However, if I say that 50% give or take 5% of a thousand coin flips will end up heads or tails, I'd probably be right.
Wrong (it's 100%). However, if I say that 50% give or take 5% of a thousand coin flips will end up heads or if I say that 50% give or take 5% of a thousand coin flips will end up tails, I'd probably be right.
The airline industry creates a tonne of value, but it's never figured out how to extract any of it for itself. It's great for society, but never captured any money for itself.
(That must relate to his former experience at Delta Airlines... but I just honestly don't get what he's trying to say. What "value" do airlines "create" and not "extract"?)
What we all have to realize though is that Apple has a target market, and despite what they say it isn't the "power user", it's the teenage kids and the hipsters or the video/music editing market.
Way to defend them under the title Apple Disabling Video Editing Apps!
The installers are GPL users, too... it was not supposed to be thought of as a license that takes away rights.
No. The installers you speak of are not mere users but also distributors. The GPL's whole idea is to distinguish between the two, and only restrict the rights of the latter (if you're gonna let them have your software for free).
few people (of whom few, if any, would even consider hacking their box anyway) "suffer" while the software community as a whole benefits
No. Take a hint from parent's sig... Many people wish iPhone weren't locked to AT&T, and will benefit if even "few, if any" manage to hack that. If Apple wants to prohibit that, at least let it not be with GPL code.
You take a quartic equation and choose to call "exact" what is called "a solution by radicals".
Yes, a solution by radicals can be hard to find even when it turns out to exist. (Indeed quartics weren't solved by radicals until Ferrari in 1540.)
But the question whether a solution by radicals exists has nothing to do with whether a solution (period) exists. Indeed polynomial of higher degree have the latter (Gauss' fundamental theorem of algebra) but not always the former (Abel's quintic counterexample).
Penny Smith's achievement is analogous to Gauss's and not *at all* to Ferrari's.
Fortunately the former, not the latter, is what's needed to guarantee that numerical methods (e.g. Newton's, in the analogy) converge to an actual solution rather than nonsense.
When I said the claim I didn't mean "the submitter's claim" but, as my sentence made clear, "the claim which is right there in the news: (...namely the claim that...:) 'the call was intercepted by British intelligence'".
Yes the submitter lied about that claim being in TFA. We were done talking about this lie. I was merely mentioning that that claim, which itself may or may not be propaganda, is found elsewhere.
"You see, no Bristish source. No UK wiretap. The summary was a fabrication easily refuted by reading the linked article, and Hemos was trolled by the submitter."
Right. TFA does not say, one way or the other, who wiretapped.
Everyone in this thread agrees with that. (I already said: "My observation does not invalidate the grandparent's".)
So why do you feel compelled to repeat it once more?
You seem to have a hard time with the idea that a post may have other purposes than just "prove the parent wrong".
Once you get past that, maybe you can become receptive to this side remark:
Other sources, such as the above-quoted Guardian, write that "The call was intercepted by British intelligence."
The article never mentions any Britsh wiretap of any kind.
The claim may or may not be propaganda, but it's certainly right there in the news. E.g.:
'He has been staying here for quite some time and has been under strict surveillance since then,' a Pakistani intelligence source said. 'His calls to Britain and internet communications have been under surveillance that helped in revealing the plot.'
Following Rauf's arrest, one of his associates is understood to have phoned the UK urging those alleged to have been involved in the plot to speed up their plans. The call was intercepted by British intelligence and triggered the decision to arrest the suspects.
... the 2004 medals of science. Why do the 2004 medals get announced by the President in November 2005, and presented in 2006? Is this a tradition, or a reflection of current priorities...?
It's not like he's hiding it, either. Actually I learned it a minute ago, not from your post but from his blog's front page (this article). Right there in the comments, people are apologizing for the very same accusation you just made...
wheel Said,
January 30, 2006 @ 5:24 am
Just so folks are clear, Matt's posting this for a reason. I posted on another blog that Matt had stripped out the links to the designer in the theme he uses here. He patiently explained that in fact the version he downloaded didn't have the links (my downloaded version did).
I publicly apologized in the other blog, and am doing so again here. Sorry Matt.
I appreciate the thought; I probably just don't have the frame of mind: I like to hack in Unix because it lets me manipulate things that Windows wouldn't... installing it opens up a world of possibilities, whereas if you install Windows, then what is new?
Slashdot Mirror
Wrong (it's 100%). However, if I say that 50% give or take 5% of a thousand coin flips will end up heads or if I say that 50% give or take 5% of a thousand coin flips will end up tails, I'd probably be right.
Right, and they certainly did in the past... Why then will he say (twice) that they "never" figured it out, "never" captured any money??
(That must relate to his former experience at Delta Airlines... but I just honestly don't get what he's trying to say. What "value" do airlines "create" and not "extract"?)
Like Disabling Video Editing Apps.
For the sake, you say, of satisfying their target market.
Which, you say, is Video/Music Editing.
No. The installers you speak of are not mere users but also distributors. The GPL's whole idea is to distinguish between the two, and only restrict the rights of the latter (if you're gonna let them have your software for free).
No. Take a hint from parent's sig... Many people wish iPhone weren't locked to AT&T, and will benefit if even "few, if any" manage to hack that. If Apple wants to prohibit that, at least let it not be with GPL code.
It's not about them reading your messages.
It's about them using the headers to link your email address(*) with all searches, cookies and ad-sense carrying sites browsed from your IP.
(*)Hence really your identity, if a message with you professional address, say, ends up forwarded to one of their accounts. )
NBC page crashes Firefox and Safari here; alternative:
http://youtube.com/watch?v=1xXNoB3t8vM
You take a quartic equation and choose to call "exact" what is called "a solution by radicals".
Yes, a solution by radicals can be hard to find even when it turns out to exist. (Indeed quartics weren't solved by radicals until Ferrari in 1540.)
But the question whether a solution by radicals exists has nothing to do with whether a solution (period) exists. Indeed polynomial of higher degree have the latter (Gauss' fundamental theorem of algebra) but not always the former (Abel's quintic counterexample).
Penny Smith's achievement is analogous to Gauss's and not *at all* to Ferrari's.
Fortunately the former, not the latter, is what's needed to guarantee that numerical methods (e.g. Newton's, in the analogy) converge to an actual solution rather than nonsense.
When I said the claim I didn't mean "the submitter's claim" but, as my sentence made clear, "the claim which is right there in the news: (...namely the claim that...:) 'the call was intercepted by British intelligence'" .
Yes the submitter lied about that claim being in TFA. We were done talking about this lie. I was merely mentioning that that claim, which itself may or may not be propaganda, is found elsewhere.
That is true, and that is all.
Right. TFA does not say, one way or the other, who wiretapped.
Everyone in this thread agrees with that. (I already said: "My observation does not invalidate the grandparent's".)
So why do you feel compelled to repeat it once more?
You seem to have a hard time with the idea that a post may have other purposes than just "prove the parent wrong".
Once you get past that, maybe you can become receptive to this side remark:
Other sources, such as the above-quoted Guardian, write that "The call was intercepted by British intelligence."
Yes, I know. My observation does not invalidate the grandparent's. Why do you assume it should?
Or did he really mean...
Please do not cut & paste opinions on Abu Ghraib here. This case is different.
1986 awards presented on Mar 12, 1986
1987 awards presented on Jun 25, 1987
1988 awards presented on Jul 15, 1988
1989 awards presented on Oct 18, 1989
1990 awards presented on Nov 13, 1990
1991 awards presented on Sep 16, 1991
1992 awards presented on Jun 23, 1992
1993 awards presented on Sep 30, 1993
1994 awards presented on Dec 19, 1994
1995 awards presented on Oct 18, 1995
1996 awards presented on Jul 26, 1996
1997 awards presented on Dec 17, 1997
1998 awards presented on Apr 27, 1999
1999 awards presented on Mar 14, 2000
2000 awards presented on Dec 1, 2000
2001 awards presented on Jun 12, 2002
2002 awards presented on Nov 6, 2003
2003 awards presented on Mar 14, 2005
2004 awards presented on Feb 13, 2006
... the 2004 medals of science. Why do the 2004 medals get announced by the President in November 2005, and presented in 2006? Is this a tradition, or a reflection of current priorities...?
I guess his point is that those sites wouldn't even exist if it weren't for Google...
The actual article is here:
http://www.businessweek.com/magazine/content/06_06 /b3970001.htm
I appreciate the thought; I probably just don't have the frame of mind: I like to hack in Unix because it lets me manipulate things that Windows wouldn't... installing it opens up a world of possibilities, whereas if you install Windows, then what is new?