It's a set of congenital ("Siamese") triplet frogs. I saw the media describe a pair of human siamese twins that way pretty recently too (two-headed child or something to that effect). I couldn't help thinking how offended I would be if (hypothetically speaking) my Siamese-twin brother and I were collectively referred to as a single two-headed person.
But then, I doubt the frogs care.
Here's one:
"It is a bonafide fact that if the PCM representation of 'Nothing Else Matters' by Metallica is compressed into the MP3 format, the following stream of bytes will result: [sequence elided for brevity...]"
Re:Heisenbugs...
on
Debugging
·
· Score: 5, Interesting
In my experience, Heisenbugs are often the result of race conditions between concurrent threads.
This reminds me of a famous hardware "bug": > This is a weird but true story (with a moral)... > A complaint was received by the Pontiac Division of General Motors: > > "This is the second time I have written you, and I don't blame you for not > answering me, because I kind of sounded crazy, but it is a fact that we > have a tradition in our family of ice cream for dessert after dinner each > night. > > But the kind of ice cream varies so, every night, after we've eaten, the > whole family votes on which kind of ice cream we should have and I drive > down to the store to get it. It's also a fact that I recently purchased a > new Pontiac and since then my trips to the store have created a problem. > > You see, every time I buy vanilla ice cream, when I start back from the > store my car won't start. If I get any other kind of ice cream, the car > starts just fine. I want you to know I'm serious about this question, no > matter how silly it sounds: 'What is there about a Pontiac that makes it > not start when I get vanilla ice cream, and easy to start whenever I get any > other kind?'" > > The Pontiac President was understandably skeptical about the letter, but > sent an engineer to check it out anyway. The latter was surprised to be > greeted by a successful, obviously well educated man in a fine neighborhood. > > He had arranged to meet the man just after dinner time, so the two hopped > into the car and drove to the ice cream store. It was vanilla ice cream > that night and, sure enough, after they came back to the car, it wouldn't > start. > > The engineer returned for three more nights. The first night, the man got > chocolate. The car started. The second night, he got strawberry. The car > started. The third night he ordered vanilla. The car failed to start. > > Now the engineer, being a logical man, refused to believe that this man's > car was allergic to vanilla ice cream. He arranged, therefore, to continue > his visits for as long as it took to solve the problem. And toward this end > he began to take notes: he jotted down all sorts of data, time of day, type > of gas used, time to drive back and forth, etc. > > In a short time, he had a clue: the man took less time to buy vanilla than > any other flavor. Why? The answer was in the layout of the store. > > Vanilla, being the most popular flavor, was in a separate case at the front > of the store for quick pickup. All the other flavors were kept in the back > of the store at a different counter where it took considerably longer to > find the flavor and get checked out. > > Now the question for the engineer was why the car wouldn't start when it > took less time. Once time became the problem-not the vanilla ice cream-the > engineer quickly came up with the answer: vapor lock. It was happening > every night, but the extra time taken to get the other flavors allowed the > engine to cool down sufficiently to start. When the man got vanilla, the > engine was still too hot for the vapor lock to dissipate. > > Moral of the story: even insane looking problems are sometimes real.
some these illegal file-sharers are only breaking the law in protest of exploitation and high prices.
It's only civil disobedience if you disobey an unjust law to protest that unjust law. The appropriate way to protest exploitation and high prices is a boycott.
Why? Because LCD displays suffer from "motion flicker". Black letters on a white background appear to have "double thickness" while you're scrolling or dragging a window around on the screen, rapidly switching between double thickness and single thickness. I have a dual-screen setup with my laptop, using my laptop's LCD screen and an external CRT simultaneously, and I can say for sure that this doesn't happen with my CRT. I don't use this for gaming, so I don't know if the gamers out there call the effect something else, but that's what it looks like to me.
I wrote "Relativity [...] says", when I meant to say "No part of Relativity [...] says", or perhaps "Relativity [...] doesn't say", or something to that effect. You get the point.
No, Relativity (neither the Special nor General theory) says that "everything is relative". Special Relativity says that inertial motion is relative in flat spacetime (i.e. in the absence of gravity). This is another way of saying that all inertial coordinate reference frames are equivalent. (Special Relativity says more than that, namely that light propagates at the constant speed 'c' independent of the motion of its source. This is what separates Special Relativity from Galilean Relativity.) General Relativity says that *locally*, accelerated motion is equivalent to inertial motion in a gravitational field. (The "locally" part accounts for the fact that the gravitational field lines are not parallel, but converge on the gravitational source.)
What this boils down to is that circular motion is accelerated motion, not inertial motion, and is not simply relative, and spacetime is not flat surrounding bodies that planets orbit. So no, Relativity does not validate the epicycles theory.
Because they have a way of verifying after the fact that their transactions occurred as they should, in case they suspect fraud. With internet voting, you can't. In fact, regardless of the voting mechanism, it's important that you not be able to verify that your individual vote was recorded properly, because that would imply being able to prove who you voted for, which would permit vote-selling and make people susceptable to vote-extortion.
Slashdot Mirror
What's a "lowest common denominator"?
I know what a GREATEST common denominator is, and what a least common MULTIPLE is, but this term is foreign to me.
root# diff gwbush_genome.map jdoe_genome.map
"Beware the advice of successful people. They do not seek company." --Dogbert
Yes. Thank you for the correction.
It's a set of congenital ("Siamese") triplet frogs. I saw the media describe a pair of human siamese twins that way pretty recently too (two-headed child or something to that effect). I couldn't help thinking how offended I would be if (hypothetically speaking) my Siamese-twin brother and I were collectively referred to as a single two-headed person. But then, I doubt the frogs care.
Here's one: "It is a bonafide fact that if the PCM representation of 'Nothing Else Matters' by Metallica is compressed into the MP3 format, the following stream of bytes will result: [sequence elided for brevity...]"
Yes, like my garage door, for example.
3056.8 gold atoms
So that's what? 3056 gold atoms and a europium atom?
...who needs enemies?
In my experience, Heisenbugs are often the result of race conditions between concurrent threads.
...
This reminds me of a famous hardware "bug":
> This is a weird but true story (with a moral)
> A complaint was received by the Pontiac Division of General Motors:
>
> "This is the second time I have written you, and I don't blame you for not
> answering me, because I kind of sounded crazy, but it is a fact that we
> have a tradition in our family of ice cream for dessert after dinner each
> night.
>
> But the kind of ice cream varies so, every night, after we've eaten, the
> whole family votes on which kind of ice cream we should have and I drive
> down to the store to get it. It's also a fact that I recently purchased a
> new Pontiac and since then my trips to the store have created a problem.
>
> You see, every time I buy vanilla ice cream, when I start back from the
> store my car won't start. If I get any other kind of ice cream, the car
> starts just fine. I want you to know I'm serious about this question, no
> matter how silly it sounds: 'What is there about a Pontiac that makes it
> not start when I get vanilla ice cream, and easy to start whenever I get any
> other kind?'"
>
> The Pontiac President was understandably skeptical about the letter, but
> sent an engineer to check it out anyway. The latter was surprised to be
> greeted by a successful, obviously well educated man in a fine neighborhood.
>
> He had arranged to meet the man just after dinner time, so the two hopped
> into the car and drove to the ice cream store. It was vanilla ice cream
> that night and, sure enough, after they came back to the car, it wouldn't
> start.
>
> The engineer returned for three more nights. The first night, the man got
> chocolate. The car started. The second night, he got strawberry. The car
> started. The third night he ordered vanilla. The car failed to start.
>
> Now the engineer, being a logical man, refused to believe that this man's
> car was allergic to vanilla ice cream. He arranged, therefore, to continue
> his visits for as long as it took to solve the problem. And toward this end
> he began to take notes: he jotted down all sorts of data, time of day, type
> of gas used, time to drive back and forth, etc.
>
> In a short time, he had a clue: the man took less time to buy vanilla than
> any other flavor. Why? The answer was in the layout of the store.
>
> Vanilla, being the most popular flavor, was in a separate case at the front
> of the store for quick pickup. All the other flavors were kept in the back
> of the store at a different counter where it took considerably longer to
> find the flavor and get checked out.
>
> Now the question for the engineer was why the car wouldn't start when it
> took less time. Once time became the problem-not the vanilla ice cream-the
> engineer quickly came up with the answer: vapor lock. It was happening
> every night, but the extra time taken to get the other flavors allowed the
> engine to cool down sufficiently to start. When the man got vanilla, the
> engine was still too hot for the vapor lock to dissipate.
>
> Moral of the story: even insane looking problems are sometimes real.
By that logic, indentation also lies. But we still use it, don't we?
I'd just like to say that our lunatic fringe is only slightly sillier, and far more benign, than yours. :)
I'm not sure what books would be good for non-existing programmers
"The Design and Implementation of Duke-Nukem Forever"
some these illegal file-sharers are only breaking the law in protest of exploitation and high prices.
It's only civil disobedience if you disobey an unjust law to protest that unjust law. The appropriate way to protest exploitation and high prices is a boycott.
It doesn't need to be beyond a reasonable doubt, it merely needs to be proved.
Huh? To me, "proved beyond a reasonable doubt" is a weaker standard than an unqualified "proved", which ordinarily means irrefutably true.
note: All is to be taken sarcastically
Or, more to the point, facetiously.
Some blue pigments like the cobalt in the rover color chip also emit this longer-wavelength light, which is not visible to the human eye."
If it's a *blue* pigment, why does it emit a *longer* (i.e. infrared) wavelength?
Why? Because LCD displays suffer from "motion flicker". Black letters on a white background appear to have "double thickness" while you're scrolling or dragging a window around on the screen, rapidly switching between double thickness and single thickness. I have a dual-screen setup with my laptop, using my laptop's LCD screen and an external CRT simultaneously, and I can say for sure that this doesn't happen with my CRT. I don't use this for gaming, so I don't know if the gamers out there call the effect something else, but that's what it looks like to me.
I wrote "Relativity [...] says", when I meant to say "No part of Relativity [...] says", or perhaps "Relativity [...] doesn't say", or something to that effect. You get the point.
At the risk of feeding the trolls...
No, Relativity (neither the Special nor General theory) says that "everything is relative". Special Relativity says that inertial motion is relative in flat spacetime (i.e. in the absence of gravity). This is another way of saying that all inertial coordinate reference frames are equivalent. (Special Relativity says more than that, namely that light propagates at the constant speed 'c' independent of the motion of its source. This is what separates Special Relativity from Galilean Relativity.) General Relativity says that *locally*, accelerated motion is equivalent to inertial motion in a gravitational field. (The "locally" part accounts for the fact that the gravitational field lines are not parallel, but converge on the gravitational source.)
What this boils down to is that circular motion is accelerated motion, not inertial motion, and is not simply relative, and spacetime is not flat surrounding bodies that planets orbit. So no, Relativity does not validate the epicycles theory.
You can check to make sure "Skinner Sucks" is on the list,
Making sure your phrase is on the list doesn't imply that your vote was recorded in favor of the candidate you intended to vote for.
Because they have a way of verifying after the fact that their transactions occurred as they should, in case they suspect fraud. With internet voting, you can't. In fact, regardless of the voting mechanism, it's important that you not be able to verify that your individual vote was recorded properly, because that would imply being able to prove who you voted for, which would permit vote-selling and make people susceptable to vote-extortion.
The funniest thing about the Pravda article is this quote:
:)
Yet somehow, these rockets managed to go much, much faster in a zero atmosphere with nothing with which to propel?
Yes, that's right, rocketry works by pushing against an atmosphere