(Look how Chile handled that for the mining disaster. They started with a safe estimate, and got praised for beating their own deadline. Imagine the reactions if they had been too optimistic in their original estimate.)
Having an optical drive in my laptop is convenient, and a DVD writer takes up as much space as a CD-ROM drive. What would you want in the space, or would you want a smaller form factor?
The First Fundamental Theorem of Calculus is absolutely true, but (Berkeley notwithstanding) neither Newton nor Leibniz expected anyone to take it on faith. Indeed, it took mathematicians over a century to clarify concepts such as continuity.
As for absolute ethics, what are the facts for such ethics to describe? Indeed, if Muslims claim that absolute ethics demands that we not treat Christ as a deity, and Christians claim that absolute ethics demands that we treat Chrsit as a deity, then how do we decide between the two?
If there is such a thing as "absolute morality"-- that is, that certain things are just "right", and others are just "wrong" aside from cultural mores and geopolitical context
You seem to be arguing more for objective ethics rather than absolute ethics, in the same sense that spacetime in Special Relativity is objective (Lorentz effects don't depend on cultural norms, geopolitical context or even observers), but not absolute (some things depend on reference frames). Also, what makes some thing right and some things wrong? If you simply posit rightness as an irreducible intrinsic quality of actions (or actors), how do you argue against those whose ascribe rightness to different actions (or actors)?
And what is the Bible's argument that homosexuality is wrong? Oh, wait, there is no argument. The authors of the Bible just expect us to believe it on faith. And I will not condemn people on such a basis.
It bears remembering there is a massive difference between asking God to guide you in your execution of your own ideas, as did the framers of the constitution
The biggest problem is that there are formats (.ppt for example) that contain lots of long numeric strings. If they are scanned it is very easy to find "interesting" patterns in plenty in them,
So such scanning might discourage people from using PowerPoint? Would Edward Tufte consider this a problem?
nor is a given piece of software magically better by virtue of being open-source, nor are open-source developers somehow better than those who develop closed-source software.
No, but it's easier to analyze source code than binaries.
That's because computers can only approximate most reals. Indeed using binary arithmetic, they can only approximate "most" rational numbers. Also, I said that computers can't deal with the notation 0.999. . . .
There is no such real number. The final 1 would be multiplied by 10^{-\infty}, which is either 0 or undefined as a real number. Hence, your "number" is either 1 or undefined.
The fault, of course, lies with the sqrt() step. For a=a to imply sqrt(a)=sqrt(a), we have to interpret sqrt(a) as the pricple square root function, so sqrt(x^y) = x^(y/2) doesn't necessary work when x isn't a real number.
It doesn't work if x is negative and y is 2 modulus 4. Sqrt((-5)^2) != (-5)^(2/2).
Of course, in an insanely strictly typed language with infinite precision 0.999... would not quite be the same as 1, as the former is a real and the latter is an integer, so despite having the same value their different types would mean they could not be used identically in all circumstances.
Then your insane strictly typed language is wrong as 0.999... is an integer. Also, I don't what computer language would admit of the representation 0.999... .
Slashdot Mirror
(Look how Chile handled that for the mining disaster. They started with a safe estimate, and got praised for beating their own deadline. Imagine the reactions if they had been too optimistic in their original estimate.)
Did they get the idea from Scotty?
And how fast are they?
Perhaps, but I don't have to go that long without an outlet, as for HDD, my 320 gigabyte drive is enough. I like being able to play optical media.
Today, a decade and a half later, we have cell phones that are many hundreds of times faster than those Pentium and Pentium II systems,
A hundred times faster than a 233 MHz processor? That's 23 GHz. What phone has a 23 GHz processor?
Having an optical drive in my laptop is convenient, and a DVD writer takes up as much space as a CD-ROM drive. What would you want in the space, or would you want a smaller form factor?
So I did my BS at Metropolitan State College of Denver, which admits just about anyone with a pulse, but still maintains high educational standards.
Go Roadrunners! Yes, I graduated from Metro after having problems at CSU.
It's how fast a newb can figure out how to set up a router and get to the web.
How many beginners set up routers? Also, is using the computer for routing, or is it using a dedicated device?
Will Canonical use that as the code name for Ubuntu 14.4?
Why obsess with taking over the desktop of average Joe, against Joe's wishes?
Because Joe insists that we use Microsoft Office.
There aren't any business databases available for either OS
Oracle?
Your beloved PC? Now a "content creator's" workstation. Everything from word processing to simple photo-editing goes on line - or into an "app".
And why would I want to do word processing online?
Lynx is rather nimble!
The First Fundamental Theorem of Calculus is absolutely true, but (Berkeley notwithstanding) neither Newton nor Leibniz expected anyone to take it on faith. Indeed, it took mathematicians over a century to clarify concepts such as continuity.
As for absolute ethics, what are the facts for such ethics to describe? Indeed, if Muslims claim that absolute ethics demands that we not treat Christ as a deity, and Christians claim that absolute ethics demands that we treat Chrsit as a deity, then how do we decide between the two?
If there is such a thing as "absolute morality"-- that is, that certain things are just "right", and others are just "wrong" aside from cultural mores and geopolitical context
You seem to be arguing more for objective ethics rather than absolute ethics, in the same sense that spacetime in Special Relativity is objective (Lorentz effects don't depend on cultural norms, geopolitical context or even observers), but not absolute (some things depend on reference frames). Also, what makes some thing right and some things wrong? If you simply posit rightness as an irreducible intrinsic quality of actions (or actors), how do you argue against those whose ascribe rightness to different actions (or actors)?
And what is the Bible's argument that homosexuality is wrong? Oh, wait, there is no argument. The authors of the Bible just expect us to believe it on faith. And I will not condemn people on such a basis.
True story. I once had one go off on me because I said I liked the Marx Brothers.
<response voice="Groucho" prop="cigar">That's the most ridiculous thing I've ever heard.</response>
(their going off on you)
It bears remembering there is a massive difference between asking God to guide you in your execution of your own ideas, as did the framers of the constitution
And when did the framers ask this?
While it is true that homosexuality is wrong
Homosexuality may be condemned in the Bible, but is the Bible correct?
The biggest problem is that there are formats (.ppt for example) that contain lots of long numeric strings. If they are scanned it is very easy to find "interesting" patterns in plenty in them,
So such scanning might discourage people from using PowerPoint? Would Edward Tufte consider this a problem?
nor is a given piece of software magically better by virtue of being open-source, nor are open-source developers somehow better than those who develop closed-source software.
No, but it's easier to analyze source code than binaries.
But even there, don't you run out of RAM at some point?
That's because computers can only approximate most reals. Indeed using binary arithmetic, they can only approximate "most" rational numbers. Also, I said that computers can't deal with the notation 0.999. . . .
It mentions Lightstone's semicolon notation, but is 0.999...;... a nonstandard number? As 0.999. . .=1, there is no room even for a nonstandard number.
There is no such real number. The final 1 would be multiplied by 10^{-\infty}, which is either 0 or undefined as a real number. Hence, your "number" is either 1 or undefined.
The fault, of course, lies with the sqrt() step. For a=a to imply sqrt(a)=sqrt(a), we have to interpret sqrt(a) as the pricple square root function, so sqrt(x^y) = x^(y/2) doesn't necessary work when x isn't a real number.
It doesn't work if x is negative and y is 2 modulus 4. Sqrt((-5)^2) != (-5)^(2/2).
Of course, in an insanely strictly typed language with infinite precision 0.999... would not quite be the same as 1, as the former is a real and the latter is an integer, so despite having the same value their different types would mean they could not be used identically in all circumstances.
Then your insane strictly typed language is wrong as 0.999... is an integer. Also, I don't what computer language would admit of the representation 0.999... .