As any diver will tell you, both nitrogen and oxygen are toxic. On compressed air, divers can become literally intoxicated below around 40-50 metres. This is known as 'rapture of the deep'. Conveniently this tipsy feeling will go as the partial pressure of N2 decreases (however, being drunk at 6 bar is not a good idea). Nitrox has a higher percentage of oxygen (say 40% O2 to 60% N2) and is used to decrease the amount of nitrogen dissolving in the blood, thus lessening the risk of the bends (nitrogen bubbles forming in the joints). However nitrox divers cannot go quite as deep, because they will in turn get oxygen toxicity symptoms - not a good idea at 30 fathoms below the sea, but sometimes an unpleasant side-effect of treatment in a hyperbaric chamber. Deeper divers (and pros) may use trimix, which adds Helium to the mix. I'm writing this from ancient memory, but I believe that He too is toxic at higher partial pressures (it can cause the bends, but the far smaller Helium atom is both absorbed and released much faster than the N2 molecule).
People who write code with Delphi don't have this problem; compile time is effectively zero for most projects.
What is this 'compile time' you speak of? I use Delphi - see my nick - but the only thing I can think of is 10-11 am and 2-3 pm when a C++ programmer on the same cross-language project would have an extended coffee break.
At first I thought that 'as potential programmers they are mentally mutilated beyond hope of regeneration' and 'He didn't say you couldn't be a programmer' were mutually incompatible.
Then I thought back to a small job I did at a place I worked last millenium. It was to update a smallish piece of code (about 1500 lines) which parsed RTF files (and then did some minor magic) to also do the same with HTML. It had been written by a brilliant programmer - the only 'non-student' to ever win a national speed programming challenge, incidentally. Of course, he had left the company by this time, and there was no documentation. So it took me about a week to grok the (C++) code, trying to find places to insert mine. Of course, since his 1500 line program was written in that OO language C++, it had a class, which had some methods, one of which was about 1400 lines long. Oh yes indeedy. Indented 12 or 14 deep (not spaces, braces). In that week I did also look in to using parser generators, but I went home at the weekend feeling down, having not achieved much.
Next Monday, I finally decided to use my brains. I decided to make a prototype in Delphi (which I am far more familiar with, see my nick). I didn't start coding straight away, I made a simple design first, but after lunch, I went in to code mode. Three hours and 200 lines later (4 or 5 serious functions doing the 4 or 5 steps actually required, none larger than a page, none nested more than 3 deep [exluding outer begin/end]), I had it. Same DLL format, so plugable. Readable (I spent the last couple of hours writing some documentation too). Usable, etc.
Moral of the story being, I now know what the 'C++' programmer really was... yes he was a programmer - but as mentally mutilated as the come!
Although my first computer - a ZX-81 - did have BASIC, the fact that it only had 1K of memory meant that I was never 'over-exposed'. Lucky me! And yes, I did have a 16K RAM-pack, but risking writing a program that size??? It would have wobbled off already! (the RAM-pack that is.)
Fortunately I have (long) since discovered Pascal and Delphi. I don't know what Edsgar would have thought, but my modal average function length is 5 lines (header/begin/code/end/whitespace - begin/end = '{'/'}' to you C and Java types.) I don't wish to start a language war - in fact I will even go so far as to admit that both C++ and Java are more 'powerful' than Object Pascal - but the sheer readability and simplicity of Delphi code is very pleasant. Sorry for the sidetrack!
Using a 1.609 conversion factor... tsk. 1609 metres and 34.4 cm to the mile, thank you very much! Hmmph nerd indeed. And don't claim you were rounding to four significant figures either, it would still be 3.219x10eX... (But in fairness, I agree with you - lol)
A) The ad for HPC I/O: A brief history at the top of this slashdot page.
B) The ad I get when I search for slashdot on google (It says: "Google is hiring (expert software designers)". YMMV)
C) The ad on Dutch TV which has some bimbo checking if her white trousers are bloody around the crotch area. (Several variations, for both tampons and pads, she looks over her shoulders to check from behind in a mirror or kicks up in front of a mirror). Note that this occurs at maximum volume first thing in to the ad break.
Now while I agree with you that ads can be intrusive, I personally don't mind even simple banners - my brain has learned to ignore them. As for pop-ups and flashing, Mozilla serves well. Interstitials (gamesp?) are rare as yet; we will work around those when we have to. Google ads are directed, and on the rare occasion I am search for a product rather than just information, I may well use them. By comparison, these are insignificant compared to TV ads.
If I were told that my child had a 1 in 56.5 chance of getting a fatal genetic disease, I'd certainly think twice before have a child, and I'd definitely have any possible screening tests done.
jd, I hate to have to tell you this, but any children you may have will have almost a 100% chance of that fatal genetic disease: age. So think twice! Oh and by the way, to save money you could consider waiting a hundred years or so instead of paying for screening tests. Good luck!
I'm still wrong and blathering. I'm too old. Extra axioms are being added which if not easy to fold physically are at least mathematically sound. My apologies for my witterings, and my thanks for having learned something after all that (no, not to not post before reading, about origami and third order equations, grin).
In answer to myself: of course I already had the 'trisecting the angle' page open in another tab! Although it does admit that the vital fold is a matter of trial and error, it is rather more elegant than folding a Z. As such, it is not a mathematical construction, but certainly could be handy if stuck without a protractor AND a calculator!
In fairness, I was deeply impressed with myself when _I_ managed to trisect an angle at around a third of my current age (which is around a third of a century). However, I discovered (when junior school arithmetic became senior school mathematics) that trisecting a right angle using origami is not particularly difficult (no harder than creating an equilateral triangle).
Now presumably your 'method' involves taking a corner of a piece of paper (perhaps not 90 degrees even) and slowly, carefully, folding it in to a Z-shape, with each 'segment' having equal length.
However, this sadly does not a geometrical construction construe. Your (any) random angle is transcendental (or the hyperbolic functions of it are).
Finally, you mention a marked ruler: these do not help. When we (mathematicians) say 'construct' we mean 'provably' so. Thus no ruler exists which can measure a line of length pi cm, for example. Having said that, I should again admit something, or at least give a hint to precocious ten-year-olds without their protractor. My Casio (it had a glowing green LED display) calculator would do just fine as long as I had a (marked) ruler. Learning what sines are before you are supposed to CAN help!
All I said in my 'secondly' point was that the velocity could only decrease, i.e. not increase.
As to bullet speed and air resistance, the force of gravity is pretty negligable (and also, a constant). On the other hand drag increases proportionally to the velocity squared. Now admittedly a bullet has efficient balistic characteristics, and it has been a long time since I have done any serious physics or applied mathematics, but I do have a vague idea what I am talking about.
First of all, a (rifle) bullet would not be able to break the land speed record - it would be travelling through the air.
Secondly, a (long-range) rifle may have a high exit velocity (muzzle? I am not an expert), but this will only decrease after being shot - the bullet will be slowed down by air resistance.
Finally, I know that laser pointers shout around 1c (speed of light), so it wouldn't be too hard to... oh wait, perhaps it IS hard? Perhaps that is why this is a record 20 years old being rebroken?
Filenames eh? Back in my day we had to remember the cassette deck counter. And variables were only a single character - unless you consider the '$' which doubled the number of variables to 52....Bah!
Let alone the fact that the doorstop/ZX-81/Timex-1000 only had 1K RAM - which included display storage. Fancy pants yourself!
Re:When do we start punching holes in them?
on
High Density CDs
·
· Score: 1
Reminds me of the old help desk joke:
Customer: My install fails on disk #3. Help desk: Ok can you tell me exactly what you did? C: Well I put in disk #1 first, and then disk #2, but disk #3 wouldn't fit. HD: Er, where are disks 1 and 2? C: They are still in the floppy drive, of course! HD: D'oh (or whatever they said pre-Homer).
You, obviously, are very sick.
Now, what you say is false, since children are individuals. Children are 'different', and although some learning may be imposed through punishment in certain cases, often they try to mimic good behaviour. The original AC was merely suggesting that it would be better to set a good example more often than to impose a punishment system for bad behaviour (and the AC made no suggestion of whether children of 5 or 15 were being discussed).
As for your sickness, it is the fundamental sickness of society (not a personal insult). Despite children being perhaps our (human races) greatest resource, they are cared for by overworked and undertrained teachers and parents (even in our richest societies, perhaps even more so the richer it gets).
Treat children as people (at all ages) and not as glorified pets in which to 'instill discipline'.
As to learning, and to keep on-topic... although it might seem opposite to my thesis that children need MORE teacher time, that doesn't mean that computers cannot help. To the contrary, some children may prefer and enjoy practicing skills (be it 2+3 or building a city economy) whereas others may need to be shown (repeatedly). Again, children differ, some learn by doing, others by example, some fast and some slow.
Saddest of all is that society treats adults impersonally too, but that is hardly surprising considering that the adults were all... kids once.
I think the word you were looking for instead of 'measure' is 'metric'.
The usual cartesian/pythagorean metric for a circle is x^2 + y^2 + z^2 = r^2, right? (I'll give you origin for sake of ease, should be (x-x0)^2 etc.)
Your metric is: max(abs(x), abs(y), abs(z)) = r, right?
Wrong. Fact is, a cube can be rotated and still be a cube, but not with that metric of yours.
Of course, drop the metric and go in to the realm of topology, and every mathematician will agree that they are (topologically) equivalent - as I originally stated.
Anyway, you yourself state 'a cube is the same but different', so your conclusion is sophistry. However, you do give a good example of why metrics are not used in topology.
As a mathematician, I can assure you that not a single mathematician in the world considers a cube to be the 'same' as a sphere. Merely topologicaly equivalent.
As a computer scientist, I must inform you that all small integers (anything less than +/- 2^23 for IEEE) are accurately represented, and specifically that 10 is NOT equal to 9.9 (recurring). Yes, (10/3)*3 will yield that value - as will decimal arithmetic to any precision.
It is a well-known fact that any compression algorithm will cause some files to increase in size when 'packed'. If this were not the case, then '42' would be the compressed version of some other file, say 'Wdugiu*6x9', which in turn would be the compressed version of DNA's DNA, which in turn might be the compressed version of the answer to life, the universe, and everything. Furthermore, everybodies DNA would compress down to the same file '42' (since we all contain the answer within ourselves, presumable mice would compress down to something else), which would mean we were all clones, which means that I am the Pope and you are CowboyNeal (and vice versa). QED.
1. Your wife has an H1B, 2. You do not mention yourself being on an H1B too. 3. You are therefore a US citizen, 4. She is therefore eligible for a green card.
I was booted one mornin' when the sun didn't shine Picked another cubicle and logged back online I d/led Sixteen Gigs of number 9 pron And the PH-boss said, "Well, bless my soul"
See me comin' better step aside A lot of PCs didn't and a lot of men died I got one fist of NT and the other of DOS And if the OS don't crash ya, the drivers will
Slashdot Mirror
As any diver will tell you, both nitrogen and oxygen are toxic. On compressed air, divers can become literally intoxicated below around 40-50 metres. This is known as 'rapture of the deep'. Conveniently this tipsy feeling will go as the partial pressure of N2 decreases (however, being drunk at 6 bar is not a good idea). Nitrox has a higher percentage of oxygen (say 40% O2 to 60% N2) and is used to decrease the amount of nitrogen dissolving in the blood, thus lessening the risk of the bends (nitrogen bubbles forming in the joints). However nitrox divers cannot go quite as deep, because they will in turn get oxygen toxicity symptoms - not a good idea at 30 fathoms below the sea, but sometimes an unpleasant side-effect of treatment in a hyperbaric chamber. Deeper divers (and pros) may use trimix, which adds Helium to the mix. I'm writing this from ancient memory, but I believe that He too is toxic at higher partial pressures (it can cause the bends, but the far smaller Helium atom is both absorbed and released much faster than the N2 molecule).
What is this 'compile time' you speak of? I use Delphi - see my nick - but the only thing I can think of is 10-11 am and 2-3 pm when a C++ programmer on the same cross-language project would have an extended coffee break.
(Removes tongue from cheek - somewhat)
Then I thought back to a small job I did at a place I worked last millenium. It was to update a smallish piece of code (about 1500 lines) which parsed RTF files (and then did some minor magic) to also do the same with HTML. It had been written by a brilliant programmer - the only 'non-student' to ever win a national speed programming challenge, incidentally. Of course, he had left the company by this time, and there was no documentation. So it took me about a week to grok the (C++) code, trying to find places to insert mine. Of course, since his 1500 line program was written in that OO language C++, it had a class, which had some methods, one of which was about 1400 lines long. Oh yes indeedy. Indented 12 or 14 deep (not spaces, braces). In that week I did also look in to using parser generators, but I went home at the weekend feeling down, having not achieved much.
Next Monday, I finally decided to use my brains. I decided to make a prototype in Delphi (which I am far more familiar with, see my nick). I didn't start coding straight away, I made a simple design first, but after lunch, I went in to code mode. Three hours and 200 lines later (4 or 5 serious functions doing the 4 or 5 steps actually required, none larger than a page, none nested more than 3 deep [exluding outer begin/end]), I had it. Same DLL format, so plugable. Readable (I spent the last couple of hours writing some documentation too). Usable, etc.
Moral of the story being, I now know what the 'C++' programmer really was... yes he was a programmer - but as mentally mutilated as the come!
Fortunately I have (long) since discovered Pascal and Delphi. I don't know what Edsgar would have thought, but my modal average function length is 5 lines (header/begin/code/end/whitespace - begin/end = '{'/'}' to you C and Java types.) I don't wish to start a language war - in fact I will even go so far as to admit that both C++ and Java are more 'powerful' than Object Pascal - but the sheer readability and simplicity of Delphi code is very pleasant. Sorry for the sidetrack!
Using a 1.609 conversion factor... tsk. 1609 metres and 34.4 cm to the mile, thank you very much! Hmmph nerd indeed. And don't claim you were rounding to four significant figures either, it would still be 3.219x10eX... (But in fairness, I agree with you - lol)
If in a hundred years time AMD is producing the CPUs for NASA spacecraft, they won't need tiles. They'll need cooling fins instead.
Compare and contrast:
A) The ad for HPC I/O: A brief history at the top of this slashdot page.
B) The ad I get when I search for slashdot on google (It says: "Google is hiring (expert software designers)". YMMV)
C) The ad on Dutch TV which has some bimbo checking if her white trousers are bloody around the crotch area. (Several variations, for both tampons and pads, she looks over her shoulders to check from behind in a mirror or kicks up in front of a mirror). Note that this occurs at maximum volume first thing in to the ad break.
Now while I agree with you that ads can be intrusive, I personally don't mind even simple banners - my brain has learned to ignore them. As for pop-ups and flashing, Mozilla serves well. Interstitials (gamesp?) are rare as yet; we will work around those when we have to. Google ads are directed, and on the rare occasion I am search for a product rather than just information, I may well use them. By comparison, these are insignificant compared to TV ads.
Which is why I want a Tivo in Europe!
jd, I hate to have to tell you this, but any children you may have will have almost a 100% chance of that fatal genetic disease: age. So think twice! Oh and by the way, to save money you could consider waiting a hundred years or so instead of paying for screening tests. Good luck!
Unfortunately, their crossword isn't even gratis online.
I'm still wrong and blathering. I'm too old. Extra axioms are being added which if not easy to fold physically are at least mathematically sound. My apologies for my witterings, and my thanks for having learned something after all that (no, not to not post before reading, about origami and third order equations, grin).
In answer to myself: of course I already had the 'trisecting the angle' page open in another tab! Although it does admit that the vital fold is a matter of trial and error, it is rather more elegant than folding a Z. As such, it is not a mathematical construction, but certainly could be handy if stuck without a protractor AND a calculator!
What a load of codswollop.
In fairness, I was deeply impressed with myself when _I_ managed to trisect an angle at around a third of my current age (which is around a third of a century). However, I discovered (when junior school arithmetic became senior school mathematics) that trisecting a right angle using origami is not particularly difficult (no harder than creating an equilateral triangle).
Now presumably your 'method' involves taking a corner of a piece of paper (perhaps not 90 degrees even) and slowly, carefully, folding it in to a Z-shape, with each 'segment' having equal length.
However, this sadly does not a geometrical construction construe. Your (any) random angle is transcendental (or the hyperbolic functions of it are).
Finally, you mention a marked ruler: these do not help. When we (mathematicians) say 'construct' we mean 'provably' so. Thus no ruler exists which can measure a line of length pi cm, for example. Having said that, I should again admit something, or at least give a hint to precocious ten-year-olds without their protractor. My Casio (it had a glowing green LED display) calculator would do just fine as long as I had a (marked) ruler. Learning what sines are before you are supposed to CAN help!
As to bullet speed and air resistance, the force of gravity is pretty negligable (and also, a constant). On the other hand drag increases proportionally to the velocity squared. Now admittedly a bullet has efficient balistic characteristics, and it has been a long time since I have done any serious physics or applied mathematics, but I do have a vague idea what I am talking about.
http://www.digidesign.com/ptfree/ptfree_qa.html
Free as in beer, obviously, and limited, but hey - beer good!
Ok, I'll bite....
First of all, a (rifle) bullet would not be able to break the land speed record - it would be travelling through the air.
Secondly, a (long-range) rifle may have a high exit velocity (muzzle? I am not an expert), but this will only decrease after being shot - the bullet will be slowed down by air resistance.
Finally, I know that laser pointers shout around 1c (speed of light), so it wouldn't be too hard to... oh wait, perhaps it IS hard? Perhaps that is why this is a record 20 years old being rebroken?
Please feel free to think before you next post.
Let alone the fact that the doorstop/ZX-81/Timex-1000 only had 1K RAM - which included display storage. Fancy pants yourself!
Reminds me of the old help desk joke:
Customer: My install fails on disk #3.
Help desk: Ok can you tell me exactly what you did?
C: Well I put in disk #1 first, and then disk #2, but disk #3 wouldn't fit.
HD: Er, where are disks 1 and 2?
C: They are still in the floppy drive, of course!
HD: D'oh (or whatever they said pre-Homer).
Since you posted this on /. you obviously aren't interested in security through obscurity!
You, obviously, are very sick. Now, what you say is false, since children are individuals. Children are 'different', and although some learning may be imposed through punishment in certain cases, often they try to mimic good behaviour. The original AC was merely suggesting that it would be better to set a good example more often than to impose a punishment system for bad behaviour (and the AC made no suggestion of whether children of 5 or 15 were being discussed). As for your sickness, it is the fundamental sickness of society (not a personal insult). Despite children being perhaps our (human races) greatest resource, they are cared for by overworked and undertrained teachers and parents (even in our richest societies, perhaps even more so the richer it gets). Treat children as people (at all ages) and not as glorified pets in which to 'instill discipline'. As to learning, and to keep on-topic... although it might seem opposite to my thesis that children need MORE teacher time, that doesn't mean that computers cannot help. To the contrary, some children may prefer and enjoy practicing skills (be it 2+3 or building a city economy) whereas others may need to be shown (repeatedly). Again, children differ, some learn by doing, others by example, some fast and some slow. Saddest of all is that society treats adults impersonally too, but that is hardly surprising considering that the adults were all... kids once.
I think the word you were looking for instead of 'measure' is 'metric'.
The usual cartesian/pythagorean metric for a circle is x^2 + y^2 + z^2 = r^2, right? (I'll give you origin for sake of ease, should be (x-x0)^2 etc.)
Your metric is: max(abs(x), abs(y), abs(z)) = r, right?
Wrong. Fact is, a cube can be rotated and still be a cube, but not with that metric of yours.
Of course, drop the metric and go in to the realm of topology, and every mathematician will agree that they are (topologically) equivalent - as I originally stated.
Anyway, you yourself state 'a cube is the same but different', so your conclusion is sophistry. However, you do give a good example of why metrics are not used in topology.
As a mathematician, I can assure you that not a single mathematician in the world considers a cube to be the 'same' as a sphere. Merely topologicaly equivalent.
As a computer scientist, I must inform you that all small integers (anything less than +/- 2^23 for IEEE) are accurately represented, and specifically that 10 is NOT equal to 9.9 (recurring). Yes, (10/3)*3 will yield that value - as will decimal arithmetic to any precision.
Oh well, I guess that makes you a troll.
Obviously not old enough to remember the original microdrive (circa 1984).
It is a well-known fact that any compression algorithm will cause some files to increase in size when 'packed'. If this were not the case, then '42' would be the compressed version of some other file, say 'Wdugiu*6x9', which in turn would be the compressed version of DNA's DNA, which in turn might be the compressed version of the answer to life, the universe, and everything. Furthermore, everybodies DNA would compress down to the same file '42' (since we all contain the answer within ourselves, presumable mice would compress down to something else), which would mean we were all clones, which means that I am the Pope and you are CowboyNeal (and vice versa). QED.
1. Your wife has an H1B,
2. You do not mention yourself being on an H1B too.
3. You are therefore a US citizen,
4. She is therefore eligible for a green card.
Correct?
I was booted one mornin' when the sun didn't shine
Picked another cubicle and logged back online
I d/led Sixteen Gigs of number 9 pron
And the PH-boss said, "Well, bless my soul"
See me comin' better step aside
A lot of PCs didn't and a lot of men died
I got one fist of NT and the other of DOS
And if the OS don't crash ya, the drivers will