Here's an honest, no trolling, I'm just curious question: when was the last time your heard "begs the question" used to mean "this is a circular argument"?
It has been a long time. It is used incorrectly so often, that I no longer consider it to be a cromulent expression. If you use it correctly, 90% of your readers will be confused. If you use it incorrectly, 10% of your readers will be left wondering what other aspects of your education are also deficient. So it is best to know what the phrase means, but avoid it in your own writing and speaking.
Did they really say "begs the question" or did they say "begging the question"? There's a big difference. If you say the former, you're obviously saying "raises the question". If you say the latter, it's "making a circular argument".
I just don't see why people get so hysterical when "beg" and "question" end up in the same sentence. I think the context always makes it clear. "That begs the question,..." has an obvious meaning.
You need to compile this compiler with a compiler which begs the question....
Sigh. It raises the question. To "beg the question" means something completely different. Here is a simple rule of thumb of when that phrase should be used: never.
Here's an honest, no trolling, I'm just curious question: when was the last time your heard "begs the question" used to mean "this is a circular argument"?
I'm listening to a performance, not some audio benchmark. If a bit of loss bothers you, it must be some pretty damned uninspiring music you're listening to.
And if you're listening on some random mp3 player with bud headphones while walking around doing stuff, compression loss is the least of your worries.
No... if that meteorite was in an orbit 30,000km radius from DA14 (which it would have to have been in order to hit Russia when it did), its orbital velocity would necessarily have to be very low. As in, so slow it would take millenia to complete even one orbit. Since DA14 is moving at a whopping 30km/second relative to Earth, anything orbiting it that far out would be moving in virtually the same direction and speed with respect to us.
In short, there's no way that meteorite could have been orbiting DA14
You missed the whole point. "E=mc^2" works in metric because the units are coherent. Use the SI base units (kg, m, s) and everything works out. If you use old stuff like slugs or pound-force for mass and btu for energy, you're going to need some arbitrary conversion factor in the equation depending on which particular units you used.
The "10" business is a very small part of it; that's just to make it easier to do the math when you scale stuff. What DOES matter is that the unit of Force (for example) is exactly related to the base units: F=ma, so the base units are kg*m/s^2, and that is how you define the Newton.
In the bad old days you had to decide what units "mass" was (slugs? oz? lb? tons?) and then acceleration (ft/s? yards/s? inches/s?) and in the end you end up with some funny conversion factor depending on what you want "Force" to be in. So instead of "F=ma" you end up with "F=kma", where "F" is "poundforce", "m" is "oz", "a" is "ft/s" and "k" is some stupid conversion factor just to make the numbers work out with the units you happened to choose. And so you'll get a different conversion factor depending on which particular units you chose for mass and acceleration. Ouch.
"Slugs" are in fact the old unit of mass created to try to sort out this idiotic mess for mass, but hardly any Imperial fanatics even seem to be aware of it. In the end it was best to throw out all that garbage and realize that you only need three basic measurements: mass, distance, time. Everything else can be derived from that through physics equations. And so SI was born: "kg, m, s". Everything else is a derived unit, and so no conversion factor is EVER necessary. The multiple of 10 stuff is just to make it easy to scale numbers, and you can scale the meter down as tiny as measuring atoms to as big as measuring galaxies, but it's still just a meter with a prefix for an exponent.
By '05-'06 K5 was nothing but a trollfest. At that point, I believe rusty was actively seeking large readership and advertising revenue by promoting troll content. For example, there was that "Fuck Natalee Holloway" article, which generated vast numbers of page views. From there the site continued its slide downhill, as rusty pursued more and more salacious material to drive traffic. It became a business model. Those who objected had their accounts summarily shitcanned one by one.
Thank you! I was trying to remember what finally drove me away from K5: It was that garbage "Fuck Natalee Holloway" post and the crap that followed.
I'd been there since 2001, and I think that really was the deathknell. I went back occasionally, but it was nothing but the same small gang of trolls
flaming each other
Not only that, but the US "inch" is actually defined in terms of metric: 25.4mm. Exactly. By definition.
I suppose by some people's strange logic, that would make all US length units metric...
I'm not sure why dicks are modding you down; that turned out to be a wonderfully interesting and noncommercial site which (gasp) is news for nerds like me and stuff that matters. I'm glad I caught your post before the "Offtopic" sourpusses did.
That said, I wasted most of the day on it and am at challenge 11, but I'm finding it's turning out to be less and less about python
and more and more about silly logic games. Still, the widely different solutions people come up with are amazing.
You are (probably) not the only person having to deal with the source code. If you're so egoistical that you're making it harder for everyone else by mangling two different things together, I sincerly hope you and I are never working on the same codebase together.
If you look back at my original post, my whole point is that I don't give a flying fuck
how people indent their code as as long as don't have to scratch my head to figure out how they liked their tabs. Which is why tabs are annoying.
You're the Nazi here, not me. I have to figure out what your tabs mean. Gee thanks a lot.
Are there really people who get their jollies by changing the tab value to make code look different on their screens
Yes.
And why should anybody pander to your bizarre fetish?
Use Unix "unexpand" and shove in tabs everywhere you want. Whack off while changing the indents; I don't care.
But for the source code I have to deal with, why must I try to figure out what particular tab setting made you orgasm?
If you are truly obsessed with a 7-space indent, then go ahead and use that but don't make me have to try to guess it.
No, this just means you (and/or the people you work with) are using tabs in the wrong way.
I don't use tabs, so this does not apply to me.
But the main point is, I have seen tons of code over the past 20 years of my coding experience with this problem. The very existence of the Unix "expand" program which converts tabs to spaces per choice is concrete evidence of this.
So, since apparently most everybody uses tabs incorrectly, and there does not seem to be any point at all with using tabs instead of spaces, then why use tabs at all? Are there really people who get their jollies by changing the tab value to make code look different on their screens?
Tab (ascii 9) goes back to typewriters and teletypes and is effectively an 8 indent because terminals and printers and other devices assume it by default.
So if you don't want an 8-space indent, don't use a tab. If you do want an 8-space indent, you can't assume the viewers device will treat it that why, so why bother with a tab at all?
Tabs do not work. Don't use them. Consider this, where there's a tab before the "int" and the "//" comment using the 8-space standard and the intent is to get
the comments to line up. I'm using "_" instead of spaces to get around slashdot formatting grief:
I for one am sick and tired of having to reverse engineer what some frustrated artistic genius decided to use for their tab offset.
Set your editor to expand tabs to spaces to whatever you want and save everyone the grief of trying to figure out what you were trying to do,
because I really don't give a damn if you use 2, 3, 4, 6 or 8 space indentation; I just don't want to have to guess my way to making your code line up.
The society which scorns excellence in plumbing as a humble activity and tolerates shoddiness in philosophy because it is an exalted activity will have neither good plumbing nor good philosophy: neither its pipes nor its theories will hold water.
So the best thing here is to keep those geosync slots in use, and not chewing up an empty slot with a dead or useless satellite. I'll have to agree with what someone else said - that de-orbit should be a published option, as well.
De-orbiting from geosync is way to expensive to be an option (too high delta-V). What they use instead is the "graveyard orbit". At the end of operational life, the satellite just does some final burns to raise its orbit by a few hundred km, where it is no longer geosynchronous but also out of the way of the geosync orbit. Satellites launched into geosync are required to have this capability.
Terrific, but sharks replace their teeth an unlimited number of times during their lifetime. So they get nice new fresh sharp ones all the time.
I'm stuck with my adult teeth for my whole life.
Oh so instead of IN the editor at the same time and it breaks right into the debugger? Or is it a separate step? Oh and do you have the right plugin's? Oh ding 'bad parameters passed in?', oh 'that line caused a memory overwrite', and 'thread race conditions'? Oh and a suggestion on what to fix? Oh and as you are debugging it? Oh I use these tools. Use both for *many* years. Like most linux tools they are 'almost there' but what I call 'scatter brained'.
Properly *configured* valgrind can do very well. But oh the configuration part... Most windows tools you are ready to rock after install. By default does valgrind do what you are talking about? No. Oh you need 4 different command line settings. Then it *starts* to produce useful information. Oh you need this other thing oh you run again and hopefully you have the right plugin.
By default (no arguments, out of the box) valgrind gives a description of the problem and a stack backtrace with the names of the procedures, files and linenumbers. You can tell it to also drop you into the debugger of your choice at the offending line.
The point is, your accusation "You goto valgrind and bisect issues" (exact quote) would make unfamiliar readers think that valgrind
does not give the exact source code location where the errors occur and that, sir, is a flat out lie. I'm sorry that there are no weaker words for it.
Slashdot Mirror
"Please run this random program you got from somewhere because we asked you to".
Then something bad happens.
What's Android platform specific about this?
Here's an honest, no trolling, I'm just curious question: when was the last time your heard "begs the question" used to mean "this is a circular argument"?
It has been a long time. It is used incorrectly so often, that I no longer consider it to be a cromulent expression. If you use it correctly, 90% of your readers will be confused. If you use it incorrectly, 10% of your readers will be left wondering what other aspects of your education are also deficient. So it is best to know what the phrase means, but avoid it in your own writing and speaking.
Did they really say "begs the question" or did they say "begging the question"? There's a big difference. If you say the former, you're obviously saying "raises the question". If you say the latter, it's "making a circular argument".
I just don't see why people get so hysterical when "beg" and "question" end up in the same sentence. I think the context always makes it clear. "That begs the question, ..." has an obvious meaning.
You need to compile this compiler with a compiler which begs the question....
Sigh. It raises the question. To "beg the question" means something completely different. Here is a simple rule of thumb of when that phrase should be used: never.
Here's an honest, no trolling, I'm just curious question: when was the last time your heard "begs the question" used to mean "this is a circular argument"?
I'm listening to a performance, not some audio benchmark. If a bit of loss bothers you, it must be some pretty damned uninspiring music you're listening to.
And if you're listening on some random mp3 player with bud headphones while walking around doing stuff, compression loss is the least of your worries.
"Rendezvous with Rama" by Arthur C. Clarke in 1972 featured this heavily. Do a google image search for more eye candy. Oh yeah, and read the book too.
No... if that meteorite was in an orbit 30,000km radius from DA14 (which it would have to have been in order to hit Russia when it did), its orbital velocity would necessarily have to be very low. As in, so slow it would take millenia to complete even one orbit. Since DA14 is moving at a whopping 30km/second relative to Earth, anything orbiting it that far out would be moving in virtually the same direction and speed with respect to us.
In short, there's no way that meteorite could have been orbiting DA14
I bet you don't own a TV either
Let me annotate and complete it:
And before any of you [[grammar Nazi's start] soiling your panties] get upset, just relax and have a beer
Which means:
And before any of you pant-shitting grammar Nazis get upset, just relax and have a beer.
See?
You missed the whole point. "E=mc^2" works in metric because the units are coherent. Use the SI base units (kg, m, s) and everything works out. If you use old stuff like slugs or pound-force for mass and btu for energy, you're going to need some arbitrary conversion factor in the equation depending on which particular units you used.
The "10" business is a very small part of it; that's just to make it easier to do the math when you scale stuff. What DOES matter is that the unit of Force (for example) is exactly related to the base units: F=ma, so the base units are kg*m/s^2, and that is how you define the Newton.
In the bad old days you had to decide what units "mass" was (slugs? oz? lb? tons?) and then acceleration (ft/s? yards/s? inches/s?) and in the end you end up with some funny conversion factor depending on what you want "Force" to be in. So instead of "F=ma" you end up with "F=kma", where "F" is "poundforce", "m" is "oz", "a" is "ft/s" and "k" is some stupid conversion factor just to make the numbers work out with the units you happened to choose. And so you'll get a different conversion factor depending on which particular units you chose for mass and acceleration. Ouch.
"Slugs" are in fact the old unit of mass created to try to sort out this idiotic mess for mass, but hardly any Imperial fanatics even seem to be aware of it. In the end it was best to throw out all that garbage and realize that you only need three basic measurements: mass, distance, time. Everything else can be derived from that through physics equations. And so SI was born: "kg, m, s". Everything else is a derived unit, and so no conversion factor is EVER necessary. The multiple of 10 stuff is just to make it easy to scale numbers, and you can scale the meter down as tiny as measuring atoms to as big as measuring galaxies, but it's still just a meter with a prefix for an exponent.
By '05-'06 K5 was nothing but a trollfest. At that point, I believe rusty was actively seeking large readership and advertising revenue by promoting troll content. For example, there was that "Fuck Natalee Holloway" article, which generated vast numbers of page views. From there the site continued its slide downhill, as rusty pursued more and more salacious material to drive traffic. It became a business model. Those who objected had their accounts summarily shitcanned one by one.
Thank you! I was trying to remember what finally drove me away from K5: It was that garbage "Fuck Natalee Holloway" post and the crap that followed.
I'd been there since 2001, and I think that really was the deathknell. I went back occasionally, but it was nothing but the same small gang of trolls flaming each other
Good riddance to that site
Not only that, but the US "inch" is actually defined in terms of metric: 25.4mm. Exactly. By definition. I suppose by some people's strange logic, that would make all US length units metric...
I'm not sure why dicks are modding you down; that turned out to be a wonderfully interesting and noncommercial site which (gasp) is news for nerds like me and stuff that matters. I'm glad I caught your post before the "Offtopic" sourpusses did.
That said, I wasted most of the day on it and am at challenge 11, but I'm finding it's turning out to be less and less about python and more and more about silly logic games. Still, the widely different solutions people come up with are amazing.
According to a comment at the end of the article, a place in Madrid has been doing this for two years now.
I object to my aunt raising the stakes in poker. I'm anti-aunti-ante.
You are (probably) not the only person having to deal with the source code. If you're so egoistical that you're making it harder for everyone else by mangling two different things together, I sincerly hope you and I are never working on the same codebase together.
If you look back at my original post, my whole point is that I don't give a flying fuck how people indent their code as as long as don't have to scratch my head to figure out how they liked their tabs. Which is why tabs are annoying.
You're the Nazi here, not me. I have to figure out what your tabs mean. Gee thanks a lot.
Are there really people who get their jollies by changing the tab value to make code look different on their screens
Yes.
And why should anybody pander to your bizarre fetish?
Use Unix "unexpand" and shove in tabs everywhere you want. Whack off while changing the indents; I don't care. But for the source code I have to deal with, why must I try to figure out what particular tab setting made you orgasm?
If you are truly obsessed with a 7-space indent, then go ahead and use that but don't make me have to try to guess it.
Well maybe that's going to be fixed. Let's see:
>>> from __future__ import braces
File "", line 1
SyntaxError: not a chance
>>>
Nope.
PS: That's real, try it yourself
No, this just means you (and/or the people you work with) are using tabs in the wrong way.
I don't use tabs, so this does not apply to me.
But the main point is, I have seen tons of code over the past 20 years of my coding experience with this problem. The very existence of the Unix "expand" program which converts tabs to spaces per choice is concrete evidence of this.
So, since apparently most everybody uses tabs incorrectly, and there does not seem to be any point at all with using tabs instead of spaces, then why use tabs at all? Are there really people who get their jollies by changing the tab value to make code look different on their screens?
Tab (ascii 9) goes back to typewriters and teletypes and is effectively an 8 indent because terminals and printers and other devices assume it by default. So if you don't want an 8-space indent, don't use a tab. If you do want an 8-space indent, you can't assume the viewers device will treat it that why, so why bother with a tab at all?
.
Tabs do not work. Don't use them. Consider this, where there's a tab before the "int" and the "//" comment using the 8-space standard and the intent is to get the comments to line up. I'm using "_" instead of spaces to get around slashdot formatting grief:
________int_a;__________//_Hello
________int_Whatever;___//_Yeah
If you set your editor, printer, viewer, whatever to use 4 space tabs it becomes this:
____int_a;______//_Hello
____int_Whatever;___//_Yeah
I for one am sick and tired of having to reverse engineer what some frustrated artistic genius decided to use for their tab offset. Set your editor to expand tabs to spaces to whatever you want and save everyone the grief of trying to figure out what you were trying to do, because I really don't give a damn if you use 2, 3, 4, 6 or 8 space indentation; I just don't want to have to guess my way to making your code line up.
The society which scorns excellence in plumbing as a humble activity and tolerates shoddiness in philosophy because it is an exalted activity will have neither good plumbing nor good philosophy: neither its pipes nor its theories will hold water.
- John W. Garner
So the best thing here is to keep those geosync slots in use, and not chewing up an empty slot with a dead or useless satellite. I'll have to agree with what someone else said - that de-orbit should be a published option, as well.
De-orbiting from geosync is way to expensive to be an option (too high delta-V). What they use instead is the "graveyard orbit". At the end of operational life, the satellite just does some final burns to raise its orbit by a few hundred km, where it is no longer geosynchronous but also out of the way of the geosync orbit. Satellites launched into geosync are required to have this capability.
Actually I was hoping somebody would pipe up with "Tesla was American!". I leave disappointed.
If you meet a Croat, tell him Tesla was Serbian. If you meet a Serb, tell him Tesla was Croatian. Watch the sparks fly.
(Tesla was born in what is now Croatia, but was ethnically Serbian).
Terrific, but sharks replace their teeth an unlimited number of times during their lifetime. So they get nice new fresh sharp ones all the time. I'm stuck with my adult teeth for my whole life.
Oh so instead of IN the editor at the same time and it breaks right into the debugger? Or is it a separate step? Oh and do you have the right plugin's? Oh ding 'bad parameters passed in?', oh 'that line caused a memory overwrite', and 'thread race conditions'? Oh and a suggestion on what to fix? Oh and as you are debugging it? Oh I use these tools. Use both for *many* years. Like most linux tools they are 'almost there' but what I call 'scatter brained'.
Properly *configured* valgrind can do very well. But oh the configuration part... Most windows tools you are ready to rock after install. By default does valgrind do what you are talking about? No. Oh you need 4 different command line settings. Then it *starts* to produce useful information. Oh you need this other thing oh you run again and hopefully you have the right plugin.
By default (no arguments, out of the box) valgrind gives a description of the problem and a stack backtrace with the names of the procedures, files and linenumbers. You can tell it to also drop you into the debugger of your choice at the offending line.
The point is, your accusation "You goto valgrind and bisect issues" (exact quote) would make unfamiliar readers think that valgrind does not give the exact source code location where the errors occur and that, sir, is a flat out lie. I'm sorry that there are no weaker words for it.