25 Mbps symetrical, is the lowest available speed from my ISP
/facedesk
Here is what prices are like for us (ISP chosen that has an easily-readable table, but the others are all similar) http://broadband.t5.co.nz/inspire.html
The standard model seems to be fairly slippery anyway.
The SM predicts that neutrinos have no mass, but experiments show that they do. However, physicists do not seem to say that this disproves the SM. The feeling is more that the SM could be adjusted so that it features neutrinos with mass.
Something similar will probably happen if there is no Higgs Boson found in the expected area. One of the hundreds of SM variants that are floating around, which happens to not include a HB in that area, would gain popularity.
There is no evidence that there is an elephant in my bedroom.
However I think it is a safe conclusion that there is none.
If your 'standard of proof' for science is that it must be conclusively disproven, then (a) nothing could ever be conclusively disproven anyway, as perhaps we are in the matrix and the thing is real outside of it but we never know, (b) what is reality anyway, (c) you will never make any progress because you are always couching your results in useless verbiage along the lines of "There almost certainly isn't, but.." or whatever.
You have to be practical. Get on with things, just making reasonable assumptions. I am going to live my life and perform future scientific experiments as if there is no elephant in my bedroom, even though I can't conclusively prove that there isn't one. And this doesn't make my experiments any less valid.
Firstly,it might not, as Nature respects neither C-symmetry (swapping matter for antimatter) nor CP-symmetry (swapping matter for antimatter and taking a reflection), as shown by TFA. So antimatter stars might behave differently or not even exist.
Secondly,if there were large amounts of antimatter in the observable universe, there would be huge amounts of radiation produced along the bounday between it and the bits that are made of matter. ('Empty space' isn't empty; look up Interstellar medium and Intergalactic medium).
Same here. It's embarrassing in a way, but it really shows that you read a lot more than you talk, which is commendable. I said "panache" as "pan" + "ache" for years
A sensible C coder might use vasprintf instead of the example in that manpage. The fact that all the standard library functions aren't great for all (or sometimes any) use cases is hardly unique to C.
The *a*printf functions are not in the C standard, so the portable coder would not use them. I guess opinion may vary about what is 'sensible':)
That 60mph is the average speed of the traffic. I'm sure you will find people going under 60 in the slow lane and people going over 60 in the fast lane.
More importantly, the graph in the PDF does not show that peak throughput occurs at 60, even though the text accompanying the graph says that it does. The graph shows that the maximum flow (=throughput) is about the same at 20-35, and at 50-65. The top 'bunch' is no further to the right than the bottom 'bunch'.
The 'two important implications' mentioned on that page might be true, but they are not shown by this graph. The graph does refute the claim that "40-45mph speed limit increases capacity". A better way of interpreting this graph would be to say that high flow *can* travel at 50-65, which is obviously good for many reasons (not not ones mentioned by this document).
There is no reason why government could not calculate the monetary cost of speeding (ie increased accident rate caused by speeding).
Well, that depends on whether an accident is "caused" by the speeding or not. This is a pretty complicated question. The investigators often report 'speed is a factor', however speed is obviously a factor in every crash. In every single crash, if they'd been going more slowly it either wouldn't have happened or would have been less serious.
Those sort of studies often competely ignore statistical variance too. For example, sometimes here on a holiday weekend there'll be no fatalities, and sometimes there'll be 10. Obviously (if you studied statistics!) neither of these things implies anything, however the police will come out and praise everybody on the 0 weekend, and criticize everybody on the 10 weekend.
If everyone goes at roughly the same speed then traffic turns into big clumps. When the cars are all moving at different speeds, they flow past each other and you get more throughput for the same road. This is pretty easily modelled mathematically, and it works out in practice too. I don't know if you have done much driving on highways or not, but if you have, you will be familiar with the phenomena of 'clumping' and 'compression waves'.
It is safest to pass quickly and get back into your lane. It's unsafe to pass at a differential of 2-3 mph ("micropassing") because you end up on the wrong side of the road for a long time, giving more opportunity for bad things to happen (an intersection approaching, other people pulling out to pass, the guy you're passing speeding up, etc.)
The earlier poster who gets angry when someone passes him quickly, is sadly symptomatic of a lot of so-called "good" drivers. They have to feel in control of the other traffic, or else they become angry and uncomfortable. The speed that they like to do is "perfect", anybody who wants to pass them should have left earlier, and anybody slow in front of them needs to start paying attention.
If it weren't on the road, we would call these people "control freaks". It's the same people who speed up when they see someone is trying to pass them. They don't give a crap about any other human being on the road, they only care that the lemmings behind them stay nicely in line behind.
If that poster is still reading: why does it make you so angry? What is wrong with someone going past? You're going to get to your destination at a pace you are obviously happy with , since you chose to go at the speed you are doing; so what is wrong with someone else getting to their destination at their pace? It doesn't affect you..
How about having "never had a fatal crash since 1951" then. It's well known that aircraft safety was terrible in those days. There wasn't proper organizations like the FAA to oversee and enforce safety standards back then.
Interesting how the second-highest petition appears to be to free a guy who was jailed for ripping off millions of dollars and abused hundreds of illegal workers, including child laborers; and was caught trying to skip the country when he was charged. (if Wikipedia is accurate) He has more votes than the petition to recognize the 99% !
The facebook page linked in TFA has a set of problems that's meant to have an auto-grading robot (which I presume then suggests to FB that it might want to hire you). However the robot has been down for months with no word on when it is coming back.
Slashdot Mirror
25 Mbps symetrical, is the lowest available speed from my ISP
/facedesk
Here is what prices are like for us (ISP chosen that has an easily-readable table, but the others are all similar)
http://broadband.t5.co.nz/inspire.html
Who says it's going to be backwards compatible?
The abstract for this paper reads like an april fools joke :(
The standard model seems to be fairly slippery anyway.
The SM predicts that neutrinos have no mass, but experiments show that they do. However, physicists do not seem to say that this disproves the SM. The feeling is more that the SM could be adjusted so that it features neutrinos with mass.
Something similar will probably happen if there is no Higgs Boson found in the expected area. One of the hundreds of SM variants that are floating around, which happens to not include a HB in that area, would gain popularity.
You're being way too general.
There is no evidence that there is an elephant in my bedroom.
However I think it is a safe conclusion that there is none.
If your 'standard of proof' for science is that it must be conclusively disproven, then (a) nothing could ever be conclusively disproven anyway, as perhaps we are in the matrix and the thing is real outside of it but we never know, (b) what is reality anyway, (c) you will never make any progress because you are always couching your results in useless verbiage along the lines of "There almost certainly isn't, but.." or whatever.
You have to be practical. Get on with things, just making reasonable assumptions. I am going to live my life and perform future scientific experiments as if there is no elephant in my bedroom, even though I can't conclusively prove that there isn't one. And this doesn't make my experiments any less valid.
'Poor' is a better word than 'naive'. They're just a small library, they cannot afford things like legal fees. Hopefully the EFF will step in here.
Didn't that shut down last year?
Firstly,it might not, as Nature respects neither C-symmetry (swapping matter for antimatter) nor CP-symmetry (swapping matter for antimatter and taking a reflection), as shown by TFA. So antimatter stars might behave differently or not even exist.
Secondly,if there were large amounts of antimatter in the observable universe, there would be huge amounts of radiation produced along the bounday between it and the bits that are made of matter. ('Empty space' isn't empty; look up Interstellar medium and Intergalactic medium).
probably have the paperwork filed already
Wait, you're suggesting it might be a speed increase to enable Compressed Folders in windows?
you seem to be using '|' for 'k' , what's that about? Or is slashdot's genius editor stripping something out.
Same here. It's embarrassing in a way, but it really shows that you read a lot more than you talk, which is commendable.
I said "panache" as "pan" + "ache" for years
A sensible C coder might use vasprintf instead of the example in that manpage. The fact that all the standard library functions aren't great for all (or sometimes any) use cases is hardly unique to C.
The *a*printf functions are not in the C standard, so the portable coder would not use them. I guess opinion may vary about what is 'sensible' :)
Tragic, but perhaps less tragic than what could happen if some of the US military systems malfunction: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Partnair_Flight_394
I thought Google took over Usenet years ago (this isn't a troll - I have been using Google's interface no trouble for a long time now)
That 60mph is the average speed of the traffic. I'm sure you will find people going under 60 in the slow lane and people going over 60 in the fast lane.
More importantly, the graph in the PDF does not show that peak throughput occurs at 60, even though the text accompanying the graph says that it does.
The graph shows that the maximum flow (=throughput) is about the same at 20-35, and at 50-65. The top 'bunch' is no further to the right than the bottom 'bunch'.
The 'two important implications' mentioned on that page might be true, but they are not shown by this graph. The graph does refute the claim that "40-45mph speed limit increases capacity". A better way of interpreting this graph would be to say that high flow *can* travel at 50-65, which is obviously good for many reasons (not not ones mentioned by this document).
Unless this uses a laser or similar technology to actually track the license plate, it's just another inaccurate revenue generator. /frank
You sound like you're saying that it would be OK if it was an accurate revenue generator?
There is no reason why government could not calculate the monetary cost of speeding (ie increased accident rate caused by speeding).
Well, that depends on whether an accident is "caused" by the speeding or not. This is a pretty complicated question. The investigators often report 'speed is a factor', however speed is obviously a factor in every crash. In every single crash, if they'd been going more slowly it either wouldn't have happened or would have been less serious.
Those sort of studies often competely ignore statistical variance too. For example, sometimes here on a holiday weekend there'll be no fatalities, and sometimes there'll be 10. Obviously (if you studied statistics!) neither of these things implies anything, however the police will come out and praise everybody on the 0 weekend, and criticize everybody on the 10 weekend.
If everyone goes at roughly the same speed then traffic turns into big clumps. When the cars are all moving at different speeds, they flow past each other and you get more throughput for the same road. This is pretty easily modelled mathematically, and it works out in practice too. I don't know if you have done much driving on highways or not, but if you have, you will be familiar with the phenomena of 'clumping' and 'compression waves'.
It is safest to pass quickly and get back into your lane. It's unsafe to pass at a differential of 2-3 mph ("micropassing") because you end up on the wrong side of the road for a long time, giving more opportunity for bad things to happen (an intersection approaching, other people pulling out to pass, the guy you're passing speeding up, etc.)
The earlier poster who gets angry when someone passes him quickly, is sadly symptomatic of a lot of so-called "good" drivers. They have to feel in control of the other traffic, or else they become angry and uncomfortable. The speed that they like to do is "perfect", anybody who wants to pass them should have left earlier, and anybody slow in front of them needs to start paying attention.
If it weren't on the road, we would call these people "control freaks". It's the same people who speed up when they see someone is trying to pass them. They don't give a crap about any other human being on the road, they only care that the lemmings behind them stay nicely in line behind.
If that poster is still reading: why does it make you so angry? What is wrong with someone going past? You're going to get to your destination at a pace you are obviously happy with , since you chose to go at the speed you are doing; so what is wrong with someone else getting to their destination at their pace? It doesn't affect you..
The 85th percentile of what speed people would do if they were left to their own judgement, actually
How about having "never had a fatal crash since 1951" then. It's well known that aircraft safety was terrible in those days. There wasn't proper organizations like the FAA to oversee and enforce safety standards back then.
..a tinfoil hat
Interesting how the second-highest petition appears to be to free a guy who was jailed for ripping off millions of dollars and abused hundreds of illegal workers, including child laborers; and was caught trying to skip the country when he was charged. (if Wikipedia is accurate) He has more votes than the petition to recognize the 99% !
The facebook page linked in TFA has a set of problems that's meant to have an auto-grading robot (which I presume then suggests to FB that it might want to hire you). However the robot has been down for months with no word on when it is coming back.
So, how do we 'apply' ?