Well not reputable web programming anyway. "Reputable Web Programming and One Hundred Other Mythical Beasts": a fantastic compendium of modern urban legends:-)
If you sample a 24kHz tone at 48kHz, you get a series of alternating impulses. Ie: 1, -1, 1, -1, 1, -1, etc. That is not an adequate waveform! Of course it is. If you are using the sampling theorem correctly, then you are going to realize that all the waves are sine waves and so the only thing you/need/ to know is their amplitudes. The shape is known a priori.
If, on the other hand, you are sampling non-sine waves that are 24kHz, at 48kHz, you're just being incompetent and no one is going to be surprised that you end up with a crap result anyway:-)
The anecdote was not meant to convey any value judgements on its own. As it stands, it can be used to make a number of different conclusions. Perhaps the anecdote says that the Applications folder sucks because I found it too much of a hassle to search it for the functionality I needed. Perhaps it says that the OSX help system is excellent because I successfully used it to discover which app to look for. Perhaps it says that OSX sucks for not prompting me with a "You have just plugged in a scanner for the first time - what to do?" type dialog. Perhaps it says something else entirely. It really is up to individual to draw his own conclusions based on my little story.
And OS X? I haven't really actively used a Mac since 2003-4ish, although I've seen some newer macs but I don't see how those help you find an app by function at all. Anecdote time: Not too long ago, I plugged a scanner into my Mac and suddenly realized I had no idea how to scan anything on a Mac at all. While I/could/ have searched manually through all the files in the "Applications" folder to see if I found anything likely, instead I did a search on "scanner" or somesuch in the Help. I quickly found that I was looking for the "Image Capture" app, which was right there in the Applications folder.
The idea is that in order to be a citizen you need to risk your life defending your species. The usual way is fighting, but might be testing drugs, or equipment, or exploration, etc. The rationale behind that is people willing to risk their life for others would value the well being of society above theirs, so they would be great leaders that protect society (...) Or else they just have an endorphine addiction.
It's the USAs' military might that saved Europe in WW1 (...) Europe didn't need much "saving" in WW1. What the US did was at best to help decide which wrong side would win. WW1 was a classical European war in that its long-term effects would be rather minor whichever side won (as always, I am sure Alsace/Elsaß and Lorraine/Lothringen might change sides, etc.).
The real long-term fallout from WW1 (if we ignore WW2) was the fall of the colonial empires, but that happened in spite of the biggest of them being one of the winners of that war.
"And while he was at it, why not have two? [...]" S.R. Hadden:First rule in government spending: why build one when you can have two at twice the price?
But if I had to turn back time I'd wait until some time next year to order my copy. Wait a second. I thought Leopard came with a time machine? Yes, but it can only take you back to when you first activated the time machine, no sooner.
I find it hard to believe anyone would defend the Tiger preference pane, let alone prefer it compared to the Leopard one. I'm still on Tiger and even without seeing the Leopard one: gimme gimme! Anything but the current confusing mess!:-)
How can you ever win a war against your own customers? If you fight them, they don't pay you and you die. How did they ever expect to win? I suspect that the record companies considered the group of pirates (that they wanted to squish) to not overlap much with the group of paying customers (that they technically want to woo). They went aggressively after the pirates, and it's taken them this long to realise that there is, in fact, considerable overlap between the two groups and that in squishing the pirates, they simultaneously enraged their paying customers. Well, now their disgruntled former paying customers.
And while some of the slashdot crowd consists of "information wants to be free" hippies, there is also a good community of people who reasonably understand the value of intellectual property rights. You are mixing up two entirely different issues here. I think you will find that the "hippies" understand the value of the copyright monopoly quite well. Much as they also understand that if AT&T were to be given a monopoly on the distribution of water, this would be extremely valuable to them. What the "hippies" question is whether or not this is actually a very good idea.
Unless it's OK to sacrifice civilians of another country to save your own soldiers, that is. It's not as if a land invasion of Japan would have been free of "collateral" damage. Chances are that such an invasion would have cost considerably more than 200,000 civilian lives. The bombs therefore sacrificed enemy civilians in order to save allied soldiers/and/ enemy civilians.
When the time limit is reached, the console will automatically shut off, ostensibly after saving the game. Does this mean that X360 games routinely support save-anywhere?
The point is that all people yearn to do/something/ that isn't social behavior. In fact, I bet there are hundreds of things that you could say that, statistically, everyone deep down wants to do, barring a few outliers. I bet there are freaks who don't want their freedom, too. That doesn't mean those impulses and urges should be legal, since those impulses and urges are exactly what the law is trying to suppress. I think what Mexico is saying is that if there is some one thing that/everyone/ (or close enough) yearns for pretty much all the time then it's reasonable to allow them to pursue this thing. They don't let murdering your neighbour and strangling your brat be among these things, probably in part because they are not something that everyone desires all the time and in part because they would directly violate someone else.
The Mexican view is quite possibly a healthy one, because if we build societies in which we purposefully institutionalize the denial of basic human needs, we are setting ourselves up for a very nasty fall later on. There are other similar cases that have been considered so compelling to humans that they have become enshrined rights in various societies: the right to pursue happiness, the right to life, etc. The right to pursue freedom doesn't really seem out of place on such a list (note, this is different from "the right to freedom").
No, they stand the same distance apart; it would violate the laws of physics if one of them was "further apart" than the other. What a peculiar question. GURPS (a role playing game) has a rule that says something along the lines of "if your weapon has 1 more reach that your enemy's, then this brings him 3 feet closer to you, but it does not bring you any closer to him".
So murderers and rapists should just be able to go free if they can, and this is somehow a check against the injustice of the system as a whole? This is the case in all legal systems everywhere. If you manage to pull it off, you can happily go free.
Some people might also "yearn" to rape children, murder their mothers, and barbecue the guy down the street, but that doesn't mean those things shouldn't be punishable by law. You may have noticed that Mexico's reason for the escape rules is that/ALL/ people yearn to be free. Is it your position that all people also yearn to rape children and murder their mothers?
Again: they believe prisoners have the right to escape and flee the police. They certainly do not have the/right/ to do so - they are just not punished for it. If they had the/right/ to escape, then they could go to court to have it uphold this right if they were ever caught, but they cannot.
The encourage prisoners to escape. As does any state that puts people in prison.
This Saturday night is a $30m draw and I just bought my ticket out of here for fun and maybe profit. I haven't checked, but have had these tickets before and I know that even with 144 (24*6) numbers you don't always end up with at least one of every 45 available. As far as I can tell from the above information, there should be about an 84% chance of at least one of the 45 numbers not being present among 144 random selections of those numbers:
Chance that any one number is present in one given position: p0 = 1/45 Chance that any one number is present in any one of 144 positions: p1 = 1 - (1 - p0)^144 Chance that all 45 numbers are present among the 144: P = 1 - p1^45 P = 1 - (1 - (1 - 1/45)^144)^45 = 1 - (1 - (44/45)^144)^45 = 0.8355
Of course, if there is some rule as to what numbers can be on a ticket, that could change matters.
If I have a secret, I don't care what the antitrust european court says, it's my secret, they shoudln't take that nor my money away for me. That may be but then, on the other hand, if the Europeans have an internal market, it's their market, and you shouldn't be able to force your product upon them. Microsoft probably figured that access to the market is more important than whatever secrets may have been involved and so chose to pay the price to be in that market.
But seriously here, autorotation, regardless of how crappy he builds his heli, might just be the thing to save his life should his second hand civic engine cut out. Not from a 15 feet altitude. Helicopters have something as non-intuitive as a minimum safe altitude. If they fly higher than this, they're safe because if their engine cuts out they can use the rotors to cushion the fall, but much lower than this altitude and they won't be able to get the spin that they need before hitting the ground.
Minimum safe altitude is much greater than 15 feet.
Slashdot Mirror
Another new word of the 21st century:
brain sprain
Usage: "I sprained my brain playing HalfLife all through the weekend".
If, on the other hand, you are sampling non-sine waves that are 24kHz, at 48kHz, you're just being incompetent and no one is going to be surprised that you end up with a crap result anyway
The anecdote was not meant to convey any value judgements on its own. As it stands, it can be used to make a number of different conclusions. Perhaps the anecdote says that the Applications folder sucks because I found it too much of a hassle to search it for the functionality I needed. Perhaps it says that the OSX help system is excellent because I successfully used it to discover which app to look for. Perhaps it says that OSX sucks for not prompting me with a "You have just plugged in a scanner for the first time - what to do?" type dialog. Perhaps it says something else entirely. It really is up to individual to draw his own conclusions based on my little story.
The real long-term fallout from WW1 (if we ignore WW2) was the fall of the colonial empires, but that happened in spite of the biggest of them being one of the winners of that war.
(Quote from Contact)
The Mexican view is quite possibly a healthy one, because if we build societies in which we purposefully institutionalize the denial of basic human needs, we are setting ourselves up for a very nasty fall later on. There are other similar cases that have been considered so compelling to humans that they have become enshrined rights in various societies: the right to pursue happiness, the right to life, etc. The right to pursue freedom doesn't really seem out of place on such a list (note, this is different from "the right to freedom").
Does Second Life use GURPS under the hood?
Chance that any one number is present in one given position: p0 = 1/45
Chance that any one number is present in any one of 144 positions: p1 = 1 - (1 - p0)^144
Chance that all 45 numbers are present among the 144: P = 1 - p1^45
P = 1 - (1 - (1 - 1/45)^144)^45 = 1 - (1 - (44/45)^144)^45 = 0.8355
Of course, if there is some rule as to what numbers can be on a ticket, that could change matters.
Minimum safe altitude is much greater than 15 feet.