That wasn't the only reason. I wanted something to fall back on for the several apps that I expected to have trouble running from Win2K, such as Adaptec EZCD Creator 3.x, which came bundled with my Plexwriter CDRW, and Bay Networks VPN client (for logging into my employer's network from home via my cable modem). And since both OS's were being paid for by my doctoral thesis advisor out of his research budget that he's having trouble spending, I wasn't too concerned:-).
The NT/2K/Whistler product line will never be a standalone complete end-user system solution until MS provides the ability to create a bootable DOS floppy from within this product line. Just about every BIOS flashing utility (not just system BIOS, but peripheral card BIOSes and possibly even some CDRW device firmware) requires booting to a DOS prompt in order to run the flashing utility. What does every NT-based system vendor tell their clients to do when they need to flash their BIOS? Find somebody with a W9X machine and format a bootable floppy. When I built my W2K system, not only did I buy an OEM copy of W2K, but I also picked up a copy of W98SE, just to make sure I had a (legal) way to boot to a DOS prompt for these situations.
I think they are intended to mean the same thing, no matter how sloppy one of them sounds. I think they are saying there is one chance in 500 that it will hit. Relatively speaking, this is a non-trivial probability. But I don't think anyone has ever suggested that any kind of impact is 500 times as likely to occur as it is not to occur. Such an event would be virtually inevitable.
No, it's not spooky enough yet. It sounds awfully contrived, as if it (the theory, that is) creates its own spookiness. The observation itself is not spooky. The observation is what I would expect from a simpler theory: that the particles each had a particular spin, and that the spins added to zero to preserve angular momentum, and the observations must therefore correlate.
How many other lego scuplters would our nation produce if we were more liberal with funding for the arts?
We have real problems far more deserving of our tax dollars than a paucity of lego sculptors.
In some cases, I think a person *could* conceivably confuse a domain-name like this with an actual company's website. Particularly if the company manufactures vacuum cleaners.
I find the above description similar to the following scenario:
Throw a rapidly spinning coin up in the air. Have two cameras facing it from opposite directions each take a photo of it using high-speed film. Each camera has a 50-50 chance of taking a picture of a heads or a tails. The cameras now contain a pair of "entangled exposures", so to speak. Send the cameras off in opposite directions by a couple of light years or so, and develop the film. As soon as one picture is developed and shows "heads", we know that the other camera's film will show "tails". Before we developed either picture, each one had a 50-50 shot at showing either heads or tails. But now, as soon as we develop one, the other one can be determined, as if the first camera sent an instantaneous message (ooooo! spoooky!) light years away to the other camera.
How is this different? If it's not different, then why is either case spooky?
Does MISRA have a website where these defensive programming guidelines can be found? I went to www.misra.org, but it was definitely NOT, I repeat, **NOT** what I was looking for.
Patents cover the use of *methods* of doing something. And, in many cases, you need to use it commercially in order to infringe. OpenSource refers to a particular *implementation* of that method. It is possible to keep a method patented, and still release an OpenSource implementation of that method. People can get the software and play with it all they want, but they need to license the *patent* if they want to use the method embodied in that patent, regardless of whether they use the OpenSource implementation or roll their own. One example of this is the Visualization Toolkit (VTK) software library. Some components of this toolkit contain methods patented by GE Corporate R&D (where VTK was originally developed) and Kitware , a company started up by two of its original authors. The vast majority of VTK does not involve any patents, and all the code is OpenSource, but if you need to use one of the pieces that implements a patented technique, and you want to use it in a commercial product, you need to license the patent from whoever owns it.
Don't we already have that? It's called a search engine. If I want to provide a link to something, I just say take a look at entry number 4 on this page
They don't build a completely free computer system. They write free software. Intel doesn't make you sign an NDA in order for you to learn what the X86 instructions are. This is a completely invalid analogy.
>and really good rubber bands from
>the superstring theory
Can you elaborate on this. I really have a hard time believing that superstring theory had anything at all to do with any advances in rubber bands that might (but probably didn't) occur in the past 20 years or so.
I've read in a couple of places (Tom's perhaps? I don't recall) that there is *NO* difference between a P3 and a P3-xeon (unlike the very real difference in their P2 counterparts). If I understand correctly, the only purpose of a P3-xeon is the ability to upgrade computers with Slot-2 motherboards. But I can't confirm this.
Watch as fantasy turns to fear in this action packed adventure when an archeologist who didn't quite think things through opens up a theme park full of prehistoric-bacteria-infested salt-water slides, boat rides, and swimming pools. As penicillin supplies run short, a mass epidemic breaks out, threatening to destroy humanity, unless Jeff Goldblum and Laura Dern can save the day.
Slashdot Mirror
Glad to hear your system vendor provided DOS disks. This is, however, not the norm. Yet.
That wasn't the only reason. I wanted something to fall back on for the several apps that I expected to have trouble running from Win2K, such as Adaptec EZCD Creator 3.x, which came bundled with my Plexwriter CDRW, and Bay Networks VPN client (for logging into my employer's network from home via my cable modem). And since both OS's were being paid for by my doctoral thesis advisor out of his research budget that he's having trouble spending, I wasn't too concerned :-).
The NT/2K/Whistler product line will never be a standalone complete end-user system solution until MS provides the ability to create a bootable DOS floppy from within this product line. Just about every BIOS flashing utility (not just system BIOS, but peripheral card BIOSes and possibly even some CDRW device firmware) requires booting to a DOS prompt in order to run the flashing utility. What does every NT-based system vendor tell their clients to do when they need to flash their BIOS? Find somebody with a W9X machine and format a bootable floppy. When I built my W2K system, not only did I buy an OEM copy of W2K, but I also picked up a copy of W98SE, just to make sure I had a (legal) way to boot to a DOS prompt for these situations.
I think they are intended to mean the same thing, no matter how sloppy one of them sounds. I think they are saying there is one chance in 500 that it will hit. Relatively speaking, this is a non-trivial probability. But I don't think anyone has ever suggested that any kind of impact is 500 times as likely to occur as it is not to occur. Such an event would be virtually inevitable.
How can an Apollo rocket booster cause the same
damage as a multi-megaton explosion? Even Skylab didn't cause any damage when it fell.
Like e ^ (pi * i), which is equal to -1.
No, it's not spooky enough yet. It sounds awfully contrived, as if it (the theory, that is) creates its own spookiness. The observation itself is not spooky. The observation is what I would expect from a simpler theory: that the particles each had a particular spin, and that the spins added to zero to preserve angular momentum, and the observations must therefore correlate.
How many other lego scuplters would our nation produce if we were more liberal with funding for the arts?
We have real problems far more deserving of our tax dollars than a paucity of lego sculptors.
Fine, use a closed, observerless environment for both the photons and the cameras. Again, I ask, how are these two physical scenarios different?
In some cases, I think a person *could* conceivably confuse a domain-name like this with an actual company's website. Particularly if the company manufactures vacuum cleaners.
I find the above description similar to the following scenario:
Throw a rapidly spinning coin up in the air. Have two cameras facing it from opposite directions each take a photo of it using high-speed film. Each camera has a 50-50 chance of taking a picture of a heads or a tails. The cameras now contain a pair of "entangled exposures", so to speak. Send the cameras off in opposite directions by a couple of light years or so, and develop the film. As soon as one picture is developed and shows "heads", we know that the other camera's film will show "tails". Before we developed either picture, each one had a 50-50 shot at showing either heads or tails. But now, as soon as we develop one, the other one can be determined, as if the first camera sent an instantaneous message (ooooo! spoooky!) light years away to the other camera.
How is this different? If it's not different, then why is either case spooky?
Although I don't know why the above individual posted anonymously, that post was definitely not a troll. It seems like a valid observation to me.
Does MISRA have a website where these defensive programming guidelines can be found? I went to www.misra.org, but it was definitely NOT, I repeat, **NOT** what I was looking for.
#include <IANAL.h>
Patents cover the use of *methods* of doing something. And, in many cases, you need to use it commercially in order to infringe. OpenSource refers to a particular *implementation* of that method. It is possible to keep a method patented, and still release an OpenSource implementation of that method. People can get the software and play with it all they want, but they need to license the *patent* if they want to use the method embodied in that patent, regardless of whether they use the OpenSource implementation or roll their own. One example of this is the Visualization Toolkit (VTK) software library. Some components of this toolkit contain methods patented by GE Corporate R&D (where VTK was originally developed) and Kitware , a company started up by two of its original authors. The vast majority of VTK does not involve any patents, and all the code is OpenSource, but if you need to use one of the pieces that implements a patented technique, and you want to use it in a commercial product, you need to license the patent from whoever owns it.
I know who they are. I was criticising his lack of knowledge and lack of respect.
Don't we already have that? It's called a search engine. If I want to provide a link to something, I just say take a look at entry number 4 on this page
They don't build a completely free computer system. They write free software. Intel doesn't make you sign an NDA in order for you to learn what the X86 instructions are. This is a completely invalid analogy.
You wrote:
>and really good rubber bands from
>the superstring theory
Can you elaborate on this. I really have a hard time believing that superstring theory had anything at all to do with any advances in rubber bands that might (but probably didn't) occur in the past 20 years or so.
PS: "Dicky"???? "Neuton"?????
>1. The energies of an atom is quantized
Irrelevant
>2. Three-dimensional space is also quantized. See Zeno's Paradox
Strawman
I've read in a couple of places (Tom's perhaps? I don't recall) that there is *NO* difference between a P3 and a P3-xeon (unlike the very real difference in their P2 counterparts). If I understand correctly, the only purpose of a P3-xeon is the ability to upgrade computers with Slot-2 motherboards. But I can't confirm this.
Paramount Pictures Presents...
PROTEROZOIC PARK
Watch as fantasy turns to fear in this action packed adventure when an archeologist who didn't quite think things through opens up a theme park full of prehistoric-bacteria-infested salt-water slides, boat rides, and swimming pools. As penicillin supplies run short, a mass epidemic breaks out, threatening to destroy humanity, unless Jeff Goldblum and Laura Dern can save the day.
Says who? And why not?
Neither the microchip nor penicillin were patented. But then, you knew that, didn't you.
I have two broken VCR's in my basement, and neither of them has a programmer inside.
>Couldnt
That's "Couldn't".
> of
That's "have".
>been more right, pal. [...] They're chicks are hot,
That's "Their".
> and I really dont care
That's "don't".
>if they can't speak English cause
That's "because".
> theres plenty I can do
That's "there's".
>But if the chicks are dragging they're wimps over here
That's "their".
>The worst part is the're
That's "they're".
> slowly corroding the spirit of our country and
> attacking our values like the English language
You value the English language? I wouldn't have guessed.
Or was that a troll?