Wow that's sounds complex. So some countries in Europe would write that as
60","000
? A lot of extra bits, but I can see it has a sort of graphical appeal.
What is the point of having the images stitched? Google maps doesn't need to. If the observer is going to look at the whole image then they can't look at it on a megapixel screen. The whole thing sounds fishy to me.
Funny post. He isn't second rate but over-rated. He is, for example, not in the same category as Roger Penrose, Ed Witten or, although a different kind of scientist, Feynman. And like all normal humans he has always been interested in making a good profit from what he does. Fair enough. My issue with him is that his books are dull dull dull.
Tyson makes more money the more science in the news. He's an entertainer. It's like getting John Travolta's opinion. I know, I know, people will say "no he is a respected scientist/educator...". He is an entertainer. There is sooooo little content in his stuff. Compare with David Attenborough for example. Or Sagan.
Actually, I do find it handy to hash (in my head) a childhood friend's phone number with some other easy to remember information. Anyone see any problem with this?
I think your comment (a joke?) is just the right response to the abuse/misuse of OO oriented programming. It's really not that complicated - the situation is a hammer looking for a nail. When you find a nail you are sooo happy to have a hammer. But when you find you need a hex wrench to put together your Ikea book shelf, well, then you end up with a bad situation. (I'm sure an equivalent comment has been said many many times before...)
I used to regularly teach data structures in the lates 90s when this stuff was the rage. There was a lot of pressure from the students actually to do more of it, since they were young vulnerable to the pressures of fads. As a person largely interested in numerics and scientific programming, I find it irksome that this stuff is sold by (some) people as a cure all. I was really surprised one day when I was discussing something like the behavior of arithmetic in C++ and the first thing the kid does after he opens his laptop is start defining a class in order to test what I was saying.
Anyway, being a zealot isn't a great idea. But if I had to pick one thing to do everything in (you shouldn't!), Lisp wouldn't be a bad choice. Lisp and Fortran are old languages that are still around not just for legacy reasons.
Wait a second I think they are investigating the wrong thing. What they need to settle is this - if a plane crashes *exactly* on the border of the US and Canada, where you do bury the survivors?
I never understood Wave. And I think that was typical of the problem Google had with it - no one really knew what the main idea was. I understood a few key things it could do, which were cool, but I am not sure if it was ahead of its time or if it just really was an ill defined mish mosh of concepts.
Well, that is true but then after those papers appeared there was a several year effort by 3 groups to fill in the details and make it more digestible. Each of the resulting books/documents are several hundred pages long.
Yes, it is a venerable math joke you've made. I've been hearing colleagues call it the Anus of Mathematics for 30 years now. It does publish great papers, but does require something of a personal connection to get into. Something remarkable you don't hear about in the press ever. Same for The Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, and a few others. But no big deal now. The internet is a great equalizer, although you'll get a better raise if you publish in the Annals, or better job offers.
I was not a prodigy, but a really smart kid who was in many environments with prodigies or near prodigies.
My experience has been that most pre-teen children with this history don't understand the material very well, and there tends to be a lot of exaggeration about it. Smart kids are good at mimicking things and that is all that is really need to "do" the first year or two of college math.
Occasionally, but very occasionally you get someone really young who later goes on to do decent, or even more rarely great things, like Norbert Wiener or Terry Tao. But I would like to hear those people give their opinions of the depth of their understanding at that age.
I knew Nadine Kowalsky, who in HS would essentially just remember everything she heard in class and got 100 on every exam. (She wasn't the only one though. I knew a number of other people like that though that didn't do as well as Nadine did.) She later went on to get a Ph.D. from Chicago and published her thesis in the Annals of Math. That is a journal most mathematicians can't get a paper in. Like publishing in Nature or Science. Nadine was the real deal, but sadly she died of cancer not long after finishing her Ph.D. But I don't believe that Nadine was doing calculus until she was 15. And that was certainly on purpose. She, and her parents apparently, knew what was a good idea to do, and not to do, with a super smart kid. (This last sentence is conjecture on my part.)
But I think most cases of pre-teens you hear about are really not what they are made out to be. Once you get to 12 or 13 those, I think things do change a lot.
You are dead on. There are quite a few objects out there and a lot of "special" positions they can be in.
Also, I don't know if it is really safe for Vulcans, since they might be temporarily blind. The full health implications were never discussed. Macular degeneration at 200 anyone?
That's what I though too when I saw this. The object is basically a bullet. Software crashes and the things decides to go in a straight line to it's home position, you might have a problem.
Right. That was why.xxx was introduced. It opened up so many free "names" as you call them, on the "regular" internet. All those porn names are free for you to use now.
Really, if that was the issue then just using 26 letters in a name and 20 char names gives 26^20 names. That's more than could possibly be needed. So ask yourself, Einstein, what's wrong with your point?
Slashdot Mirror
Wow that's sounds complex. So some countries in Europe would write that as 60","000 ? A lot of extra bits, but I can see it has a sort of graphical appeal.
Financing isn't the issue. The issue is a madman in a submarine named Nemo, who rules the sea.
What is the point of having the images stitched? Google maps doesn't need to. If the observer is going to look at the whole image then they can't look at it on a megapixel screen. The whole thing sounds fishy to me.
But I am pretty sure that showing them the episode "Spock's Brain" would be the worst way.
Funny post. He isn't second rate but over-rated. He is, for example, not in the same category as Roger Penrose, Ed Witten or, although a different kind of scientist, Feynman. And like all normal humans he has always been interested in making a good profit from what he does. Fair enough. My issue with him is that his books are dull dull dull.
Tyson makes more money the more science in the news. He's an entertainer. It's like getting John Travolta's opinion. I know, I know, people will say "no he is a respected scientist/educator...". He is an entertainer. There is sooooo little content in his stuff. Compare with David Attenborough for example. Or Sagan.
Actually, I do find it handy to hash (in my head) a childhood friend's phone number with some other easy to remember information. Anyone see any problem with this?
That's silly. I just use my SS#. That has a LOT of digits. Who is going to guess that?
I think your comment (a joke?) is just the right response to the abuse/misuse of OO oriented programming. It's really not that complicated - the situation is a hammer looking for a nail. When you find a nail you are sooo happy to have a hammer. But when you find you need a hex wrench to put together your Ikea book shelf, well, then you end up with a bad situation. (I'm sure an equivalent comment has been said many many times before...)
I used to regularly teach data structures in the lates 90s when this stuff was the rage. There was a lot of pressure from the students actually to do more of it, since they were young vulnerable to the pressures of fads. As a person largely interested in numerics and scientific programming, I find it irksome that this stuff is sold by (some) people as a cure all. I was really surprised one day when I was discussing something like the behavior of arithmetic in C++ and the first thing the kid does after he opens his laptop is start defining a class in order to test what I was saying.
Anyway, being a zealot isn't a great idea. But if I had to pick one thing to do everything in (you shouldn't!), Lisp wouldn't be a bad choice. Lisp and Fortran are old languages that are still around not just for legacy reasons.
Wait a second I think they are investigating the wrong thing. What they need to settle is this - if a plane crashes *exactly* on the border of the US and Canada, where you do bury the survivors?
I never understood Wave. And I think that was typical of the problem Google had with it - no one really knew what the main idea was. I understood a few key things it could do, which were cool, but I am not sure if it was ahead of its time or if it just really was an ill defined mish mosh of concepts.
Well, that is true but then after those papers appeared there was a several year effort by 3 groups to fill in the details and make it more digestible. Each of the resulting books/documents are several hundred pages long.
Some problems just require longer proofs.
Yes, it is a venerable math joke you've made. I've been hearing colleagues call it the Anus of Mathematics for 30 years now. It does publish great papers, but does require something of a personal connection to get into. Something remarkable you don't hear about in the press ever. Same for The Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, and a few others. But no big deal now. The internet is a great equalizer, although you'll get a better raise if you publish in the Annals, or better job offers.
I was not a prodigy, but a really smart kid who was in many environments with prodigies or near prodigies.
My experience has been that most pre-teen children with this history don't understand the material very well, and there tends to be a lot of exaggeration about it. Smart kids are good at mimicking things and that is all that is really need to "do" the first year or two of college math.
Occasionally, but very occasionally you get someone really young who later goes on to do decent, or even more rarely great things, like Norbert Wiener or Terry Tao. But I would like to hear those people give their opinions of the depth of their understanding at that age.
I knew Nadine Kowalsky, who in HS would essentially just remember everything she heard in class and got 100 on every exam. (She wasn't the only one though. I knew a number of other people like that though that didn't do as well as Nadine did.) She later went on to get a Ph.D. from Chicago and published her thesis in the Annals of Math. That is a journal most mathematicians can't get a paper in. Like publishing in Nature or Science. Nadine was the real deal, but sadly she died of cancer not long after finishing her Ph.D. But I don't believe that Nadine was doing calculus until she was 15. And that was certainly on purpose. She, and her parents apparently, knew what was a good idea to do, and not to do, with a super smart kid. (This last sentence is conjecture on my part.)
But I think most cases of pre-teens you hear about are really not what they are made out to be. Once you get to 12 or 13 those, I think things do change a lot.
Any browser that has a "turn off images" feature sounds like fair game to me. Old Netscape had it, don't know if any modern ones do.
It depends on the situation. (Ring.) Or author.
Yeah, but the "I can simulate the 14000-body problem in real time" fad is alive and kicking.
You are dead on. There are quite a few objects out there and a lot of "special" positions they can be in. Also, I don't know if it is really safe for Vulcans, since they might be temporarily blind. The full health implications were never discussed. Macular degeneration at 200 anyone?
This is great. I'll be able avoid ECT.
Don't forget you'll still have to pay your $699....oh wait, wrong evil historical slashdot theme...
That's what I though too when I saw this. The object is basically a bullet. Software crashes and the things decides to go in a straight line to it's home position, you might have a problem.
Right. That was why .xxx was introduced. It opened up so many free "names" as you call them, on the "regular" internet. All those porn names are free for you to use now.
Really, if that was the issue then just using 26 letters in a name and 20 char names gives 26^20 names. That's more than could possibly be needed. So ask yourself, Einstein, what's wrong with your point?
is to opt not to take part. Keep human interaction in teaching. We're headed to a dark ages in education otherwise.
When you've got nothing on the line, you're not going to be as careful about cryptography as someone who does.
Is not the increase in rates, and that crowdsourcing doesn't solve the problem, but that spell checkers don't solve the problem. What's up with that?