Most people with decent hearing find TV aisles uncomfortable - it's either too many random TVs putting out the same audio minutely out of synch, or the high-pitched squeal that comes from any CRT being multiplied by a couple dozen. The EMF signals are hardly the most irritating thing that a TV can put out.
Saying that the human eye can perceive 5 photons is missing a bunch of units. The time portion is very important, as well as how spread out they are over the eye. In the pictures in the article, the light emitted from the face peaked out at around 3000 photons per second per square centimeter. If humans need 3,000,000 photons / s*cm^2 to perceive light, then you just need to focus the beam tightly over a short stretch of time - if you send those 5 photons in a single ms over.17 mm^2, you'll get approximately the requisite 3,000,000 photons/s*cm^2 to perceive them.
No, but maybe you could patent reading the percentage of CO2 in the air exhaled by the body as an indicator that the person is indeed using the O2 being breathed in.
It was certainly better than the alternatives at the time, and a great leap up from 4.1. The day I could get rid of that little function key paper template that listed the commands was a very happy day.
So install it and quit complaining. It's easy enough to do under XP: http://www.columbia.edu/~em36/wpdos/windowsxp.html I have an old 286 laptop that the kids play with that has wp51 installed and as nice as it was 20 years ago (menus! woo-hoo!), the lack of copy-and paste between apps, an OS-based printer driver system, etc... makes it just that much more of an effort to use. Stick me in front of vi for coding anyday, but when I want to quickly create a document to print out that looks nice, I'll go with a modern word processor.
It only works that way in a self-sustaining reaction (one that produces enough energy to keep itself going). In this case, the hydrogen is being used to store energy, so the process is going to require input energy the whole time. They're taking from a lower energy state and pushing it up to a higher energy state so that at a future time, you can add in that bit of activation and let the reaction go, giving you energy in the process. It''s like pushing a rock up the hill - when you get it to the top, you can use all that stored energy just by giving the rock a little tap and letting it roll down. The advantage of using urea over water as a source of hydrogen, is that with urea, less energy is required to separate out the hydrogen. It's like starting pushing the rock from halfway up the hill.
Clearly you need to upgrade your ancient operating system. When I type in slashdot.org into the address bar of explorer, it opens a new tab in firefox.
Canadian winters are what make the summers so enjoyable! If you don't get at least two weeks below -40, you don't savor the two week of summer as much as you should.
The worst part is, is that even for the middle-of-the-road kids, the thinking techniques and content that they teach arent' that tough. Even first-year university-level calculus can be taught one-on-one in a week to an average person by a competent tutor. But, by teaching to the bottom of the pack, the teachers make everything seem like it should be much harder than it is, so the students spend huge amounts of time trying to memorise lists of rules that apply to very specific situations, instead of developing an intuitive understanding of how a system works. It's like the coder who write this:
switch (var) {
case 0:
return 0;
case 1:
return 1;
case 2:
return 2;
\\...
case 1522145:
return 1522145;
case 1522146:
return 1522146;
default:
ASSERT(false);// If this happens, add more numbers to the switch. }
instead of
return var;
Anyone can understand what the second example does just by looking at it. On the other hand, looking at the first example, you have to check every single case to make sure there isn't an exception hidden in there. Nearly all of my teachers taught in the first manner. They don't explain that there is a relationship between resitance, voltage and current, they give you three separate sitations: you have resistance and voltage; you have voltage and current; and you have current and resistance. Then they teach you three formulae to solve each situation. And they'll devote an entire class to examples for each of the three. And everyone is sitting there assuming they must be missing something because the professor spent 3 hours try to teach that V = IR, and hasn't even touched on the theory and the reasons why the relation holds.
It's not necessarily a matter of snobbery, it's just a matter of the amount of effort an expert invests into understanding a topic. When my wife asks me what I'm doing at work, the best I can do is give some vague analogies that give her a rough idea of what I'm doing, since she really doesn't have the interest in learning about the details of programming in general, and of the problem at hand in specific. Likewise, when she tells me about her work, I don't have the background to understand much more than surface glossing of molecular biology.
For her to put herself in the position to judge what programming technique would be best in a given situation would be silly. And I wouldn't pretend to be able to offer her advice on the synthesizing technique she should you for a specific situation - she knows all the details way better than I ever will. Of course, there is value in discussing back and forth - sometimes if I set up the analogy right, she'll come up with an "out-of-the-box" solution that I can look at and adjust to fit the real solution. Of course, at least as often, that "out-of-the-box" solution is just an inadequacy in my analogy, and then I need to explain the problem in more detail. Usually at that point we switch to a topic that we both only know a little about (like economics, history, or politics) and we can discuss endlessly without having to worry about the actual physical applications.
At the very least, the extra cores keep the operating system out of the way. The fewer context switches you have, the less wasted CPU time. Even on my XP machine I have probably around 50 threads alive at any given time - most of them will be waiting for some event or other, but it's helpful that when that event happens, it can run on another CPU and not switch out my process.
I find the notion of fingerprinting innocents a gross violation of human rights.
Really? A gross violation of human rights is being sold into slavery. It's being denied personhood. It's having your local police force come by and rape your wife. It's being held indefinitely without charge and being subjected to torture. It's having all the children in your entire ethnic group rounded up and sent to boarding schools to be assimilated.
Being fingerprinted is a pointless invasion of privacy, and an inconvenience.
The label "Tree" is pretty much agreed upon by English speakers. Socialism and communism had pretty well defined meanings until they started being used to label anything that the government does. Gender is mostly agreed upon; your profession is usually indisputable. These are all useful labels.
Many of the labels we use, like liberal/conservative, left/right wing, are pretty much useless. It's entirely possible to support stem-cell research, gay marriage, abortions and yet be against nationalized health care. It's also possible to support nationalized health care, and be against abortion etc.. If you want, you can even be against abortion, but support gay-marriage. By applying these labels to people (or worse, ourselves) you pre-define positions on topics without requiring any thought. When people label themselves Democrat or Republican they often fall into the trap of supporting the party no matter what, relying on talking points and rationalizations to support whatever opinion they're supposed to hold.
If your arm can change color and switch between a left and a right hand then it can move through 5 dimensions: x, y, z, color, and handedness. Add in number of fingers and you have 6.
First they came for gets, then they took scanf and strcpy, now they want memcpy? Outrageous! How are virus writers going to be able to take advantage of buffer overflows if I'm continuously keeping track of how big my buffers are? I may have to start lying about their size just to give hackers a chance.
Not that I disagree with calling an embryo human, or a person, but it's anything but clear what the actual line is. We can say that an embryo is human since given the right conditions and time, you'll end up with a mature human. But we can say the same thing for an unfertilized egg and some sperm cells. Or for that matter, two teenagers of the opposite sex.
The embryo stage is convenient in that it gives a clear deliniation between not-human and human. Things get harder when you start trying to draw the line at a certain number of weeks in gestation (especially since the point of conception is often quite vague). The only other clear line of deliniation is birth.
Slashdot Mirror
I had kind of hope the implication would have been obvious enough, but yes, that too.
Most people with decent hearing find TV aisles uncomfortable - it's either too many random TVs putting out the same audio minutely out of synch, or the high-pitched squeal that comes from any CRT being multiplied by a couple dozen. The EMF signals are hardly the most irritating thing that a TV can put out.
Saying that the human eye can perceive 5 photons is missing a bunch of units. The time portion is very important, as well as how spread out they are over the eye. In the pictures in the article, the light emitted from the face peaked out at around 3000 photons per second per square centimeter. If humans need 3,000,000 photons / s*cm^2 to perceive light, then you just need to focus the beam tightly over a short stretch of time - if you send those 5 photons in a single ms over .17 mm^2, you'll get approximately the requisite 3,000,000 photons/s*cm^2 to perceive them.
No, but maybe you could patent reading the percentage of CO2 in the air exhaled by the body as an indicator that the person is indeed using the O2 being breathed in.
And yet no one gets confused about the meaning "inflamation". If "flammable" was never used, there'd be no confusion about "inflammable".
It was certainly better than the alternatives at the time, and a great leap up from 4.1. The day I could get rid of that little function key paper template that listed the commands was a very happy day.
So install it and quit complaining. It's easy enough to do under XP: http://www.columbia.edu/~em36/wpdos/windowsxp.html I have an old 286 laptop that the kids play with that has wp51 installed and as nice as it was 20 years ago (menus! woo-hoo!), the lack of copy-and paste between apps, an OS-based printer driver system, etc... makes it just that much more of an effort to use. Stick me in front of vi for coding anyday, but when I want to quickly create a document to print out that looks nice, I'll go with a modern word processor.
It only works that way in a self-sustaining reaction (one that produces enough energy to keep itself going). In this case, the hydrogen is being used to store energy, so the process is going to require input energy the whole time. They're taking from a lower energy state and pushing it up to a higher energy state so that at a future time, you can add in that bit of activation and let the reaction go, giving you energy in the process. It''s like pushing a rock up the hill - when you get it to the top, you can use all that stored energy just by giving the rock a little tap and letting it roll down. The advantage of using urea over water as a source of hydrogen, is that with urea, less energy is required to separate out the hydrogen. It's like starting pushing the rock from halfway up the hill.
Clearly you need to upgrade your ancient operating system. When I type in slashdot.org into the address bar of explorer, it opens a new tab in firefox.
Canadian winters are what make the summers so enjoyable! If you don't get at least two weeks below -40, you don't savor the two week of summer as much as you should.
The worst part is, is that even for the middle-of-the-road kids, the thinking techniques and content that they teach arent' that tough. Even first-year university-level calculus can be taught one-on-one in a week to an average person by a competent tutor. But, by teaching to the bottom of the pack, the teachers make everything seem like it should be much harder than it is, so the students spend huge amounts of time trying to memorise lists of rules that apply to very specific situations, instead of developing an intuitive understanding of how a system works. It's like the coder who write this:
switch (var)
{
case 0:
return 0;
case 1:
return 1;
case 2:
return 2;
\\ ...
case 1522145: // If this happens, add more numbers to the switch.
return 1522145;
case 1522146:
return 1522146;
default:
ASSERT(false);
}
instead of
return var;
Anyone can understand what the second example does just by looking at it. On the other hand, looking at the first example, you have to check every single case to make sure there isn't an exception hidden in there. Nearly all of my teachers taught in the first manner. They don't explain that there is a relationship between resitance, voltage and current, they give you three separate sitations: you have resistance and voltage; you have voltage and current; and you have current and resistance. Then they teach you three formulae to solve each situation. And they'll devote an entire class to examples for each of the three. And everyone is sitting there assuming they must be missing something because the professor spent 3 hours try to teach that V = IR, and hasn't even touched on the theory and the reasons why the relation holds.
No, that's just vanilla VS2008 for C#.
It's not necessarily a matter of snobbery, it's just a matter of the amount of effort an expert invests into understanding a topic. When my wife asks me what I'm doing at work, the best I can do is give some vague analogies that give her a rough idea of what I'm doing, since she really doesn't have the interest in learning about the details of programming in general, and of the problem at hand in specific. Likewise, when she tells me about her work, I don't have the background to understand much more than surface glossing of molecular biology.
For her to put herself in the position to judge what programming technique would be best in a given situation would be silly. And I wouldn't pretend to be able to offer her advice on the synthesizing technique she should you for a specific situation - she knows all the details way better than I ever will. Of course, there is value in discussing back and forth - sometimes if I set up the analogy right, she'll come up with an "out-of-the-box" solution that I can look at and adjust to fit the real solution. Of course, at least as often, that "out-of-the-box" solution is just an inadequacy in my analogy, and then I need to explain the problem in more detail. Usually at that point we switch to a topic that we both only know a little about (like economics, history, or politics) and we can discuss endlessly without having to worry about the actual physical applications.
At the very least, the extra cores keep the operating system out of the way. The fewer context switches you have, the less wasted CPU time. Even on my XP machine I have probably around 50 threads alive at any given time - most of them will be waiting for some event or other, but it's helpful that when that event happens, it can run on another CPU and not switch out my process.
I find the notion of fingerprinting innocents a gross violation of human rights.
Really? A gross violation of human rights is being sold into slavery. It's being denied personhood. It's having your local police force come by and rape your wife. It's being held indefinitely without charge and being subjected to torture. It's having all the children in your entire ethnic group rounded up and sent to boarding schools to be assimilated.
Being fingerprinted is a pointless invasion of privacy, and an inconvenience.
Many of the labels we use, like liberal/conservative, left/right wing, are pretty much useless. It's entirely possible to support stem-cell research, gay marriage, abortions and yet be against nationalized health care. It's also possible to support nationalized health care, and be against abortion etc.. If you want, you can even be against abortion, but support gay-marriage. By applying these labels to people (or worse, ourselves) you pre-define positions on topics without requiring any thought. When people label themselves Democrat or Republican they often fall into the trap of supporting the party no matter what, relying on talking points and rationalizations to support whatever opinion they're supposed to hold.
Or when the next king / emperor / pharaoh decides that his predecessor never existed and sets out to "relabel" all the monuments.
If your arm can change color and switch between a left and a right hand then it can move through 5 dimensions: x, y, z, color, and handedness. Add in number of fingers and you have 6.
First they came for gets, then they took scanf and strcpy, now they want memcpy? Outrageous! How are virus writers going to be able to take advantage of buffer overflows if I'm continuously keeping track of how big my buffers are? I may have to start lying about their size just to give hackers a chance.
Try either double-clicking on one of the ribbon tab titles, or right-click on the ribbon and check "Minimize the ribbon" or using the keyboard: , , n
After most of his writings were lost, he re-wrote it after his katra was brought back.
Not the poutine! Anything but that!
Not that I disagree with calling an embryo human, or a person, but it's anything but clear what the actual line is. We can say that an embryo is human since given the right conditions and time, you'll end up with a mature human. But we can say the same thing for an unfertilized egg and some sperm cells. Or for that matter, two teenagers of the opposite sex.
The embryo stage is convenient in that it gives a clear deliniation between not-human and human. Things get harder when you start trying to draw the line at a certain number of weeks in gestation (especially since the point of conception is often quite vague). The only other clear line of deliniation is birth.
First you say:
I see absolutely no problem
and then you say:
I ended up an engineer
Seems like a dire enough consequence to me.
Just wait until I publish my paper: An Enumeration of All Possible English Phrase Permutations of Length 5-10 Words. It's quite an epic read.
a aa aaa aal aaas ...
a aa aaa aal aachen
a aa aaa aal aafp
a aa aaa aal aah
a aa aaa aal aahed
a aa aaa aal aahing
a aa aaa aal aahs
zym zymase zymases zymo zymogen zymogens zymogram zymograms zymosan zymosans
* Note that the above sample is copyrighted and any attempts at plagiarism will be dealt with.