You miss my point. You can view it as you store an infinite amount of information, but you cannot read it - like you say when you read it directly, you only get one classical bit of information.
I was kinda hoping you didn't know that a dimmer switch doesn't make the light dimmer, but rather turns it on and off rapidly.
I was thinking along the lines of using a variable resistor, like you say. The intensity would then be at X/2 for each light. Then when you put both lights in the same room, the total would be X. (Where X is the full brightness for a given light).
I agree with what you say though. It's hard to come up with perfect analogies.
Just to expand on this post, you can treat |0> and |1> as vectors. Well actually they are vectors.
So |0> is [1,0] and |1> is [0,1]
So a "superposition" is simply A*|0> + B*|1> = [A,B]
Nothing particulary fancy or anything.
The analogy I used to explain it to my dad is this:
Imagine I have a light bulb, with a dimmer switch. I could set this to a dimmer switch to anything in between on and off. Theoritically I could store an infinite amount of information in the dimmer switch. Imagine I took a large book, converted it to hex, and turned that into one long number. Then I prepended 0. to the front.
So you get "0.1939434....". Then I set the dimmer switch to that exact value.
But, if I want to look at the light, for some reason, I can only see if it's on or off. The chance I see it as being on is the same as the dimmer switch setting. (So if it's set to 0.5, then I have a 0.5 chance of seeing it as on, and 0.5 chance of seeing it's off). I'm stretching this analogy a bit, but you can see that despite storing anything I want, I can still only read it as on or off.
So.. how do we use this usefully? We don't really know many practical uses, but what you can do is do calculations. Say you put two of these lights in a room. Both are set to 0.5 brightness. With the case of the lights, the total brightness is now 1. So we've gone from having probability, to something definite. You are always going to see that as being on.
The analogy doesn't quite fit, but you can see how you can use the underlying probability to do calculations and get a definite answer.
"Voluntary schooling, no problem; forced schooling, no fucking way."
Hey, there's an idea. Let's ask kids if they want to go to school. And those who don't want to can stay at home. We'll let 12 year olds make decisions that with strongly effect their whole life.
The government have a list of bad guys. The government wants the charities to check that none of the employees are on this list.
EFF are complaining that this is a loss of privacy.
Personally I think charities should be open for inspection to all, and that a list of banned people from working for charities is a good thing. Charities are too open to abuse as they are.
I've been modded informative, so it seems someone is interested.
A quick explanation why this works:
The laser goes though the "blank hologram" (which is a piece of glass with some chemicals on it), then hits the hologram behind. The light from the hologram behind bounces back. Now you have the original incomming light, and the reflected light. The two interfere, and make an interference pattern. The chemicals capture this interference pattern. now when you shine light through it, the light interferes with the interference pattern, and replays the hologram image. (The hologram plate stores the XOR, for you computer scientists)
But I think you're right. Although it's a different story for business and governments. I'm not sure what their primary motivations are. I'm managing to get open office installed at work.
Unless I really missed something, this is just way too obvious, and you can't really say that 9 out of 10 doctors... (assuming you got that by just looking at column 4)
A better, and more 'truthful' way would be to divide the doctors into 4 groups, depending on where in the country they are. Then say "9 out of 10 doctors recommend crest* (*data from survey done for doctors in the south east)"
Besides, I get annoyed when people disagree with the direction a developer takes, and decides they are 'arrogant pricks'. I hate it when I write code, for free, and people complain at me. One side is always complaining every feature is "bloatware crap", another side complains if you don't put the features they want in, and so on.
And what is 'arrogance' anyway - that they think they know more than you on the software they are developing and you're not?
Please, do give me an example where the gaim developers arrogance has offended you.
Anyway, this just all depresses me. I like praise (obviously), and I welcome constructive criticism. Anything else is just unhelpful.
P.s. No I'm not a gaim developer. P.p.s. The majority of users are very nice - it's just the one or two.
You need to modify the source code for each copy - renaming variables, changing comments, etc.
Unfortunately, I can't work out the math to determine how many modifications you need to ensure that any combination of released sources and diffing between them will still reveal which sources were leaked. I suspect it's (N^N)-1 modifications, but can't think it through:(
So wait, you think they should never release 1.0 until they have every feature that everyone wants, and it's stable? And if they don't do this, they are shooting themselves in the foot?
Slashdot Mirror
The faq mentions that the python vm is stack-based, and parrot is register-based.
You miss my point. You can view it as you store an infinite amount of information, but you cannot read it - like you say when you read it directly, you only get one classical bit of information.
I was kinda hoping you didn't know that a dimmer switch doesn't make the light dimmer, but rather turns it on and off rapidly.
I was thinking along the lines of using a variable resistor, like you say.
The intensity would then be at X/2 for each light. Then when you put both lights in the same room, the total would be X. (Where X is the full brightness for a given light).
I agree with what you say though. It's hard to come up with perfect analogies.
Just to expand on this post, you can treat |0> and |1> as vectors. Well actually they are vectors.
So |0> is [1,0] and |1> is [0,1]
So a "superposition" is simply A*|0> + B*|1>
= [A,B]
Nothing particulary fancy or anything.
The analogy I used to explain it to my dad is this:
Imagine I have a light bulb, with a dimmer switch. I could set this to a dimmer switch to anything in between on and off. Theoritically I could store an infinite amount of information in the dimmer switch. Imagine I took a large book, converted it to hex, and turned that into one long number. Then I prepended 0. to the front.
So you get "0.1939434....". Then I set the dimmer switch to that exact value.
But, if I want to look at the light, for some reason, I can only see if it's on or off. The chance I see it as being on is the same as the dimmer switch setting. (So if it's set to 0.5, then I have a 0.5 chance of seeing it as on, and 0.5 chance of seeing it's off).
I'm stretching this analogy a bit, but you can see that despite storing anything I want, I can still only read it as on or off.
So.. how do we use this usefully? We don't really know many practical uses, but what you can do is do calculations.
Say you put two of these lights in a room. Both are set to 0.5 brightness. With the case of the lights, the total brightness is now 1. So we've gone from having probability, to something definite. You are always going to see that as being on.
The analogy doesn't quite fit, but you can see how you can use the underlying probability to do calculations and get a definite answer.
As long as the contract also says their partner has to have sex with them so many times a week, with blowjobs being 10% of the time etc.
And neither partner is allowed to get drunk more than X amount, etc etc.
so an "innocent plea" would actually be making no plea at all?
Don't they ask you "How do you plea?". Surely that should be "Do you plea guilty?" then?
What examples are there of too many _open_ standards causing a problem?
In re to your sig... thanks! At long last that saying makes sense!
In re to your nick... thanks! At long last that saying makes sense!
So your problem with it is false-positives:?
While I feel this could be fixed, I doubt the competence of them to do this correctly.
"Voluntary schooling, no problem; forced schooling, no fucking way."
Hey, there's an idea. Let's ask kids if they want to go to school. And those who don't want to can stay at home.
We'll let 12 year olds make decisions that with strongly effect their whole life.
I read it to mean:
The government have a list of bad guys. The government wants the charities to check that none of the employees are on this list.
EFF are complaining that this is a loss of privacy.
Personally I think charities should be open for inspection to all, and that a list of banned people from working for charities is a good thing. Charities are too open to abuse as they are.
I've been modded informative, so it seems someone is interested.
A quick explanation why this works:
The laser goes though the "blank hologram" (which is a piece of glass with some chemicals on it), then hits the hologram behind. The light from the hologram behind bounces back. Now you have the original incomming light, and the reflected light. The two interfere, and make an interference pattern. The chemicals capture this interference pattern. now when you shine light through it, the light interferes with the interference pattern, and replays the hologram image. (The hologram plate stores the XOR, for you computer scientists)
It sounds silly, but I think it's as opposed to specialising in providing a service.
normal holograms are trivial to copy. :)
do a contact copy - place the blank hologram on top of one you want to copy, and fire a laser at it
I switched to linux just out of curiosity.
But I think you're right. Although it's a different story for business and governments. I'm not sure what their primary motivations are.
I'm managing to get open office installed at work.
Unless I really missed something, this is just way too obvious, and you can't really say that 9 out of 10 doctors... (assuming you got that by just looking at column 4)
A better, and more 'truthful' way would be to divide the doctors into 4 groups, depending on where in the country they are.
Then say "9 out of 10 doctors recommend crest* (*data from survey done for doctors in the south east)"
for example.
No it doesn't
It presupposes that the free price of Linux would otherwise be the major selling point.
That's a different thing to argue. (One I would agree with too)
Don't underestimate your kids - they are smarter than you.
By 10 I was coding spectrum basic, and by 12 had a qualification from college in C, advanced C and advanced C++.
Jeeez
Can you back this up please?
doing: time tar -zcvf
on a 3MB file takes less than 0.3 seconds.
I'd be interested in where you got your information from.
Hmm, it did not come across as a joke to me.
Besides, I get annoyed when people disagree with the direction a developer takes, and decides they are 'arrogant pricks'. I hate it when I write code, for free, and people complain at me. One side is always complaining every feature is "bloatware crap", another side complains if you don't put the features they want in, and so on.
And what is 'arrogance' anyway - that they think they know more than you on the software they are developing and you're not?
Please, do give me an example where the gaim developers arrogance has offended you.
Anyway, this just all depresses me. I like praise (obviously), and I welcome constructive criticism. Anything else is just unhelpful.
P.s. No I'm not a gaim developer.
P.p.s. The majority of users are very nice - it's just the one or two.
I've been thinking about this for a while.
:(
You need to modify the source code for each copy - renaming variables, changing comments, etc.
Unfortunately, I can't work out the math to determine how many modifications you need to ensure that any combination of released sources and diffing between them will still reveal which sources were leaked. I suspect it's (N^N)-1 modifications, but can't think it through
Sun spends more on development than Microsoft?
Isn't Microsoft much bigger? Why isn't MS spending vast amounts more?
"Not exactly a surprise after having chatted with a couple of the devs here and there."
Can't anyone around here talk about anything without falling into insults? Be a bit more professional please.
So wait, you think they should never release 1.0 until they have every feature that everyone wants, and it's stable?
And if they don't do this, they are shooting themselves in the foot?