Much has been written on they, and we aren’t going to attempt to cover it here. We will note that they has been in consistent use as a singular pronoun since the late 1300s; that the development of singular they mirrors the development of the singular you from the plural you, yet we don’t complain that singular you is ungrammatical; and that regardless of what detractors say, nearly everyone uses the singular they in casual conversation and often in formal writing.
You also used to be plural, but they and you became acceptable for singular use around the same time, 700 years ago.
Cuba is a valuable member of the international community, and an important partner of the US. Or at least that's what our last President said.
Yeah, and our current President says the same thing about Russia.
I'm sure you hold the same high burden of proof for this alleged assault on our diplomats by Cuba as you do for Russian interference in the election, correct?
Prior to publishing the trio of Clinton-related fabrications, the same site and blogger held that President Obama had ordered the military to nuke the city of Charleston (which didn’t happen)
I'm not sure if this is funny or a sad sign of the time we live in.
I know these are all arbitrary distinctions anyway, but technically Generation Y === Millenial. Being born in the early 2000s is the end of the Millenial generation.
Yeah, and before Don't Ask Don't Tell was repealed, if a man was raped by another man, they would discharge the victim for being homosexual. That is so much better isn't it?
Why don't you go tell this former member of Seal Team Six, who served for 21 years, that they are not combat effective? They received 29 decorations including the Purple Heart and the Bronze Star, and fought in both Iraq and Afghanistan.
What have you sacrificed for your country again? Allowing icky gays to go off and die for your freedoms? You know the military spends millions on medical expenses for erectile dysfunction, so they've got you covered. As long as your dick is original equipment of course.
I don't usually read documentaries, but rather watch them. In the documentary they interview many people in the service. I guess one guy on/. outweighs all that in your eyes though.
For the person who claimed not all jobs in the Military are combat, I say bullshit! Every soldier is trained on how to kill the enemy and defend against attacks. Even if your job isn't going out on patrol looking for enemies, you are at risk simply by being a soldier. Your first job and first responsibility in the Military is to be a Soldier.
Watch a documentary called "Anybody's Son Will Do". Basic Training has been fundamentally the same since at least the Roman Empire. It will take you, whoever you are, whatever background you come from, and make you into someone who can to kill or even die on command.
I'm going to take millennia of military precedent over whatever you think, US Army Vet or otherwise.
His account is only a year and a half old, so he only has a few pages of comments. Ctrl+F shows that he hasn't even used the word "shut" by itself, let alone told anyone to "shut up".
You are very confused. VW designed a "defeat device" that detected when the car was undergoing an emissions test and lowered the performance of the engine, also reducing the emissions.
That would be pretty dumb, but that's not what they do. VW programmed the engine to detect an emissions test and change to a lower-performance mode that would produce less emissions. On the road the vehicle would revert to its normal high-performance mode.
As far as I can tell, they've done some math to put bounds on how fast the signal can change (how high a frequency can be present) to allow reconstruction.
That has already existed for a long time, it's called the Nyquist Frequency, and it's half the sampling frequency. Or rather, you must sample at a rate at least double the highest frequency you want to measure.
Many of the same things intrigued me as well. The answer is that they don't tackle the issue of signal limits. What this shows is that IF a signal reaches the ADC that is out of bounds, it is possible to reconstruct using their algorithm. Obviously all the practicalities of signal processing still apply.
What I wonder is, say you have a 5V ADC. Using their technique, could you drive a 15V (max) signal into the ADC and effectively triple your resolution? You're still using all your bits to measure a 5V range... so if that's the case then it truly is quite groundbreaking.
If you take the time to look at the paper, you'll notice much of the beginning is dedicated to the properties of a unique type of ADC, which their algorithm utilizes.
Slashdot Mirror
I don't care about any of that. The OP I was replying to specifically said that it was grammatically incorrect, and that is not true.
From Merriam-Webster:
Much has been written on they, and we aren’t going to attempt to cover it here. We will note that they has been in consistent use as a singular pronoun since the late 1300s; that the development of singular they mirrors the development of the singular you from the plural you, yet we don’t complain that singular you is ungrammatical; and that regardless of what detractors say, nearly everyone uses the singular they in casual conversation and often in formal writing.
You also used to be plural, but they and you became acceptable for singular use around the same time, 700 years ago.
Stupid millenial here. 'They' can also be singular.
For example: "I replied to an Anonymous Coward on Slashdot, because they needed a lesson in grade school grammar."
Cuba is a valuable member of the international community, and an important partner of the US. Or at least that's what our last President said.
Yeah, and our current President says the same thing about Russia.
I'm sure you hold the same high burden of proof for this alleged assault on our diplomats by Cuba as you do for Russian interference in the election, correct?
Prior to publishing the trio of Clinton-related fabrications, the same site and blogger held that President Obama had ordered the military to nuke the city of Charleston (which didn’t happen)
I'm not sure if this is funny or a sad sign of the time we live in.
Parent wishes child's life is better === Parent regrets having child.
I know these are all arbitrary distinctions anyway, but technically Generation Y === Millenial. Being born in the early 2000s is the end of the Millenial generation.
Before your time? I'm the same age as this guy and I remember adjusting my rabbit ears to get better reception. I think he's just an idiot.
So what?! Podesta was not and is not the Homeland Security Advisor to the President, that's what!
Yeah, and before Don't Ask Don't Tell was repealed, if a man was raped by another man, they would discharge the victim for being homosexual. That is so much better isn't it?
Why don't you go tell this former member of Seal Team Six, who served for 21 years, that they are not combat effective? They received 29 decorations including the Purple Heart and the Bronze Star, and fought in both Iraq and Afghanistan.
What have you sacrificed for your country again? Allowing icky gays to go off and die for your freedoms? You know the military spends millions on medical expenses for erectile dysfunction, so they've got you covered. As long as your dick is original equipment of course.
What about the transgender people who serve or have served in the military? You stand up to defend the service of one person, but not another.
They offered to lay down their lives for their country too.
making things up from things you read
I don't usually read documentaries, but rather watch them. In the documentary they interview many people in the service. I guess one guy on /. outweighs all that in your eyes though.
For the person who claimed not all jobs in the Military are combat, I say bullshit! Every soldier is trained on how to kill the enemy and defend against attacks. Even if your job isn't going out on patrol looking for enemies, you are at risk simply by being a soldier. Your first job and first responsibility in the Military is to be a Soldier.
Watch a documentary called "Anybody's Son Will Do". Basic Training has been fundamentally the same since at least the Roman Empire. It will take you, whoever you are, whatever background you come from, and make you into someone who can to kill or even die on command.
I'm going to take millennia of military precedent over whatever you think, US Army Vet or otherwise.
And women. And gays.
The pattern is so predictable we can all basically sing along to it.
Pretty sure they used to say the same things about women and their periods.
Really, where?
His account is only a year and a half old, so he only has a few pages of comments. Ctrl+F shows that he hasn't even used the word "shut" by itself, let alone told anyone to "shut up".
Fucking FACTS, amirite?
Junior devs shouldn't be responsible for designing the security features of a critical medical device.
You are very confused. VW designed a "defeat device" that detected when the car was undergoing an emissions test and lowered the performance of the engine, also reducing the emissions.
That would be pretty dumb, but that's not what they do. VW programmed the engine to detect an emissions test and change to a lower-performance mode that would produce less emissions. On the road the vehicle would revert to its normal high-performance mode.
A well calculated move... straight out of Sun Tzu's ancient text, The Art of War. Or my own master work, Zapp Brannigan's Big Book of War.
As far as I can tell, they've done some math to put bounds on how fast the signal can change (how high a frequency can be present) to allow reconstruction.
That has already existed for a long time, it's called the Nyquist Frequency, and it's half the sampling frequency. Or rather, you must sample at a rate at least double the highest frequency you want to measure.
Also an EE, greetings brother/sister!
Many of the same things intrigued me as well. The answer is that they don't tackle the issue of signal limits. What this shows is that IF a signal reaches the ADC that is out of bounds, it is possible to reconstruct using their algorithm. Obviously all the practicalities of signal processing still apply.
What I wonder is, say you have a 5V ADC. Using their technique, could you drive a 15V (max) signal into the ADC and effectively triple your resolution? You're still using all your bits to measure a 5V range... so if that's the case then it truly is quite groundbreaking.
Try reading the paper. It has nothing to do with what you're talking about.
If you take the time to look at the paper, you'll notice much of the beginning is dedicated to the properties of a unique type of ADC, which their algorithm utilizes.
It's both. It utilizes the unique properties of these ADCs, but there is absolutely an algorithm. You stopped reading the paper too early.