However, when landing a plane, it doesnt matter if the runway is exactly here, or 15ft over there... When calculating velocity, 15ft will make a TREMENDOUS difference.
They cant photo from behind in most US states. Because the law defines the penalties being assessed to the DRIVER of the car. The law even defines what is meant by driver. So by photographing from behind, you have no idea who the driver is... Actually, in reality, even if they did photograph your face, they still couldn't prove it was you. Even if it looked like you, because picture alone is not positive ID in most states. That is why we have a thing called a drivers license and state ID cards... A picture alone is not positive ID, because you wouldn't be able to prove if it was you, your brother, your twin, etc etc. Burden of proof is on the prosecution, not the defense, so it doesn't matter if you don't have an identicle twin, the prosecution has to prove it.
No you wont... Look at the law. In Oregon, Washington, and California, (at the company I used to work for, the governments were our clients, so when I was compiling stuff, I browsed the books), the law specifically defines the penalties... In those three states, it specifically defines the person guilty as being the driver. And it specifically defines what a driver means. So in answer to your question... You don't have to pay. Because the law does NOT say the registered owner is the party responsible for the violation.
Many cars are limited because of the tires they came with. Example... If the car comes with H rated tires from the factory (130mph), usually there will be a limiter on the car around 127-128mph. They do this because of "liability" reasons... You know, if the owner decides he wants to drive 145+ on those 130mph rated tires, and loses control... You know how this country works... Everyone tries to place blame on everyone/everything except themselves;)
not to mention you have the right to face your accusor... On top of this, who is going to be the prosecution's witness in this case? Most ticket by mail cases get thrown out when you challenge them for this very reason. There is no case for the prosecution without a witness. You can't exactly have the photo-radar machine be a witness. Though if they ever get good AI....
At least at the IKEA in Torrance, once you get in, you have to walk through the entire store to get out. The entrance is a pair of escalators that only goes up. Once you get ot the top, you have to walk through the entire top floor, go down a set of escalators, then walk through the entire bottom floor to get out. It wouldn't be so bad if you could walk straight from the escalator to the other, but you have to walk in the aisles, which curve round and round, going through every department...
If you take any intro Anthropology class, you'll learn that most modern scientists in fact DO correlate brain size with intelligence... No other creature on this planet has a brain size even remotely close to the size of a human. An elephant has a brain the size of a peanut.
And yes, modern scientists actually believe that during their time, neandertals were in fact MORE intelligent then their homosapien counterpart. Please remember, I didn't say smarter than TODAY's homosapiens... I was referring to homo-sapiens of that era...
And hightened sense of smell will NOT make the brain of a peon the size of a human... Just look at dogs. Their sense of smell is whole magnitudes of scale greater than ours, yet their brains are still pretty small.
Besides, according to Darwin, if the neandertals had greater senses than homo-sapiens, one would think that would have prevailed today, but obviously it didn't... (Not that I agree with those theories or anything... I'm just stating what was told)
In my Anthropology class in college, shey showed that:
The Neandertals, contrary to popular believe, are not stupid. Their brain case is actually significanly larger than that of homosapiens. Modern anthropologists actually believe that neandertals were bigger, stronger, and smarter than homosapiens... Kinda throws a monkey wrench into survival of the fittest and such....
I don't think that comparison is accurate.... I think a better comparison would be:
C++ --> Learning to swim by jumping into the shallow end of a pool, and learning to swim
Java --> Learning to swim by jumping into the pool, with all sorts of inflatable devices around your neck, arms, legs, etc etc...
I'm sure you could learn to swim both ways. It is even easier to learn to swim the latter way... But who do you think is going to be a better swimmer?
Thats funny. For most of my stuff, if I wasn't using X-Win, I was just coding it on my windows box. When I took 3D Graphics, I had no problems coding to C++/Open GL, on my windows box, and giving a demo to the prof on an NT box, and the TA on a solaris box. In fact before our dorms had ethernet, I coded on my own box, with no problems. In fact, the only time I remember having problems, is in my java class! My app ran fine in the lab, but went to crap when I tried running it in the dorm.
As a class of '98 CS grad, here's my take:
You should stick with C/C++.
I think you need to understand things like pointers, and memory management, if not just for the purpose that you know whats going on, so you know what the GC is doing, (or trying to do;)
Going from C++ to Java for me was pretty easy. As was going from C++ to C#. Heck, going from C++ to any language for me is easy.... But I think if you learn Java or C# first, and get comfortable with it, you are missing out on a lot of things, and may not even some concepts well.
I think its akin to giving a student a calculator in elementary school, and letting them use it for their mach classes... Sure, they can do things easier, but in the end, who is better off? You don't want to have to rely on the calculator (Java) for everything. If you know the underlying stuff, and the underlying principles and such, your life would be easier. As an example, (probably a bad one):
If some asks me to calculate the root of some arbitrary number, I'll need to dig out my calculator. If you ask my dad, just give him a pencil, and he'll calculate it for you. Its a shame they don't teach that in schools anymore... But my point. In college, one of my upper div math classes was number theory... It was pretty confusing. When I asked my dad for some help, he was able to explain a lot of things to me, and he understood it really well. Little things like these, can give you a different outlook on the way things work, if you know what I mean.... Why limit your repetoir(sp?) The more conecepts you understand, the more flexible you'll be...
Maybe this is a better way to explain. In the windows world, I'm very proficient in utilizing straight win32 sockets. Because of this, I feel that I could pretty much code whatever I want that dealt with sockets. Whether it be RTSP or whatever. One of my friends who claims to be a guru, despite the fact he only knows VB. Well, he only knows how to use the active x controls. Thats all fine and dandy, but I ended up helping him code a lot of the communications modules, because he didn't quite understand sockets. In the java world, I think if you get all used to Java.net , and not the berkely sockets implementation, you are only hurting yourself.
Slashdot Mirror
However, when landing a plane, it doesnt matter if the runway is exactly here, or 15ft over there... When calculating velocity, 15ft will make a TREMENDOUS difference.
They cant photo from behind in most US states. Because the law defines the penalties being assessed to the DRIVER of the car. The law even defines what is meant by driver. So by photographing from behind, you have no idea who the driver is... Actually, in reality, even if they did photograph your face, they still couldn't prove it was you. Even if it looked like you, because picture alone is not positive ID in most states. That is why we have a thing called a drivers license and state ID cards... A picture alone is not positive ID, because you wouldn't be able to prove if it was you, your brother, your twin, etc etc. Burden of proof is on the prosecution, not the defense, so it doesn't matter if you don't have an identicle twin, the prosecution has to prove it.
No you wont... Look at the law. In Oregon, Washington, and California, (at the company I used to work for, the governments were our clients, so when I was compiling stuff, I browsed the books), the law specifically defines the penalties... In those three states, it specifically defines the person guilty as being the driver. And it specifically defines what a driver means. So in answer to your question... You don't have to pay. Because the law does NOT say the registered owner is the party responsible for the violation.
Many cars are limited because of the tires they came with. Example... If the car comes with H rated tires from the factory (130mph), usually there will be a limiter on the car around 127-128mph. They do this because of "liability" reasons... You know, if the owner decides he wants to drive 145+ on those 130mph rated tires, and loses control... You know how this country works... Everyone tries to place blame on everyone/everything except themselves ;)
not to mention you have the right to face your accusor... On top of this, who is going to be the prosecution's witness in this case? Most ticket by mail cases get thrown out when you challenge them for this very reason. There is no case for the prosecution without a witness. You can't exactly have the photo-radar machine be a witness. Though if they ever get good AI....
At least at the IKEA in Torrance, once you get in, you have to walk through the entire store to get out. The entrance is a pair of escalators that only goes up. Once you get ot the top, you have to walk through the entire top floor, go down a set of escalators, then walk through the entire bottom floor to get out. It wouldn't be so bad if you could walk straight from the escalator to the other, but you have to walk in the aisles, which curve round and round, going through every department...
If you take any intro Anthropology class, you'll learn that most modern scientists in fact DO correlate brain size with intelligence... No other creature on this planet has a brain size even remotely close to the size of a human. An elephant has a brain the size of a peanut. And yes, modern scientists actually believe that during their time, neandertals were in fact MORE intelligent then their homosapien counterpart. Please remember, I didn't say smarter than TODAY's homosapiens... I was referring to homo-sapiens of that era... And hightened sense of smell will NOT make the brain of a peon the size of a human... Just look at dogs. Their sense of smell is whole magnitudes of scale greater than ours, yet their brains are still pretty small. Besides, according to Darwin, if the neandertals had greater senses than homo-sapiens, one would think that would have prevailed today, but obviously it didn't... (Not that I agree with those theories or anything... I'm just stating what was told)
In my Anthropology class in college, shey showed that: The Neandertals, contrary to popular believe, are not stupid. Their brain case is actually significanly larger than that of homosapiens. Modern anthropologists actually believe that neandertals were bigger, stronger, and smarter than homosapiens... Kinda throws a monkey wrench into survival of the fittest and such....
I don't think that comparison is accurate.... I think a better comparison would be: C++ --> Learning to swim by jumping into the shallow end of a pool, and learning to swim Java --> Learning to swim by jumping into the pool, with all sorts of inflatable devices around your neck, arms, legs, etc etc... I'm sure you could learn to swim both ways. It is even easier to learn to swim the latter way... But who do you think is going to be a better swimmer?
Thats funny. For most of my stuff, if I wasn't using X-Win, I was just coding it on my windows box. When I took 3D Graphics, I had no problems coding to C++/Open GL, on my windows box, and giving a demo to the prof on an NT box, and the TA on a solaris box. In fact before our dorms had ethernet, I coded on my own box, with no problems. In fact, the only time I remember having problems, is in my java class! My app ran fine in the lab, but went to crap when I tried running it in the dorm.
As a class of '98 CS grad, here's my take: You should stick with C/C++. I think you need to understand things like pointers, and memory management, if not just for the purpose that you know whats going on, so you know what the GC is doing, (or trying to do ;)
Going from C++ to Java for me was pretty easy. As was going from C++ to C#. Heck, going from C++ to any language for me is easy.... But I think if you learn Java or C# first, and get comfortable with it, you are missing out on a lot of things, and may not even some concepts well.
I think its akin to giving a student a calculator in elementary school, and letting them use it for their mach classes... Sure, they can do things easier, but in the end, who is better off? You don't want to have to rely on the calculator (Java) for everything. If you know the underlying stuff, and the underlying principles and such, your life would be easier. As an example, (probably a bad one):
If some asks me to calculate the root of some arbitrary number, I'll need to dig out my calculator. If you ask my dad, just give him a pencil, and he'll calculate it for you. Its a shame they don't teach that in schools anymore... But my point. In college, one of my upper div math classes was number theory... It was pretty confusing. When I asked my dad for some help, he was able to explain a lot of things to me, and he understood it really well. Little things like these, can give you a different outlook on the way things work, if you know what I mean.... Why limit your repetoir(sp?) The more conecepts you understand, the more flexible you'll be...
Maybe this is a better way to explain. In the windows world, I'm very proficient in utilizing straight win32 sockets. Because of this, I feel that I could pretty much code whatever I want that dealt with sockets. Whether it be RTSP or whatever. One of my friends who claims to be a guru, despite the fact he only knows VB. Well, he only knows how to use the active x controls. Thats all fine and dandy, but I ended up helping him code a lot of the communications modules, because he didn't quite understand sockets. In the java world, I think if you get all used to Java.net , and not the berkely sockets implementation, you are only hurting yourself.