My interpretation is that these ideas, like the one in TFA, are acting as Modest Proposals. They'll cost an absurd amount of money to design and build, and the obvious absurdity causes people to contemplate that it would be more effective to just stop the introduction of carbon into the atmosphere.
I see your point about stopping and smelling the roses. However, when I do pleasure reading, I'm doing just that. I've practiced enough so that 600 words per minute is my natural reading pace -- any variation from that requires effort. I'll often read literature, for fun, for 8-10 hours at a stretch. I (presumably) read more in that span of time than you because I've practiced and you prefer to do your pleasure reading slowly. I can do more of what I enjoy in the same amout of time. (Don't get me started on drinking!;-)
Oh god, if Math 101 requires any software to be installed, she should just transfer to a better school. The only software a mathematician needs is LaTeX. A computer mathematics package might be useful for formulating conjectures though.
Reading fiction quickly seems to me to be a numbers game for the obsessively competitive.
Reading is a skill, just like touch typing. If you practice it enough you'll naturally become faster at it. My "leisurely" reading pace is about 600 words per minute. I'm not bragging here. I can read that quickly because of all the time I've spent reading, not out of competitiveness.
I think the best analogy would be that Wikipedia is like a slutty teen cheerleader whose going to take anything google and yahoo have to offer. More than one quarterback indeed!
The meaning of the message is clear, even if the presentation suffered because of my multi-tasking. Only an autist would read that and not get the point. If you have anything else to say to me, put your karma on the line. Dipshit.
Godel's Incompleteness Theorem states that in any given logical system, there are propositions which can be neither proved nor disproved.
False. Pressburger arithmetic is complete -- which is to say that every proposition can be proven true or false. Hilbert's formulation of Euclidean geometry is also complete.
Unfortunately, a mathematical "explanation" (what an ugly term) is not sufficient for machine computation. Witness the use of the Second Order Axioms of Peano Arithmetic to prove that there is a unique model of the natural numbers. This would appear to contradict Godel's Incompleteness theorem, since if there is a unique model of the natural numbers, every sentence true relative to that model would have a proof, by the completeness theorem.
So what is the difference between the theories of the first and second order Peano Axioms for arithmetic? Well, in the first order theory, one can only quantify over so-called definable sets. These are exactly the decidable sets from recursion theory. In a second-order theory, one quantifies over all sets.
Since an automated theorem prover must be given a recursive set of axioms from which to build a theory, in any domain where the family of definable sets is a strict subset of the power set of the domain, there will be theorems that can only be proved with help from second-order logic.
Eh, I don't think we can say who the best player the world has ever seen is. Capablanca was the best player in his time, and Kasparov might be the best now. But without at least a nice one-on-one seven round match, there's no point in comparing them.
Gattaca was a story about race and prejudice, in a scifi setting. The Terminator is a bit tricker to characterize in such terms since time travel is a major plot point. But then again, the essential theme is that of an unstoppable killer, a hero who just might stop him, and a damsel in distress. There's no need to use robots or time travel to frame such a story.
I suspect you're not familiar with neither Blue Note, nor ECM, nor any of the independent music review sites that list their albums. They're going to tell you to listen to their records, because they are good. These labels pick out only the best talents, and outside of a few surprise hits, sell relatively modest but consistent numbers. They aren't banking on the big hits, so they can afford to take artistic risks. And you should probably know that most labels are like this.
None of the big stores. Look for a local hifi store and listen to the equipment. Move the speakers around so that there is roughly a 2/3 ratio of the distance between the speakers and your distance from the line between the speakers (so the triangle formed has base 2 and height 3) with the speakers slightly toed in. Sit so that your eyes are at the same height as the tweeters. Once you're in a good reference position, just listen and judge for yourself.
If this is your first time buying a "good" stereo, listen to a lot of speakers -- you don't want the first pair you listen to (which will likely be far better than any you've heard before) impressing you too much. Bring along a CD you're very familiar with. Ideally, you'd be familiar with live classical music and would also bring in a classical CD. Cheap consumer speakers try to wow the buy with jacked up bass and treble, so you want to listen to pay particular attention to the tone of any instrument you're familiar with. It should sound like it is in the room. If it has a fake shimmering sound, stay away. You also want to test what's known as "imaging." If you've ever listened to a record and could swear you could point out where the band members are playing relative to your position, those speakers had good imaging.
You'll also need to buy an amplifier. I recommend a fairly low power (40 W or so per channel) amplifier. You'll get higher quality for the price if you stick to low(er) power amplifiers. And they get plenty loud too. There are a lot of variables involved in matching an amplifier to a set of speakers, so talk to your salesman. But don't let him talk you into buying a big amplifier to power your new speakers. Unless you want to get REALLY loud or start dicking around with impedance, there isn't much point.
Stay away from brands like JBL, Bose, or anything else you might find in your local best buy. Barring Bose, those brands might make some good speakers, but not for your budget. I recommend NHT speakers, personally. I have their (now discontinued) SuperOne's and I'm quite happy with them. They have a 6.5 inch woofer and a 1.5 inch tweeter. This is a good size for a speaker for an entry level system. In any event, NHT has a few lines of similar speakers now. If you must go for big woofers, remember that they're not supposed to make the bass louder, but lower -- which is to say, you should hear more notes than with a smaller woofer, but the notes you *could* hear before should remain at the same volume.
(OK, that's still not exactly right. Say you have a speaker A and a subwoofer B. Speaker A's cutoff frequency is 50 Hz, which means that it's at -6 dB at 50Hz. If you play music, you *will* hear 50Hz tones, but at half the volume they should be. So you turn on the subwoofer. Ideally, the subwoofer complements the speaker so that it, e.g., adds 6 dB to a 50 Hz tone. If a subwoofer is making, say, 200 Hz tones louder, it's too loud or just not right for the speaker.)
I still haven't told you about buying cd players or other input devices, but the same ideas apply. Tone is the most important factor to consider in most cases, though if you're buying a turntable/tonearm/stylus, imaging is important too.
These are just suggestions, certainly not Gospel. But if you follow my advice, you'll end up with an entry-level (or better) system you can fine tune at your convenience. Physical placement of the speakers is of particular tuning importance. But there are other facets, and my suggestions are only meant to give a rough but educated idea of what a speaker sounds like. The more effort you put into doing this, the better the stereo you buy.
Except that labels like ECM and Blue Note and a bunch of others cull the hacks. I don't know about you, but I only have enough time to listen to 15-30 albums in a day. And I'd rather listen to the good ones.
People with a history of broken legs may end up having fewer opportunities to reproduce. If limping is sexually selected against, and over a few generations this trend continued, in fact, bones would get stronger.
On average. You'd simply be culling out those with weak bones. It takes a lot more than a "few generations" for mutations to cause an increase in the strength of already strong bones.
None of the mirrors worked? Are you sure you were connected to the internet? Did you try running dhclient? Did you ping the sites? Report the problem to the debian administrators?
Slashdot Mirror
My interpretation is that these ideas, like the one in TFA, are acting as Modest Proposals. They'll cost an absurd amount of money to design and build, and the obvious absurdity causes people to contemplate that it would be more effective to just stop the introduction of carbon into the atmosphere.
I see your point about stopping and smelling the roses. However, when I do pleasure reading, I'm doing just that. I've practiced enough so that 600 words per minute is my natural reading pace -- any variation from that requires effort. I'll often read literature, for fun, for 8-10 hours at a stretch. I (presumably) read more in that span of time than you because I've practiced and you prefer to do your pleasure reading slowly. I can do more of what I enjoy in the same amout of time. (Don't get me started on drinking! ;-)
Oh god, if Math 101 requires any software to be installed, she should just transfer to a better school. The only software a mathematician needs is LaTeX. A computer mathematics package might be useful for formulating conjectures though.
Reading fiction quickly seems to me to be a numbers game for the obsessively competitive.
Reading is a skill, just like touch typing. If you practice it enough you'll naturally become faster at it. My "leisurely" reading pace is about 600 words per minute. I'm not bragging here. I can read that quickly because of all the time I've spent reading, not out of competitiveness.
The pot. And the smell.
I think the best analogy would be that Wikipedia is like a slutty teen cheerleader whose going to take anything google and yahoo have to offer. More than one quarterback indeed!
I too have talked to the cellcos about employment. I'm looking for a RIM job, but nobody seems interested.
PostgreSQL, Perl, and Apache.
Should be pretty straight forward, but dicking around with the metadata might be an incredible pain.
The meaning of the message is clear, even if the presentation suffered because of my multi-tasking. Only an autist would read that and not get the point. If you have anything else to say to me, put your karma on the line. Dipshit.
Uh, that's retarded. Google's URL syntax is very different from google's. Try reading http://www.google.com/results.aspx?q=test&srch_typ e=0&FORM=QBHP.
False. Pressburger arithmetic is complete -- which is to say that every proposition can be proven true or false. Hilbert's formulation of Euclidean geometry is also complete.
Unfortunately, a mathematical "explanation" (what an ugly term) is not sufficient for machine computation. Witness the use of the Second Order Axioms of Peano Arithmetic to prove that there is a unique model of the natural numbers. This would appear to contradict Godel's Incompleteness theorem, since if there is a unique model of the natural numbers, every sentence true relative to that model would have a proof, by the completeness theorem.
So what is the difference between the theories of the first and second order Peano Axioms for arithmetic? Well, in the first order theory, one can only quantify over so-called definable sets. These are exactly the decidable sets from recursion theory. In a second-order theory, one quantifies over all sets.
Since an automated theorem prover must be given a recursive set of axioms from which to build a theory, in any domain where the family of definable sets is a strict subset of the power set of the domain, there will be theorems that can only be proved with help from second-order logic.
Eh, I don't think we can say who the best player the world has ever seen is. Capablanca was the best player in his time, and Kasparov might be the best now. But without at least a nice one-on-one seven round match, there's no point in comparing them.
Gattaca was a story about race and prejudice, in a scifi setting. The Terminator is a bit tricker to characterize in such terms since time travel is a major plot point. But then again, the essential theme is that of an unstoppable killer, a hero who just might stop him, and a damsel in distress. There's no need to use robots or time travel to frame such a story.
I suspect you're not familiar with neither Blue Note, nor ECM, nor any of the independent music review sites that list their albums. They're going to tell you to listen to their records, because they are good. These labels pick out only the best talents, and outside of a few surprise hits, sell relatively modest but consistent numbers. They aren't banking on the big hits, so they can afford to take artistic risks. And you should probably know that most labels are like this.
If this is your first time buying a "good" stereo, listen to a lot of speakers -- you don't want the first pair you listen to (which will likely be far better than any you've heard before) impressing you too much. Bring along a CD you're very familiar with. Ideally, you'd be familiar with live classical music and would also bring in a classical CD. Cheap consumer speakers try to wow the buy with jacked up bass and treble, so you want to listen to pay particular attention to the tone of any instrument you're familiar with. It should sound like it is in the room. If it has a fake shimmering sound, stay away. You also want to test what's known as "imaging." If you've ever listened to a record and could swear you could point out where the band members are playing relative to your position, those speakers had good imaging.
You'll also need to buy an amplifier. I recommend a fairly low power (40 W or so per channel) amplifier. You'll get higher quality for the price if you stick to low(er) power amplifiers. And they get plenty loud too. There are a lot of variables involved in matching an amplifier to a set of speakers, so talk to your salesman. But don't let him talk you into buying a big amplifier to power your new speakers. Unless you want to get REALLY loud or start dicking around with impedance, there isn't much point.
Stay away from brands like JBL, Bose, or anything else you might find in your local best buy. Barring Bose, those brands might make some good speakers, but not for your budget. I recommend NHT speakers, personally. I have their (now discontinued) SuperOne's and I'm quite happy with them. They have a 6.5 inch woofer and a 1.5 inch tweeter. This is a good size for a speaker for an entry level system. In any event, NHT has a few lines of similar speakers now. If you must go for big woofers, remember that they're not supposed to make the bass louder, but lower -- which is to say, you should hear more notes than with a smaller woofer, but the notes you *could* hear before should remain at the same volume.
(OK, that's still not exactly right. Say you have a speaker A and a subwoofer B. Speaker A's cutoff frequency is 50 Hz, which means that it's at -6 dB at 50Hz. If you play music, you *will* hear 50Hz tones, but at half the volume they should be. So you turn on the subwoofer. Ideally, the subwoofer complements the speaker so that it, e.g., adds 6 dB to a 50 Hz tone. If a subwoofer is making, say, 200 Hz tones louder, it's too loud or just not right for the speaker.)
I still haven't told you about buying cd players or other input devices, but the same ideas apply. Tone is the most important factor to consider in most cases, though if you're buying a turntable/tonearm/stylus, imaging is important too.
These are just suggestions, certainly not Gospel. But if you follow my advice, you'll end up with an entry-level (or better) system you can fine tune at your convenience. Physical placement of the speakers is of particular tuning importance. But there are other facets, and my suggestions are only meant to give a rough but educated idea of what a speaker sounds like. The more effort you put into doing this, the better the stereo you buy.
Except that labels like ECM and Blue Note and a bunch of others cull the hacks. I don't know about you, but I only have enough time to listen to 15-30 albums in a day. And I'd rather listen to the good ones.
Uh, you seem to have forgotten Saucerful of Secrets, their only good album.
People with a history of broken legs may end up having fewer opportunities to reproduce. If limping is sexually selected against, and over a few generations this trend continued, in fact, bones would get stronger.
On average. You'd simply be culling out those with weak bones. It takes a lot more than a "few generations" for mutations to cause an increase in the strength of already strong bones.
It's not strange at all. Ever read "The Wanderer"?
Sorry, that's still not right. Cocoa is a (huge) API, not a language.
...again, and again, and again.
Yep. I got the error:
! LaTeX Error: \include cannot be nested.
Not particularly impressive.
It's called a "taint." See the Mr. Show episode entitled "It's Insane This Guy's Taint."
None of the mirrors worked? Are you sure you were connected to the internet? Did you try running dhclient? Did you ping the sites? Report the problem to the debian administrators?