity (such as electromagnetism, etc.), then it would be deflected on encounters with other objects instead of passing right through them. This would eventually cause the dark matter to settle into a disk, like the rest of the stuff in the galaxy. However, it instead seems to remain in its initial spherical distribution to this day.
As I recall, it's because the orbital velocities of regular stars in disk-shaped galaxies suggest that dark matter is distributed spherically around the galactic center rather than concentrated in the disk. That implies that unlike brown dwarfs, dark matter interacts neither with normal matter nor itself by any force other than gravity.
IIRC, they can sustain fusion until all of the natural deuterium (which is not much) is used up, but then they stop because they're not big enough to fuse regular hydrogen. Its kind of like a wimpier version of a white dwarf star that stops burning because it can't fuse carbon.
what troubles me is the impossibility of a theoretical solution because it undermines my belief in a deterministic universe.
As they say: The universe doesn't care what you believe.
We don't have enough information to know whether it's deterministic or not. Whatever the case, it is what it is. And if it is deterministic, that still doesn't necessarily imply that predicting the future is actually computationally feasible.
Slashdot Mirror
but they want to complain about visas.
Well, who doesn't?
But seriously, why do they always want to single out engineering to artificially stuff the talent supply with imports? For example, it's obvious from the quality of our current congress that this country has a severe shortage of qualified candidates for public office. If they weren't flagrant hypocrites, they'd pass a law to issue visas to thousands of foreign politicians so that they could come here and compete for their seats, and in the process strengthen America's competitiveness and increase the quality of its laws.
And you can speak only for yourself. Each person's brain works differently.
In my case, I'm not strong on "I/O", so if I'm taking notes, I'm clogging up channels that would be better used to absorb the lecture in the first place.
I figured this out gradually during college. The first year, I took copious notes and filled thick notebooks. After realizing that the note taking was counterproductive for me, the last couple of years, I took essentially no notes. My GPA remained the same, but my stress level dropped.
For people like myself, "active" learning is best kept to lab experiments and writing papers.
No static type checking. Move along, nothing to see here.
Yeah, it would be better make most of the code you write boilerplate like copy constructors and redundant interface declarations in order to comply with a static type system. Then, once you realize that you still can't do what you need with static typing, run everything in a bloated "bean" container to get dynamic typing without having to admit it. And as an added benefit, you get a generous dose of XML to go with that!
High-speed ions would actually be easier and more efficient to use for generating electricity than conventional thermal energy. You set up an opposing electric field with a voltage that corresponds to the ions' energy in MeV, and capture them once they've slowed down. This creates a direct electric current at that high voltage, without the need for Carnot cycles, steam equipment, heat exchangers, etc.
One of the attractions of aneutronic fusion is that most of the energy is released in the form of charged ions that can be harnessed in this way.
... our hopes of seeing an iPad Maxi are dashed, then?
Probably... But the good news is that the USPTO did grant them a trademark on "Light Day iPad Liners".
Because everyone in the open source community has this insufferable "Me, too!" attitude, resulting in half a dozen needlessly duplicative efforts.
That's right. Open source developers should take a cue from the commercial database market: The vendors like IBM, Microsoft and Oracle don't waste resources on duplicate efforts, but instead they collaborate on the one single commercial SQL database engine available on the market today.
These citizens are not homogenous no matter how badly you think things are gerrymandered
Irrelevant. All they have to listen to is the subset of people in their own district who comprise more than 50% of voters who actually show up. They can and do totally ignore all other viewpoints. Districts have been carefully engineered to ensure that situation exists.
The Senate is indeed somewhat less affected by this, but there are still plenty of states that are solidly on one side or the other. Given that it effectively takes a 60% supermajority to get anything done in the Senate, they end up being no more effective than the House, even without boundaries drawn up using sophisticated data mining.
but trying to understand the most important issues in your home district/state and listening to your constituents should never be considered one of them.
Why not? With the current gerrymandered districts, it's not hard to figure out exactly what the majority of constituents in each one think that they want. That's the easy part.
The hard part is for congress to come up with some kind of common national plan of action rather than deadlock. That would generally require each member of congress to spend *less* time holed up in their own echo chambers and *more* time thinking about the country as a whole.
They already spend too much time in their home districts. Jet air travel allows them to constantly return to their home base, where they get constant earfuls of whining from their gerrymandered constituents (whatever the political slant of the particular district). So they pop back briefly into DC to work with colleagues who they now barely know, and with no motivation to compromise on *anything*.
Hence, nothing gets accomplished, least of all steering this country away from financial crises.
Presumably, this country was set up as a republic for a reason. One of those would be for the members of congress to actually spend time working together, for the good of the country as a whole.
Now, if they want to improve how congress works, it would be better to pass a constitutional amendment prohibiting *lobbyists* from interacting with members of congress in person. Trackable email and video calls only.
Whether a subsidy is delivered via a tax deduction or by cutting a check, the outcome is completely indistinguishable. At the end of the day, all parties end up with the same amounts of money.
The difference is entirely irrelevant.
Congratulations! You've just won the"I pulled facts out of my ass" award of the week!
Yes, most things benefit from some level of government subsidy.
If you are competing with one of those, and you don't have *any* subsidies, then you're not economically viable because you have higher cost relative to your competition.
Fossil fuels and nuclear power enjoy generous government subsidies, in areas including tax loopholes, military security support for oil producers, cut-rate socialized liability insurance for nuclear risks that private insurers wouldn't touch with a hundred-foot pole, saddling the public with the costs of environmental damage... the list goes on and on. If solar power gets no subsidies relative to all that, of course it can't compete.
If you somehow magically removed *all* government subsidies on everything, then solar power might be "economically viable" again. But thousands of years of history, and human nature in general, show that it is just not going to happen in the real world. Ever, Deal with it.
But I'm also aware without government subsidies, it's not economically viable.
Nor are most things.
Government subsidies have been a fact of life since the days of the Pharaohs.
Success or failure is measured by a balance of all the factors.
You have a list of moderate, but not earth-shattering successes. Unfortunately, those are completely outweighed by Nixon's instigation of the biggest constitutional crisis since the Civil War era.
After adding up both columns, the bottom line is: Epic Fail.
are you one of these crazy old people who still repairs stuff?
I am. I have a ~7 year old Samsung 1600x1200 monitor that still looks nice. I like this form factor, and it's hard to get in these days of HDTV LCDs. Unfortunately, Samsung was known for using shoddy capacitors in that time period, and a few years ago my monitor started blacking out shortly after power up.
I found a video on YouTube where they showed how to fix my exact model, and I fixed mine with $5 of new caps. Now it's still going strong.
But the OP is talking about using C, not those other nice languages.
At any rate, I'm sure that it would have been much easier to write those bindings if GTK had chosen a more sane API with less "OO envy". The Sqlite API comes to mind as a clean, easy to use example of a C API.
C code doesn't have to be procedural. You can implement classes and objects and what's more, you can actually understand how they work when you do. You can create just about anything you want (not everything, but very near.) You'll know what you are writing. You won't be including incredibly overweight code that bloats your app and slows it down. You can manage memory intelligently, you can construct very maintainable code, and you can be quite concise about it.
Ok, but on the other hand you can also end up with things like GTK.
Moses' people couldn't make bricks without straw, and your brain can't make amyloid plaques without aluminum.
Since Aluminum comprises a full 8% of the earth's crust, good luck with that.
So we have a planetoid enveloped in a vaporous cloud of mysterious matter, which is unknown to science.
Well, I've seen enough old Star Trek episodes to know that it's almost certainly a malevolent disembodied life form, which was left imprisoned on that desolate moon eons ago to keep it from threatening other civilizations throughout the galaxy.
Unfortunately, the Huygens probe has probably now provided it with the tools it needs to transport itself off the moon, most likely in a bid to attack and take over our planet Earth. Since it's probably invulnerable to any technology we posess, our only hope is to cleverly lure it into some kind of trap where it will destroy itself, most likely in a large explosion.
The term "little" could be construed as demeaning.
I think the currently preferred term is "differently sized" planets.
No, it's the same gravity, which affects both normal matter and dark matter the same.
The difference is that if dark matter interacted by any force other than gravity (such as electromagnetism, etc.), then it would be deflected on encounters with other objects instead of passing right through them. This would eventually cause the dark matter to settle into a disk, like the rest of the stuff in the galaxy. However, it instead seems to remain in its initial spherical distribution to this day.
As I recall, it's because the orbital velocities of regular stars in disk-shaped galaxies suggest that dark matter is distributed spherically around the galactic center rather than concentrated in the disk. That implies that unlike brown dwarfs, dark matter interacts neither with normal matter nor itself by any force other than gravity.
then why are they considered stars?
IIRC, they can sustain fusion until all of the natural deuterium (which is not much) is used up, but then they stop because they're not big enough to fuse regular hydrogen. Its kind of like a wimpier version of a white dwarf star that stops burning because it can't fuse carbon.
what troubles me is the impossibility of a theoretical solution because it undermines my belief in a deterministic universe.
As they say: The universe doesn't care what you believe.
We don't have enough information to know whether it's deterministic or not. Whatever the case, it is what it is. And if it is deterministic, that still doesn't necessarily imply that predicting the future is actually computationally feasible.
Why are you thinking in terms of "3/4" liter?
To answer your question: 175 cl X 2 = 350. Divide by 3 = 100 + 17 cl = 1170ml
Do you really think that was harder than your compound fraction computation?