Well, monitoring is what slows you down. Ask any competent stenographer; they are basically a cog in the machine; they are not supposed to be mentally processing what they are writing down.
Well, somebody is spamming/"salami publishing", but the score is an average of several tries (you can see the number of quotes typed that's being averaged). I'm pretty sure he (or she) has typed below 198 or above 200 on some of those tries; but by the time it gets averaged with 9+ tries, the "natural" speed comes through (and he might have deleted accounts with speeds below par).
It does look like one person trying to keep the QWERTY typists down (for a QWERTY example, look at geoffhuang on second page). Still one thing is true: it's not a QWERTY typist that can keep Dvorak typists down.
Well, my anecdote (singular of "data") is, I can type at about 100 WPM on Dvorak. I don't think I ever typed that fast on QWERTY, even before my QWERTY speed suffered with my finger memory switching to Dvorak (I can still type on QWERTY; I'm just far more error-prone and it takes more mental effort). The fastest I remember typing on QWERTY is about 80 WPM, when I was in college.
Look, I'm not going to bother responding to someone who cannot understand definitions. Talk to anybody with an astronomy degree; a moon is a satellite, and a satellite may not be a moon.
No, you got it completely backward. Just because a dog is an animal doesn't mean an animal is a dog. "Satellite" is the most encompassing term (once again, acknowledging most people mean artificial satellite when they say "satellite" in everyday language). You never say that "International Space Station is a moon around the Earth."
Here's a useful indicator for me if all this climate alarmism is worth listening to: How often do they cite their own predictions from 10, 20 years ago?
The climate alarmists have been around long enough now that we have had time to see if their medium-term (10 to 20 years) predictions have come true. If most dire versions of their alarms have not come true, it is probably a safe bet that the most dire versions of their current alarms also won't come true. Beware of psychics who can't provide you with list of things they correctly predicted—and are unwilling to tell you what they have incorrectly predicted.
Or did you mean to sound smarter and more informed than you actually were?
P.S. This whole article is a bunk. It's a long-standing test of symmetries of nature to test if speed of light is constant (as a function of location in universe, or as a function of time). Sure, there are kooky ways to go about challenging it, but there are legitimate ways to test it that had more sensitivity than these methods. See: Is the fine-structure constant actually constant?
Not exactly a contract, but my guess (IANAL) is estoppel is sufficient principle. Nothing in GPLv2 says you can revoke the license, so once you license something under GPLv2, future users rely on your promise not to exercise some of your rights that you could have reserved under copyright. This reliance means something legally and you cannot unilaterally withdraw your promise.
That's totally false, completely bogus characterization. Why don't you check your sources before you spout off nonsense like this? Some S. Korean leaders commit suicide.
I'm not sure if that's true anymore. I'm told Office web stuff runs fine on Linux. 'Has been so long since I was able to run Linux though—too much work stuff lives in WindowsLand.
Except in the SWAT'ing cases where someone died, the person had no idea they were going to get SWAT'ed, because the person who had a reason to be targeted gave someone else's info in provoking the future felon. https://www.cnn.com/2018/01/03...
There is some serious loss of common sense in Seattle Police Department (or any police department) thinking something like this: (1) won't get abused, and (2) will actually save lives.
No, I read that there is a circuit split (U.S. v. Doe is ruling in 11th circuit, not SCOTUS) and until SCOTUS weighs on it, there is no definitive answer.
This is good enough for labeling "still actively debated matter", so I filed it away—I'll check back later when there is a relevant SCOTUS case. This isn't my day job.
Slashdot Mirror
I thought that was the whole point of BSD (plus no assumption of liability and requirement to give credit).
Well, monitoring is what slows you down. Ask any competent stenographer; they are basically a cog in the machine; they are not supposed to be mentally processing what they are writing down.
Well, somebody is spamming/"salami publishing", but the score is an average of several tries (you can see the number of quotes typed that's being averaged). I'm pretty sure he (or she) has typed below 198 or above 200 on some of those tries; but by the time it gets averaged with 9+ tries, the "natural" speed comes through (and he might have deleted accounts with speeds below par).
It does look like one person trying to keep the QWERTY typists down (for a QWERTY example, look at geoffhuang on second page). Still one thing is true: it's not a QWERTY typist that can keep Dvorak typists down.
Well, my anecdote (singular of "data") is, I can type at about 100 WPM on Dvorak. I don't think I ever typed that fast on QWERTY, even before my QWERTY speed suffered with my finger memory switching to Dvorak (I can still type on QWERTY; I'm just far more error-prone and it takes more mental effort). The fastest I remember typing on QWERTY is about 80 WPM, when I was in college.
Because they are all in a cult!
Didn't Eisenhower fight with communists? Calling his view "commie" sounds right.
Well, this is not exactly scientific, but on online typing test sites, it's the Dvorak typists who dominate the top ranks.
Look, I'm not going to bother responding to someone who cannot understand definitions. Talk to anybody with an astronomy degree; a moon is a satellite, and a satellite may not be a moon.
No, you got it completely backward. Just because a dog is an animal doesn't mean an animal is a dog. "Satellite" is the most encompassing term (once again, acknowledging most people mean artificial satellite when they say "satellite" in everyday language). You never say that "International Space Station is a moon around the Earth."
No, "moon" is a word for natural satellite. Artificial satellites (like what we usually call "satellite") are never called "moon".
Yap. Also, if you are a climate alarmist and you haven't gone vegan already, you have proven yourself a hypocrite not worth listening to.
Here's a useful indicator for me if all this climate alarmism is worth listening to: How often do they cite their own predictions from 10, 20 years ago?
The climate alarmists have been around long enough now that we have had time to see if their medium-term (10 to 20 years) predictions have come true. If most dire versions of their alarms have not come true, it is probably a safe bet that the most dire versions of their current alarms also won't come true. Beware of psychics who can't provide you with list of things they correctly predicted—and are unwilling to tell you what they have incorrectly predicted.
Oh, come on. Have some full-sized aortic pump!
Judge Brett Kavanaugh? More like Judge Dredd! https://youtu.be/miVoe7U6Lx4?t...
When the medium is moving relative to the observer: Fresnel frame dragging.
Or did you mean to sound smarter and more informed than you actually were?
P.S. This whole article is a bunk. It's a long-standing test of symmetries of nature to test if speed of light is constant (as a function of location in universe, or as a function of time). Sure, there are kooky ways to go about challenging it, but there are legitimate ways to test it that had more sensitivity than these methods. See: Is the fine-structure constant actually constant?
Not exactly a contract, but my guess (IANAL) is estoppel is sufficient principle. Nothing in GPLv2 says you can revoke the license, so once you license something under GPLv2, future users rely on your promise not to exercise some of your rights that you could have reserved under copyright. This reliance means something legally and you cannot unilaterally withdraw your promise.
That's totally false, completely bogus characterization. Why don't you check your sources before you spout off nonsense like this? Some S. Korean leaders commit suicide.
Ignorant prick.
I'm not sure if that's true anymore. I'm told Office web stuff runs fine on Linux. 'Has been so long since I was able to run Linux though—too much work stuff lives in WindowsLand.
Sounds like overcorrection.
Climate change—we save that one for the Republicans.
Yes, but less sadistic.
Serves you right for being a Canadian.
Except in the SWAT'ing cases where someone died, the person had no idea they were going to get SWAT'ed, because the person who had a reason to be targeted gave someone else's info in provoking the future felon. https://www.cnn.com/2018/01/03...
There is some serious loss of common sense in Seattle Police Department (or any police department) thinking something like this: (1) won't get abused, and (2) will actually save lives.
No, I read that there is a circuit split (U.S. v. Doe is ruling in 11th circuit, not SCOTUS) and until SCOTUS weighs on it, there is no definitive answer.
This is good enough for labeling "still actively debated matter", so I filed it away—I'll check back later when there is a relevant SCOTUS case. This isn't my day job.
Can you cite case law? This is still-actively-debated matter in U.S.
P.S. I know it's already decided in U.K., but you Brits never had as much rights as we do anyway.