It could not be extended and remain consistent using the mathematical techniques of the time. The geocentric theory can now be extended consistently through the use of Fourier (or rather, Harmonic) Analysis.
The schools lost the ability to teach mathematics properly a couple of decades ago, starting with the "new math" in grade school
You're evidently not in a position to discuss mathematics pedagogy. Many major mathematical discoveries were found by mathematicians trained in that "New Math" in the 1960s. Mathematics is the art understanding problems in terms of logical constraints, and formulae that satisfy them. You don't teach that by counting, or even adding or subtracting. You need to jump into an undecidable language to do that, like Zermelo-Fraenkel set theory, or Peano Arithmetic, or Logo or another Lisp.
and the "dumbing down" of math in high school.
The "dumbing down" of math in high school amounts to using the "Old Math" techniques of rote memorization of formulas, applied to the domain of calculus and geometry. Pick one. You can't have it both ways.
No it is not a question of frame of reference, it is a question of models. The solar system could be modeled in infinitely many ways. The geocentric model models the routes of the other planets with "epicycles".
Which model should we use? Enter Occam's Razor.
Look up Fourier Analysis. Orbital paths are sums of epicycles.
You should use the right model for the job. If you need to deal with the harmonics involved, you should use a basis that expresses the harmonics clearly. If not, you should use one that does what you need it to. Occam's Razor has nothing to do with it.
McMurtough Station houses about 1,200 people full time. They have stores there. And a bowling alley. And research stations. And janitors and a mechanics' shop or five. The point was to come up with a market where physical needs have consequences if they aren't met, and to show what the implied warranty of fitness for purpose means by comparing purposes and markets. It is fundamentally tied to the purpose for which a product is to marketed to be used, and secondarily to the market in which it is sold. (Admittedly, if the store put up disclaimers about the sleeping bags -- something like "THESE TENTS ARE NOT SUITABLE FOR ANTARCTIC WEATHER", like you suggested, there would be no "problem" except that maybe there aren't any warm sleeping bags in Antartica).
Is Apple doing anything remotely like that? Nope. They show commercials of hip looking 20-somethings walking around New York City and Miami and San Francisco and Portland with their phones to their ears. Playing with their compass app, searching for restaurants.
Apple is selling a product they know, with a high degree of probability, will be rendered broken or at least out of warranty (specifically because of this humidity sensor thing), in Florida. I don't live there any more, but it's not much less humid in the Pacific North West, where this same problem almost bit me in the ass and cost me $100 (despite the fact that I had not violated my warranty in any way).
I wouldn't begrudge anything anybody did to try to help them, whether money changed hands or not.
Perhaps you should, at least if money changed hands. You paid for one thing and got something else. I see that as a problem.
Apple shouldn't be selling iPhones in Florida, or Canada, or lots of other places if the phone is unfit for the purpose it is being advertised for. It amounts to false advertising. If you can't stand behind your product, you shouldn't be selling it. (Mind you, if it's perfectly fine for use in Italy's climate or whatever, more power to Apple to sell it there).
Imagine going to Antartica, and finding that the "Official Camping Supply Store" sold sleeping bags that broke to pieces in Antarctic weather. Is that fit for the purpose you got it? That sleeping bag might be just fine in parts of North America, but it is ENTIRELY unsuited for Antarctic weather. That would be a problem, right? But it wouldn't if they just sold in North America, right? So why is Apple selling these phones in Canada? Florida, which regularly hits 100F and 100% humidity?
I have a crappy little cell phone, and had parts replaced. The clerk at T-Mobile said I kept it in good shape. Then she saw that a sensor had tripped. Luckily, she said "That's weird" and just gave me a new phone.
I'm not demanding an inert slab of metal. I'm demanding a phone that does what I expect it to -- let me carry it around in my pocket without fear that not doing anything at all to it will break it, when there simply happens to be average weather for my region. If they can't sell a phone that does that, they shouldn't be marketing ANY phones in that market. It really is against the law.
You can hit 100% humidity in Florida. That is enough to void the warranty, just by doing nothing at all. Is it common sense for these little sensors to trip and ruin your chances for replacing their shoddy, unfit-for-its-purpose product?
According to some of the other posts on here, it seems like Apple has already covered this in the warranty agreement by specifying that the phone shouldn't be used in humid air where water can condensate.
That's not an enforceable clause anywhere I know of. The iPhone is marketed as a portable phone, among other things. It's not portable if you can't take it into environments people commonly go into. Ergo, this all falls under the implied warranty of fitness for purpose.
Good luck fighting for it when Apple has "evidence" against you.
It's marketed as a PORTABLE PHONE. Look up "IMPLIED WARRANTY OF FITNESS FOR PURPOSE". If the phone can't handle common environments where people tend to carry around phones, it's not a PORTABLE PHONE.
It depends on how it's implemented. Remember, we're taking the actual eye and replacing it. You've got to first reproduce the existing signal, then you've got to figure out how to map any new signals we don't already send.
Eh, no. You just send them, and let the brain learn how to decode the signals, just like your brain did when you were an infant. You LEARNED to see in the first place.
Regardless of the spectrum your artificial eyes can pick up, in the end they must with absolutely no way around it, translate those to inputs that we already receive. Therefore, your brain will not come up with no colors.
If you go into a store, give them money for a product, and they start treating you poorly, you can demand your money back and walk out. You can't do that with an insurance company, specifically because of the timing.
You seem to have forgotten that ISPs are already running out of bandwidth, and that the marginal cost to upgrade to 100mb/s instead of 10mb/s is negligible. They might as well upgrade to gigabit ethernet, considering how much ANY upgrade will cost.
It's not just "more ice" and "less ice" or "more hurricanes" and "fewer hurricanes." The questions is where the local climate is changing, and whether it is changing in according to large scale models.
If a madman had a gun, you would wish you had that vest you scoffed at. Is there a real risk that a madman will try to shoot you? Probably not. So wearing a vest won't give you much security. Is there a real risk that someone will try to steal your money? YES.
Slashdot Mirror
No, it is not. You just don't get it.
It's a "21st century assume nothing" perspective.
Your "answer" isn't much of one, by the way. You simply gave a name to what he was discussing.
The Mormons don't want straight-edgeism in their schools. It competes with Mormonism as a basis for morality.
You're telling me... my mom use to beat me, and then threaten to call the police if I put up my arms to stop her from pummelling my face.
It could not be extended and remain consistent using the mathematical techniques of the time. The geocentric theory can now be extended consistently through the use of Fourier (or rather, Harmonic) Analysis.
The schools lost the ability to teach mathematics properly a couple of decades ago, starting with the "new math" in grade school
You're evidently not in a position to discuss mathematics pedagogy. Many major mathematical discoveries were found by mathematicians trained in that "New Math" in the 1960s. Mathematics is the art understanding problems in terms of logical constraints, and formulae that satisfy them. You don't teach that by counting, or even adding or subtracting. You need to jump into an undecidable language to do that, like Zermelo-Fraenkel set theory, or Peano Arithmetic, or Logo or another Lisp.
and the "dumbing down" of math in high school.
The "dumbing down" of math in high school amounts to using the "Old Math" techniques of rote memorization of formulas, applied to the domain of calculus and geometry. Pick one. You can't have it both ways.
No it is not a question of frame of reference, it is a question of models. The solar system could be modeled in infinitely many ways. The geocentric model models the routes of the other planets with "epicycles".
Which model should we use? Enter Occam's Razor.
Look up Fourier Analysis. Orbital paths are sums of epicycles.
You should use the right model for the job. If you need to deal with the harmonics involved, you should use a basis that expresses the harmonics clearly. If not, you should use one that does what you need it to. Occam's Razor has nothing to do with it.
Why isn't alsamixer saving your settings? Any idea? Or did you just not know about alsamixer?
McMurtough Station houses about 1,200 people full time. They have stores there. And a bowling alley. And research stations. And janitors and a mechanics' shop or five. The point was to come up with a market where physical needs have consequences if they aren't met, and to show what the implied warranty of fitness for purpose means by comparing purposes and markets. It is fundamentally tied to the purpose for which a product is to marketed to be used, and secondarily to the market in which it is sold. (Admittedly, if the store put up disclaimers about the sleeping bags -- something like "THESE TENTS ARE NOT SUITABLE FOR ANTARCTIC WEATHER", like you suggested, there would be no "problem" except that maybe there aren't any warm sleeping bags in Antartica).
Is Apple doing anything remotely like that? Nope. They show commercials of hip looking 20-somethings walking around New York City and Miami and San Francisco and Portland with their phones to their ears. Playing with their compass app, searching for restaurants.
Apple is selling a product they know, with a high degree of probability, will be rendered broken or at least out of warranty (specifically because of this humidity sensor thing), in Florida. I don't live there any more, but it's not much less humid in the Pacific North West, where this same problem almost bit me in the ass and cost me $100 (despite the fact that I had not violated my warranty in any way).
I wouldn't begrudge anything anybody did to try to help them, whether money changed hands or not.
Perhaps you should, at least if money changed hands. You paid for one thing and got something else. I see that as a problem.
Apple shouldn't be selling iPhones in Florida, or Canada, or lots of other places if the phone is unfit for the purpose it is being advertised for. It amounts to false advertising. If you can't stand behind your product, you shouldn't be selling it. (Mind you, if it's perfectly fine for use in Italy's climate or whatever, more power to Apple to sell it there).
Imagine going to Antartica, and finding that the "Official Camping Supply Store" sold sleeping bags that broke to pieces in Antarctic weather. Is that fit for the purpose you got it? That sleeping bag might be just fine in parts of North America, but it is ENTIRELY unsuited for Antarctic weather. That would be a problem, right? But it wouldn't if they just sold in North America, right? So why is Apple selling these phones in Canada? Florida, which regularly hits 100F and 100% humidity?
I have a crappy little cell phone, and had parts replaced. The clerk at T-Mobile said I kept it in good shape. Then she saw that a sensor had tripped. Luckily, she said "That's weird" and just gave me a new phone.
I'm not demanding an inert slab of metal. I'm demanding a phone that does what I expect it to -- let me carry it around in my pocket without fear that not doing anything at all to it will break it, when there simply happens to be average weather for my region. If they can't sell a phone that does that, they shouldn't be marketing ANY phones in that market. It really is against the law.
You can hit 100% humidity in Florida. That is enough to void the warranty, just by doing nothing at all. Is it common sense for these little sensors to trip and ruin your chances for replacing their shoddy, unfit-for-its-purpose product?
Yes. They specifically refer to it as a "mobile phone" and Safari as a "mobile web browser".
Implied warranty of fitness for purpose. That's why.
According to some of the other posts on here, it seems like Apple has already covered this in the warranty agreement by specifying that the phone shouldn't be used in humid air where water can condensate.
That's not an enforceable clause anywhere I know of. The iPhone is marketed as a portable phone, among other things. It's not portable if you can't take it into environments people commonly go into. Ergo, this all falls under the implied warranty of fitness for purpose.
Good luck fighting for it when Apple has "evidence" against you.
It's marketed as a PORTABLE PHONE. Look up "IMPLIED WARRANTY OF FITNESS FOR PURPOSE". If the phone can't handle common environments where people tend to carry around phones, it's not a PORTABLE PHONE.
A portable phone isn't fit for its purpose if you can't take it outside in humid states. It is meant to be a portable device.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Implied_warranty
Yes, it's worse. The LCI sensors can be activated without doing anything that violates the warranty.
Doesn't matter the rules, or how long it took me to grind that money from collecting flowers or whatever - end result is I have more money.
Only a child would think working a hundred hours for a dollar is "better" than working an hour for half a dollar.
It depends on how it's implemented. Remember, we're taking the actual eye and replacing it. You've got to first reproduce the existing signal, then you've got to figure out how to map any new signals we don't already send.
Eh, no. You just send them, and let the brain learn how to decode the signals, just like your brain did when you were an infant. You LEARNED to see in the first place.
Regardless of the spectrum your artificial eyes can pick up, in the end they must with absolutely no way around it, translate those to inputs that we already receive. Therefore, your brain will not come up with no colors.
Nope, you are entirely wrong.
It's only barratry if the lawsuit is frivolous. "Solely to harass", as your link said.
Seriously?
If you go into a store, give them money for a product, and they start treating you poorly, you can demand your money back and walk out. You can't do that with an insurance company, specifically because of the timing.
You seem to have forgotten that ISPs are already running out of bandwidth, and that the marginal cost to upgrade to 100mb/s instead of 10mb/s is negligible. They might as well upgrade to gigabit ethernet, considering how much ANY upgrade will cost.
It's not just "more ice" and "less ice" or "more hurricanes" and "fewer hurricanes." The questions is where the local climate is changing, and whether it is changing in according to large scale models.
If a madman had a gun, you would wish you had that vest you scoffed at. Is there a real risk that a madman will try to shoot you? Probably not. So wearing a vest won't give you much security. Is there a real risk that someone will try to steal your money? YES.