http://www.regular-expressions.info/ And this book doesn't seem any better than this site, which I've used as a reference for the last 3-4 years or so. Plus, there's an additional advantage to using regular-expressions.info over this book: You can't grep dead trees!.
The technology...would [I]render useless[/I] the most daunting fear of the Pentagon: [I]EMP weapons[/I]." And that's exactly why the Pentagon would be investing in such technology. Any additional performance or other geeky coolness is just a side benefit. Ultra-high-performance computing is the DoE's gig, not the Pentagon's.
Even a directed wireless transmitter through a waveguide only manages to send a fraction of its signal power over to the receiver. There's also the problem that it's much more susceptible to interference, it drains a lot of power because RF signals are not easy to generate at high speeds, the extra logic required and the fact that the bandwidth is just nowhere near what traditional wired links are capable of might not make it all that attractive. Exactly. Hence the reason 802.x wireless is much slower than its wired counterpart or why fiber optics are used for high-speed networking over great distances (like between North America and Europe) (as opposed to satellites).
I also notice that that article doesn't cite any references for that fact. Even so, if you put the quote in full context:
Also, a person accused of any crime punishable by more than six months imprisonment is also entitled to demand trial by jury; the Supreme Court has ruled that if imprisonment is for six months or less, trial by jury is not required, meaning a state may choose whether or not to permit trial by jury in such cases. TFS says that this crime is punishable by three years in prison. So I'm not sure that this SCOTUS decision really applies or not even if the prosecutor asks for less than 6 months.
Read the summary - misdemeanor. In other words, if the prosecdution decides to ask for no more than 6 months jail time, or just for a fine, no right to a jury trial for you! Not true. You always have a right to trial by jury. In misdemeanor cases under certain circumstances, you may have to ask for one. It's just not usually to advantage to ask for one, because if you request a jury trial, then the prosecution is far more likely to request -- and the judge is far more likely to grant -- the maximum penalty if you're still found guilty. Waive your right to a jury trial and go before the magistrate, and you'll usually get leniency.
As a person having been found guilty of a misdemeanor (driving on a suspended license), I can tell you that in most cases, they let you off with a fine for most misdemeanors
What has improved a lot is fuel efficiency - how much work is done using a given amount of fuel. But on the other hand, car size and weight has grown dramatically in the same time, so a lot more work needs to be done by the engine to move an average car over the same distance. No, it hasn't. I've worked in the industry with the engineers. Trust me. Pound for pound, when comparing apples-to-apples, newer cars on average, are lighter, not heavier. a 1970s VW Rabbit and it's modern-day equivalent, the VW Golf get the same gas mileage and weight is just about the same -- I'm so confident that this is the case, that I didn't even Google it, but I invite you to. When they've had to increase weight for safety and emissions features, they've compensated in other ways by using lighter metal alloys, replacing steel parts with plastic, and by just plain ol' making holes in the body in order to lighten the cars (no, I'm not kidding).
If you think this is not as exciting, then you don't know what a tall order it really is to have all those things the mainstream car category requires and make it really, truly more fuel efficient. Not even the current best Toyota Prius model really gets better gas mileage than conventional cars of comparable size and weight. For instance, the VW Jetta, Golf, and New Beetle all get 35 MPG City and 44 MPG Highway, which is an overall equivalent of about 38 MPG. The Prius gets 42 MPG City and 41 MPG Highway. Not really a significant savings considering the premium price tag the Prius carries compared to those cars.
GOTO? If you had a BBC Micro, you didn't need GOTO or GOSUB. BBC BASIC had support for named procedures, pointers, structured IF/THEN/ELSE, and inline assembler. Quite advanced for its day, really.
Shouldn't be a problem for a big money company like Google. A lot of the equipment they would need to do that will be going at fire sale prices from television stations who will no longer need the equipment.
We seriously need to toss this crap in a landfill and go back to paper. Any idiot can figure out a paper system, and the system should have that sort of transparency. Paper? What is this 'paper' of which you speak? Is it some sort of precursor to a monitor?
As I said, install DD_WRT. In addition to adjusting transmitter power, it also allows you to tweak your wifi connection using stuff like packet aggregation, compression, channel bonding and so forth. Maybe the Intel RCP improves things greatly, maybe it doesn't. I'm not too optimistic.
Yup. You can often get Dish network dishes from Freecycle, and worse comes to worse, I've seen them at yard sales for as little as $5 or so. Throw DD-WRT on a pair of Linksys routers, get the dishes and then follow these or similar instructions and there you go. The whole deal will cost you under $200.
Why are monads cheating? My understanding is that one of the biggest reasons people like Haskell is for its support of monads. Isn't that a bit like saying using regular expressions in Perl is cheating?
Don't get me wrong, I think the federal government is *very* secretive, and I greatly dislike domestic spying... but the two are not mutually inclusive. It's far from "Poll B proves Assertion A is a blatantly false." Oh, I agree with your logic 100%. But I really don't think that Americans 'don't care' about domestic spying. You can make a poll say anything you want it to say. There a various well-established techniques for that, including selection bias and tricky question wording.
Sarcasm aside, you're full of bs. Exposing a child to an unclothed adult is not horrible parenting and is in no way psychogically (sic) damaging. Or an unclothed child even. In the end, what is psychologically damaging is treating the human body as if it were somehow dirty and unclean and unholy and all of that crap. Stuffing that shit in children's heads does lots of psychological damage which has adverse effects on their self-esteem and their attitudes towards sexuality.
Obviously children aren't really built to handle, much less understand sex. Sex should be something that is brought into a child's awareness at an appropriate age and level of psychological development -- typically sometime around puberty. But even before that, children are naturally curious and may ask questions like "Where do babies come from?" You answer in a thruthful, but age-appropriate fashion, i.e., "Babies are made when a man and a woman love each other very much. They become a daddy and a mommy."
an obvious examples examples being frontal nudity or other explicit pornography. Nudity and pornography aren't the same thing. Exposing a child to an unclothed human body isn't likely to be psychologically damaging at all really. Pornography is the depiction of sexual acts. Nudity displayed in a non-sexual context is absolutely fine for children to see. The problem with American society is that it seems to be unable to distinguish between the two.
Definitely. Such administrative controls can also be used to get children to 1) do their homework, 2) do their chores (aka "assigned tasks"), 3) eat their vegetables, and/or 4) go outside and get some fresh air before the TV can even be turned on.
It's called parenting. When I was growing up, there were no technological controls available. We didn't have TVs in our bedrooms, and we were only allowed to watch what we were told we were allowed to watch. You watch something else and you were going to get yourself into trouble.
The bottom line is that if you need technology to control what you're kids are watching -- you are doing something wrong.
Slashdot Mirror
And why would you want to build a cyclotron in your basement, huh? You must be a terrorist.
Oops. Forgot to click the [X] Post Anonymously box, huh?
As a person having been found guilty of a misdemeanor (driving on a suspended license), I can tell you that in most cases, they let you off with a fine for most misdemeanors
If you think this is not as exciting, then you don't know what a tall order it really is to have all those things the mainstream car category requires and make it really, truly more fuel efficient. Not even the current best Toyota Prius model really gets better gas mileage than conventional cars of comparable size and weight. For instance, the VW Jetta, Golf, and New Beetle all get 35 MPG City and 44 MPG Highway, which is an overall equivalent of about 38 MPG. The Prius gets 42 MPG City and 41 MPG Highway. Not really a significant savings considering the premium price tag the Prius carries compared to those cars.
I'm sure he meant 512K. 512MB would have cost a small fortune back then and would have required a large freezer to both store and keep it cool. :)
'sides, the 8086 only had a 20-bit address bus. 1MB is the most it would address.
GOTO? If you had a BBC Micro, you didn't need GOTO or GOSUB. BBC BASIC had support for named procedures, pointers, structured IF/THEN/ELSE, and inline assembler. Quite advanced for its day, really.
Shouldn't be a problem for a big money company like Google. A lot of the equipment they would need to do that will be going at fire sale prices from television stations who will no longer need the equipment.
No, I smell a rat. Definitely.
As I said, install DD_WRT. In addition to adjusting transmitter power, it also allows you to tweak your wifi connection using stuff like packet aggregation, compression, channel bonding and so forth. Maybe the Intel RCP improves things greatly, maybe it doesn't. I'm not too optimistic.
Yup. You can often get Dish network dishes from Freecycle, and worse comes to worse, I've seen them at yard sales for as little as $5 or so. Throw DD-WRT on a pair of Linksys routers, get the dishes and then follow these or similar instructions and there you go. The whole deal will cost you under $200.
And then there's Korn/Bourne/bash scripting, which is procedural (duh), but seems to be in a category all by itself, because, like Perl, TIMTOWTDI:
....
if [ $x -eq 1 ]; then
fi
or:
if [ $x = 1 ]; then
fi
or even, the more obtuse:
[ $x -eq 1 ] &&
Or, for some bash/kshisms:
if (( $x == 1 )); then
fi
I've seen more than one method used in the same script, too.
Why are monads cheating? My understanding is that one of the biggest reasons people like Haskell is for its support of monads. Isn't that a bit like saying using regular expressions in Perl is cheating?
Just wait until you hear about their next project, the Battle Ordnance for Military Blasting (BOMB).
"Those who fail to learn the lessons of history are doomed to repeat it." -- (Don't remember who said it).
It's called propaganda, folks. "Tell a lie long and enough and loud enough and sooner or later people will believe you." -- P.T. Barnum, I think.
Obviously children aren't really built to handle, much less understand sex. Sex should be something that is brought into a child's awareness at an appropriate age and level of psychological development -- typically sometime around puberty. But even before that, children are naturally curious and may ask questions like "Where do babies come from?" You answer in a thruthful, but age-appropriate fashion, i.e., "Babies are made when a man and a woman love each other very much. They become a daddy and a mommy."
Definitely. Such administrative controls can also be used to get children to 1) do their homework, 2) do their chores (aka "assigned tasks"), 3) eat their vegetables, and/or 4) go outside and get some fresh air before the TV can even be turned on.
It's called parenting. When I was growing up, there were no technological controls available. We didn't have TVs in our bedrooms, and we were only allowed to watch what we were told we were allowed to watch. You watch something else and you were going to get yourself into trouble.
The bottom line is that if you need technology to control what you're kids are watching -- you are doing something wrong.
A proletarian and a plutocrat are two different things, hence the problem with the quote.
A proleterian is basically a member of the lower classes. A 'blue collar' worker. What, today, we call 'working class'.
A plutocrat is almost the opposite -- a member of the wealthy and powerful.
At $2375 1917 dollars, a "prole" wouldn't have been able to afford a "Detroit Electric", whilst a plutocrat most certainly would.