The header of the xml file says its utf-8, but he might be saving it without the UTF-8 BOM header.
So? It's still perfectly valid XML even without the BOM. XML it's a real standard and I suggest you read it, it's not Notepad.
And don't even start talking about malformed UTF-8 since he only used characters in the ASCII subset, so even saving it as Latin-1 would have generated valid XML.
Re:Wrong number, in both the GP and the summary!
on
A Mighty Number Falls
·
· Score: 1
No problem: you aren't the only one to make this mistake.;-)
Re:Wrong number, in both the GP and the summary!
on
A Mighty Number Falls
·
· Score: 1
And don't doubt me, I'm a 3 digits UID
Sorry grandpa, but you are still wrong: the factors when multiplied together give that number, but it's just a random number, not the 2**1039-1 from TFA.
Re:Wrong number, in both the GP and the summary!
on
A Mighty Number Falls
·
· Score: 1
Have you checked the result or at least seen my code?
>>> len(str(2**1039-1)) 313
It's 313 decimal digits without any space or newline. And the wonderful/. mods modded you informative...
Wrong number, in both the GP and the summary!
on
A Mighty Number Falls
·
· Score: 3, Informative
I don't know where she/he got her/his number, but it's wrong.
Use Python, Luke:
Python 2.5.1 (r251:54863, Apr 19 2007, 19:11:47) [GCC 3.3.1] on linux2 Type "help", "copyright", "credits" or "license" for more information. >>> print 2**1039-1 589068086431683676644738724917747624711 93869645981501775357568993765843207946555599325913 84900650140340063891615625817543763223144510803885 84562460719428810761069833174599222153387113189363 20121062386221739214690332885215589978237001371848 06201826907368669534112523820726591354912103343876 844956209126576528293887 >>> len(str(2**1039-1)) 313
So the summary is wrong too: the number is 313, not 307 digits long. At least in base 10.
I don't know how familiar you are with the Italian TV, but trust me: the Mediaset channels are even worse than the already really bad RAI's. RAI4 doesn't exist, maybe you mean RAI3? Yes they are the exception that proves the rule: they often have decent programs, sometime even great ones. This last category is also the category that get canceled faster if they dare to disturb the Catholic Church, some politician or the mafia.
If you want something better you must search outside of the RAI/Mediaset duopoly; e.g. La7 is usally pretty good.
FYI we have the same problem in Italy for the number of TV programs viewers.
There is a corporation, Auditel, which is in teory indipendent but in practice is owned for the 66% by the two biggest TV networks (RAI, the crappy public TV, and Mediaset the crappier Berlusconi's TV).
Their numbers are used for the prices of the ads and the result is that they always greatly overestimate the number of watchers. An infamous case was when, due to a technical problem, the transmission of a big channel was interrupted for 30 minutes and according to Auditel millions of people (a big percentage of the Italian population) continued to watch it anyway, without any interruption and without changing channel!
It's even worse: using a Creative Commons license doesn't mean what most people think! Some of those licenses are free/open source, but others are proprietary!
This isn't exactly what most scientist would consider "good news". We already know that both the standard model and the general relativity are wrong or at least incomplete, but they continue to pass every experiment, including this one...
The reason they keep trying is because they hope to finally find something different from what those theories predict: this will probably open a very exciting period of progress for our understanding of the universe.
I don't know if it can be considered ok, but pretty much anywhere in the world the other animals can be keep in captivity (unless they are an endangered specie), can be killed (humans kill and eat a lot of different species of animals) and it's legal to do to them what is usually considered torture if applied to humans (vivisection, dangerous or painful drug experiments).
The Spanish proposal would outlaw this for all the hominids.
FYI there was a proposal in Spain to give to all the non-human Great Apes some very basic rights (they cannot be killed, tortured or keep in captivity).
And the scientific name for Great Apes (humans, chimpanzees, gorillas, and orangutans) is hominids and we have in common more of 97% of our DNA even with the more different of them (this obviously doesn't make them automatically humans).
If more code was released under BSD-type license, we would've seen wider adoption.
No, we would not. *BSD OSes existed for a long time before GNU/Linux and they had a much smaller adoption. Then GNU and Linux came and we know the rest of the story. Why the difference? Because much more people are willing to contribute to GNU and to Linux because they are GPLed!
Remember people: XML may be good for data interchange between different applications because every language ever created by the gods has an XML parser, but don't use it for anything else. To quote Phillip J. Eby: Some people, when confronted with a problem, think "I know, I'll use XML." Now they have two problems.
Well, that would mean sending a robot probe first, I would think.
No need to do that: just build a big big f*ing telescope in orbit and we can even get small resolution images and atmospheric chemical composition analysis from here. And if we are really lucky, an existing European space telescope can already detect terrestrial planets around Epsilon Eridani (but they must have the right alignment).
I completely agree with you: the problem with space missions is that even a very small problem can be unsolvable if the hardware is more than 100 million km away!
But even if we completely lose the camera, it will be a big problem but not a disaster for science: there are currently 3 operational spacecrafts orbiting Mars (2 American + 1 European) and High Resolution Stereo Camera on ESA Mars Express, the second best camera after HiRISE with a resolution of up to 2 metre/pixel, is still working and sending back beautiful images.
A tiny issue to be sure, but I'm appreciative of the website linked for providing a video link that's easy to use, even in Linux.
It's an HTTP URL for an.asx file which in turn point to a.wmv file served over the mms:// protocol. Not exactly what I call an open standard.
Sure, providing a link it's better than the usual windows-only non-standard <object> tag, and I don't expect to find anytime soon an honest ogg (theora+vorbis) file served over an open protocol, but at least the Clinton announcement site offered a.mov file (with H.264 video) over HTTP.
Disclaimer: this is only a technical remark, no political criticism implied here.
Armadillo Aerospace is considering exactly the same fuel. Some of the advantages are relatively high ISP (lower that LH2, but with a much smaller volume) and the fuel and the oxidizer (LOX) have more or less the same volume which can be a very good thing, depending on your vehicle configuration.
I work on a small euro-american space project (I'm in the european side) and my experience is very different from yours: everything is in English units and when I asked surprised why, I have been told: "everything in the aerospace industry is still in English units." This caused significant problems even for apparently simple things like screws.
Granted this is only a small suborbital project, things may be different when going orbital.
I am glad to see smart companies and developers using developer friendly licenses like Apache and Mozilla. I've been burned early in my career by using the GPL and I'll never do it again for any software I write.
I don't agree with you on this, but FYI the GNU GPL version 3 will be compatible with the Apache 2.0 license. See this RMS transcript from the Free Software Foundation Europe. The combined GPLv3+Apache2 work can be released under the GPLv3+"patent termination protection" license.
If people think that the GNU GPLv2 is viral wait until everyone realise what are the implications of the GPLv3 new compatibility! And, yes, this is one of the many reasons why I really like the GPLv3.
Slashdot Mirror
So? It's still perfectly valid XML even without the BOM. XML it's a real standard and I suggest you read it, it's not Notepad.
And don't even start talking about malformed UTF-8 since he only used characters in the ASCII subset, so even saving it as Latin-1 would have generated valid XML.
No problem: you aren't the only one to make this mistake. ;-)
I don't know where she/he got her/his number, but it's wrong.
Use Python, Luke:
So the summary is wrong too: the number is 313, not 307 digits long. At least in base 10.
[this is a bit OT]
I don't know how familiar you are with the Italian TV, but trust me: the Mediaset channels are even worse than the already really bad RAI's. RAI4 doesn't exist, maybe you mean RAI3? Yes they are the exception that proves the rule: they often have decent programs, sometime even great ones. This last category is also the category that get canceled faster if they dare to disturb the Catholic Church, some politician or the mafia.
If you want something better you must search outside of the RAI/Mediaset duopoly; e.g. La7 is usally pretty good.
FYI we have the same problem in Italy for the number of TV programs viewers.
There is a corporation, Auditel, which is in teory indipendent but in practice is owned for the 66% by the two biggest TV networks (RAI, the crappy public TV, and Mediaset the crappier Berlusconi's TV).
Their numbers are used for the prices of the ads and the result is that they always greatly overestimate the number of watchers. An infamous case was when, due to a technical problem, the transmission of a big channel was interrupted for 30 minutes and according to Auditel millions of people (a big percentage of the Italian population) continued to watch it anyway, without any interruption and without changing channel!
No problem, that was funny. ;-)
It's even worse: using a Creative Commons license doesn't mean what most people think! Some of those licenses are free/open source, but others are proprietary!
This isn't exactly what most scientist would consider "good news". We already know that both the standard model and the general relativity are wrong or at least incomplete, but they continue to pass every experiment, including this one...
The reason they keep trying is because they hope to finally find something different from what those theories predict: this will probably open a very exciting period of progress for our understanding of the universe.
More infos: start from unsolved problems in physics and click links.
The parent links to a Greasemonkey user script that works very well to "gray-out" Roland slashvertisements on slashdot.
I don't know if it can be considered ok, but pretty much anywhere in the world the other animals can be keep in captivity (unless they are an endangered specie), can be killed (humans kill and eat a lot of different species of animals) and it's legal to do to them what is usually considered torture if applied to humans (vivisection, dangerous or painful drug experiments).
The Spanish proposal would outlaw this for all the hominids.
FYI there was a proposal in Spain to give to all the non-human Great Apes some very basic rights (they cannot be killed, tortured or keep in captivity).
And the scientific name for Great Apes (humans, chimpanzees, gorillas, and orangutans) is hominids and we have in common more of 97% of our DNA even with the more different of them (this obviously doesn't make them automatically humans).
Well said. A good example is RELAX NG: write the source in the compact syntax and convert it to XML when/if you need it.
A simple compact syntax example:
The equivalent XML (and the RELAX NG XML format is considered much better than, e.g., W3C XML Schema):
(Please ignore the underscores.)
Remember people: XML may be good for data interchange between different applications because every language ever created by the gods has an XML parser, but don't use it for anything else. To quote Phillip J. Eby: Some people, when confronted with a problem, think "I know, I'll use XML." Now they have two problems.
I completely agree with you: the problem with space missions is that even a very small problem can be unsolvable if the hardware is more than 100 million km away!
But even if we completely lose the camera, it will be a big problem but not a disaster for science: there are currently 3 operational spacecrafts orbiting Mars (2 American + 1 European) and High Resolution Stereo Camera on ESA Mars Express, the second best camera after HiRISE with a resolution of up to 2 metre/pixel, is still working and sending back beautiful images.
It's an HTTP URL for an .asx file which in turn point to a .wmv file served over the mms:// protocol. Not exactly what I call an open standard.
Sure, providing a link it's better than the usual windows-only non-standard <object> tag, and I don't expect to find anytime soon an honest ogg (theora+vorbis) file served over an open protocol, but at least the Clinton announcement site offered a .mov file (with H.264 video) over HTTP.
Disclaimer: this is only a technical remark, no political criticism implied here.
Armadillo Aerospace is considering exactly the same fuel. Some of the advantages are relatively high ISP (lower that LH2, but with a much smaller volume) and the fuel and the oxidizer (LOX) have more or less the same volume which can be a very good thing, depending on your vehicle configuration.
Canada.
Chandrayan-1 (the correct spelling is Chandrayaan-1) isn't a manned mission.
I work on a small euro-american space project (I'm in the european side) and my experience is very different from yours: everything is in English units and when I asked surprised why, I have been told: "everything in the aerospace industry is still in English units." This caused significant problems even for apparently simple things like screws.
Granted this is only a small suborbital project, things may be different when going orbital.
FYI, ADD here is the Attention Deficit Disorder.
I don't agree with you on this, but FYI the GNU GPL version 3 will be compatible with the Apache 2.0 license. See this RMS transcript from the Free Software Foundation Europe. The combined GPLv3+Apache2 work can be released under the GPLv3+"patent termination protection" license.
If people think that the GNU GPLv2 is viral wait until everyone realise what are the implications of the GPLv3 new compatibility! And, yes, this is one of the many reasons why I really like the GPLv3.