it's been proven for N=1, 2, 4, 5, 6, and >=7, but not for 3. I don't know why... I mean, can't you just define a point that is in the center of a given manifold then make a sphere that is the average distance from all points on the surface and define a new surface that is half-way between the two surfaces, and repeat forever to show that you really get a sphere...
Holy shit, you've done it! Give the guy his million bucks!
First, we give them the missiles to help in their fight against anti-American interests. Second, enemy vanquished, they turn against us. Then we need the plane. Rinse and repeat;)
Recently during the (September 2002) MA primary elections I received a 2+ minute automated voicemail from a group supporting one of the candidates. What am I going to do, sue them?
Yes. They probably violated FCC rules. Excerpt from link:
"The TCPA also prohibits artificial or prerecorded voice message calls to residences made without prior express consent, unless it is an emergency call or specifically exempted by the Commission."
Sure you do. All you have to do (if you're programmatically inclined) is open a file for writing, seek to somewhere greater than 1TB into the file, then close it. The resulting file will not actually take up > 1TB of space, because the filesystem doesn't allocate any space for a "hole" like you've just created, until you write into it. However, ls will show the full size. Keep on increasing the limit until you find the maximum file size.
Perhaps the open-source community needs to put out some Sprint PCS-like ads. For example, a likeable spokesperson could run into the Blue Man Group, intuit from their color that they'd been using buggy Microsoft products, and then restore them to normal with free software. There should be some humor in there, too.
Hmm? Alt+tab is faster than ctrl+pgup, because it requires fewer hands. Are you using one of the Linux window managers that forces you to switch windows by moving the mouse?
Are you using one of those keyboards without a right Ctrl?
An earlier example of attempts to stifle linking---relevant not only here, but foreshadows e.g. the 2600 DeCSS case. Excerpt:
'In article 15, the plaintiffs state that a so-called 'hyperlink', a reference to the location of another document, is also to be considered as "publication and/or duplication by the user and the provider". A hyperlink is nothing, and I mean absolutely nothing, more than a description of a location that can be activated. Plaintiffs' statement is the same as saying that a library or the writer of a book can be accused of duplication and/or publication because they publish the name, number and location of a certain book or article in a footnote, a bibliography or in an archive entry...
A hyperlink refers to a location. Hyperlinks regularly refer to other hyperlinks. The whole WWW is nothing but a complicated conglomerate of hyperlinks and files. Are all these systems breaking the law in plaintiffs' opinion? Should the whole WWW be indicted whenever there's a document available somewhere that is illegal in plaintiffs' opinion?
A hyperlink does not formally add anything. The publication is a fact as soon as the page is on Internet. Making the document available can only be considered as publication and/or duplication when the number of potential users is increased by this act. But this doesn't apply to Internet, because all users already had access to the files, they just didn't know where to find them yet. Making a catalogue (which is what hyperlinks are basically about) means making data easily accessible. In my opinion, that is not illegal.'
The picture reminds me of the raster image that was found in the digits of pi, in the book Contact. I bet if you looked hard enough you could find his 34-byte universal combinator there. Accident, or not?;)
Jonathan Betts, curator of horology at the observatory, said the simultaneous running of all four chronometers would not be repeated in the foreseeable future.
"It is a huge privilege; it is one I won't take for granted," he told BBC News Online. "I think it is incredibly exciting. It is a true honour."
Slashdot Mirror
Holy shit, you've done it! Give the guy his million bucks!
First, we give them the missiles to help in their fight against anti-American interests. Second, enemy vanquished, they turn against us. Then we need the plane. Rinse and repeat ;)
You'll probably have to saw your nuts off with a butter knife after some of these girls, or at least your doctor will.
Check out all the outrageous claims
Next he'll be claiming he invented the question mark!
Recently during the (September 2002) MA primary elections I received a 2+ minute automated voicemail from a group supporting one of the candidates. What am I going to do, sue them?
Yes. They probably violated FCC rules. Excerpt from link:
"The TCPA also prohibits artificial or prerecorded voice message calls to residences made without prior express consent, unless it is an emergency call or specifically exempted by the Commission."
Although, a 1TB iPod 7 in my belly, wirelessly trasmitting over UWB directly to my optic nerve would be pretty cool
Now that's what I call synesthesia!
Sure you do. All you have to do (if you're programmatically inclined) is open a file for writing, seek to somewhere greater than 1TB into the file, then close it. The resulting file will not actually take up > 1TB of space, because the filesystem doesn't allocate any space for a "hole" like you've just created, until you write into it. However, ls will show the full size. Keep on increasing the limit until you find the maximum file size.
I think you mean Nostradamus. Quasimodo did come up with the rear spoiler, though.
The penguin seems a bit too into that apple...
Parents of children named Willis are required to pay a royalty at birth which covers any future potential copyright infringment. So don't worry. ;)
He has a one-up on the rest of us because he can preface any legal uncertainty on /. with IAAAL.
Now my favorite pr0n star's cup size is REALLY gonna matter!
Would that size be... DDD?
Actually if you understood elementary physics you'd not have asked that. The platters are gyros
;)
Mmm... gyro platters.
Oddly enough, I'm reading slashdot with Pornzilla and your post came through as
"[garbled] right now [garbled] rub it HARD [garbled] Yeah [garbled] dampness [garbled] RUB HARD WITH A THUMB [garbled] keep it up"
Hmm.
That's all well and good, but more importantly, how many libraries of congress can I fit on it?
For all we know, that may be the standard of beauty in 10,000 years.
Perhaps the open-source community needs to put out some Sprint PCS-like ads. For example, a likeable spokesperson could run into the Blue Man Group, intuit from their color that they'd been using buggy Microsoft products, and then restore them to normal with free software. There should be some humor in there, too.
Hmm? Alt+tab is faster than ctrl+pgup, because it requires fewer hands. Are you using one of the Linux window managers that forces you to switch windows by moving the mouse?
Are you using one of those keyboards without a right Ctrl?
An earlier example of attempts to stifle linking---relevant not only here, but foreshadows e.g. the 2600 DeCSS case. Excerpt:
'In article 15, the plaintiffs state that a so-called 'hyperlink', a reference to the location of another document, is also to be considered as "publication and/or duplication by the user and the provider". A hyperlink is nothing, and I mean absolutely nothing, more than a description of a location that can be activated. Plaintiffs' statement is the same as saying that a library or the writer of a book can be accused of duplication and/or publication because they publish the name, number and location of a certain book or article in a footnote, a bibliography or in an archive entry...
A hyperlink refers to a location. Hyperlinks regularly refer to other hyperlinks. The whole WWW is nothing but a complicated conglomerate of hyperlinks and files. Are all these systems breaking the law in plaintiffs' opinion? Should the whole WWW be indicted whenever there's a document available somewhere that is illegal in plaintiffs' opinion?
A hyperlink does not formally add anything. The publication is a fact as soon as the page is on Internet. Making the document available can only be considered as publication and/or duplication when the number of potential users is increased by this act. But this doesn't apply to Internet, because all users already had access to the files, they just didn't know where to find them yet. Making a catalogue (which is what hyperlinks are basically about) means making data easily accessible. In my opinion, that is not illegal.'
Seven years of graphics down the drain...
The picture reminds me of the raster image that was found in the digits of pi, in the book Contact. I bet if you looked hard enough you could find his 34-byte universal combinator there. Accident, or not? ;)
Jonathan Betts, curator of horology at the observatory, said the simultaneous running of all four chronometers would not be repeated in the foreseeable future.
"It is a huge privilege; it is one I won't take for granted," he told BBC News Online. "I think it is incredibly exciting. It is a true honour."
You are protected from the mistake, but you never know it occurred at all. That's why you need the assertion.
Maybe he's got an off-by-one problem in his brain.
"It works on so many levels!"