general-purpose encyclopedias are widely cited in scholarly works. That's not done; even if they are expertly written and fact-checked, they are usually many years behind the latest research in an area.
I thought that was one of the big advantages of Wikipedia over tradition encyclopedias: timeliness. It's updated continuously -- minute by minute.
Listen, if tacking on a lot of crappy gimmicks makes you technologically superior, I'd say the US auto market was eviscerating the Japanese one in the mid 1970s.
As far as I ever knew, all calculators do it this way. Not a checkbox, but a button that simulates one, but still. I'd think anyone who would need to to calculations along these lines would have done so on any number of calculators which have the exact same functionality.
Exhibit A: An article entirely about government censorship in China instantly turns into a contest to see who can say "the US is worse" most convincingly.
...since I'm liable to vote for whichever one sounds most like the Centurions from Battlestar Galactica, or the voice communications from THX-1138. Not best quality, not most understandable, just coolest.
Slashdot Mirror
Seeing as how the games seem to be in German, why is the game machine named (and prominently so) in English? (Or is "Poly Play" also German?)
Sodium Tag.
Will scholars snicker at me for citing thusly?
"...are gay lovers. (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ren_and_Stimpy, 23:30, 12 Jul 2004 (UTC))"
All seriousness aside...
Do people cite Wikipedia seriously and get taken seriously? My hope is that the answer is yes, but my fear is that the answer is no.
"Services For Unix" = SFU (San Francisco University?)
"Service Technology For Unix" = STFU
STFU, n00b!
"jklsemicolon@asdf.com"
(I am not making this up.)
Oh wait. I just posted. So I guess I can't.
"Wow! Check out the conniving on her!"
Go here and poke around
Go here and read
Oh, and while you're at it, check out this movie about a guy who was a lot like Tesla, except he was saddled with living in the Soviet Union.
(Funny how some statments are true whether or not you take them out of context.)
Netcraft confirms it, huh?
Listen, if tacking on a lot of crappy gimmicks makes you technologically superior, I'd say the US auto market was eviscerating the Japanese one in the mid 1970s.
I don't get it. Someone out there keeps voting for this lunatic. Who? And for the love of all that is sane, why?
If you have concerns along these lines, then you may wish to consult (or contribute to) this page.
As far as I ever knew, all calculators do it this way. Not a checkbox, but a button that simulates one, but still. I'd think anyone who would need to to calculations along these lines would have done so on any number of calculators which have the exact same functionality.
You'll need it to use some of the things a quick Googling reveals.
Actually, I was referring to the Broadcast Flag as the "simple, neat, wrong" solution.
"For every complex problem, there is a solution that is simple, neat, and wrong."
H.L. Mencken
Exhibit A: An article entirely about government censorship in China instantly turns into a contest to see who can say "the US is worse" most convincingly.
...since I'm liable to vote for whichever one sounds most like the Centurions from Battlestar Galactica, or the voice communications from THX-1138. Not best quality, not most understandable, just coolest.
...a directed EM pulse. Advantages:
- MASH-style Public Address horn speaker on your eaves (or possibly pole-mounted in your yard)
- Large, power-hungry amplifier
- Barry Manilow CD
Writing the procedure is left as an exercise to the reader.There's a great photo of Hubble firing its death beam into some hapless cluster of stars. Get some, suckers!
(No, really! Look at the article! BBC has the most amusing illustrations...)
Finally, the future arrives!
Now excuse me while Shades and I go robot-hunting.