IIRC, 21dB SNR giver a raw bit error rate of about 1 in 10E10. (that would in the order of magnitude be one flipped bit in 100 hours of cd quality audio playback). 1960's audio tape has already about 60 dB SNR, and keep in mind the log scale. Go figure.
We do actually speak of Newtonian mechanics, for what it's worth. Probably more than anyone in science actually speaks of Darwinian evolution. So we've sort of already done what this guy is asking for, it seems?
Why Newtonian mechanics? Simple:
If it is very small: use quantum mechanics If there are a lot of little things to describe: use statistical mechanics If it travels very fast: use relativistic mechanics And so on.
The non-quantum, non-statistical, non-relativistic, etc... version was the first to be formally described. Calling it Newtonian is the simple way of distinguishing it from the more complex variants. Among physicists, you would refer to classical mechanics, which also refers to its historical status.
In the city of Zadar (Croatia), paying for parking by phone is already common practice for several years. You send your license number by SMS, and extend it by the hour, as often as required. Zadar is a tourist town, so here is nicely fits the spot.
... you copy a text verbatim from
another site, you may want to mention that?
It's not that difficult:" Credit & Copyright: Thomas Nylen & Andrew Fountain (PSU), NASA, NSF Russell Croman". There.
My quantum mechanics teacher has a very good solution to this. He had a file with 100 problems. An exam was a random draw of 3 of those. You could get all problems, plus all completely elaboreated answers from him if you asked for it. If you could memorize the correct answers to those 100 questions, you knew what was required for the subject...
> I guess Rosen won't be happy until each and every > pirate is charged with crimes against humanity and > convicted by the International Court of Justice"
The US has to accept the court's authority first... until then US citizens can't be sued.
Where I work, we make software that needs to run on both windows and unices. I have a win2k desktop with DevStudio, and a suse with (guess...) gcc. I develop on both, and both configurations sometimes bug me.
- find in files (visual): of course, you can make a script that greps your source dirs, but having it one click away is really more convenient than having your own custom grep script
- makefiles (nix) vs. projectfiles (visual): whoever designed the gui for the projectfile settings was a complete idiot. Any program of reasonable size uses libraries, or is divided in libraries itself. Why have only a 80(?)-character field in which to specify those libs? There's lots of such stupid things in that single window... Our makefiles handle linux{i386,ppc,alpha},{open,free}bsd,solaris,irix... and you never have to wonder whether they will live after cvs is done with them (projectfiles are really allergic for unix-returns)
{flamebait}
- editors: Once you use Emacs (or Vi, for that matter) for any appreciable amount of time, you feel _really_ handicapped when you have to edit in the Visual editor. Yes, you can plugin an editor of your choice in Visual. But Visual's default is pretty ascetic.
{/flamebait}
- debuggers: when you have to dig into dynamic libraries, Visual really kicks gdb-ass (shutup you ddd wimps!). And gprof doesn't really cut it if you can have Rational Quantify. AFAIK, Purify is slowly being phased out for unices, which is a shame. And edit-and-continue (Visual) is also really nice. The commands-command (gdb) is a life saver!
And so on and so on. If you use both on a regular basis, and use them seriously, you run into the limits of the tools. Not a problem. I find myself switching back and forth, and using the strongpoints of whatever tool is needed at whatever moment. Use the right tool for the right job. Sometimes a gui is better. Sometimes a cli is better.
Slashdot Mirror
IIRC, 21dB SNR giver a raw bit error rate of about 1 in 10E10. (that would in the order of magnitude be one flipped bit in 100 hours of cd quality audio playback). 1960's audio tape has already about 60 dB SNR, and keep in mind the log scale. Go figure.
We do actually speak of Newtonian mechanics, for what it's worth. Probably more than anyone in science actually speaks of Darwinian evolution. So we've sort of already done what this guy is asking for, it seems?
Why Newtonian mechanics? Simple:
If it is very small: use quantum mechanics
If there are a lot of little things to describe: use statistical mechanics
If it travels very fast: use relativistic mechanics
And so on.
The non-quantum, non-statistical, non-relativistic, etc... version was the first to be formally described. Calling it Newtonian is the simple way of distinguishing it from the more complex variants. Among physicists, you would refer to classical mechanics, which also refers to its historical status.
In the city of Zadar (Croatia), paying for parking by phone is already common practice for several years. You send your license number by SMS, and extend it by the hour, as often as required. Zadar is a tourist town, so here is nicely fits the spot.
(see e.g. http://www.inyourpocket.com/croatia/split/Arriving__and__Transport/category/65134-SMS_Parking.html).
-sigh-
When quoting the article, maybe you can mention you are doing so? Or maybe the 'editors' failed to nitice the quote?
Not 'just before the toll booth', but 20 km before the booth. In Europe, that constitutes a non-trivial distance in some places.
... and it disappears when you look at it.
... you copy a text verbatim from another site, you may want to mention that? It's not that difficult:" Credit & Copyright: Thomas Nylen & Andrew Fountain (PSU), NASA, NSF Russell Croman". There.
Actually, it was in the Volkskrant (=national Dutch newspaper) last week, on page 5 or so. It was a small piece, 6 or 7 lines.
If SCO goes bankrupt, would that void the NDA?
My quantum mechanics teacher has a very good solution to this. He had a file with 100 problems. An exam was a random draw of 3 of those. You could get all problems, plus all completely elaboreated answers from him if you asked for it. If you could memorize the correct answers to those 100 questions, you knew what was required for the subject...
> I guess Rosen won't be happy until each and every
> pirate is charged with crimes against humanity and
> convicted by the International Court of Justice"
The US has to accept the court's authority first... until then US citizens can't be sued.
A modern windmill can get up to 2 MW. 30 windmills is not that much, really?
Enron's accountants?
Where I work, we make software that needs to run on both windows and unices. I have a win2k desktop with DevStudio, and a suse with (guess...) gcc. I develop on both, and both configurations sometimes bug me.
. .. and you never have to wonder whether they will live after cvs is done with them (projectfiles are really allergic for unix-returns)
- find in files (visual): of course, you can make a script that greps your source dirs, but having it one click away is really more convenient than having your own custom grep script
- makefiles (nix) vs. projectfiles (visual): whoever designed the gui for the projectfile settings was a complete idiot. Any program of reasonable size uses libraries, or is divided in libraries itself. Why have only a 80(?)-character field in which to specify those libs? There's lots of such stupid things in that single window... Our makefiles handle linux{i386,ppc,alpha},{open,free}bsd,solaris,irix
{flamebait}
- editors: Once you use Emacs (or Vi, for that matter) for any appreciable amount of time, you feel _really_ handicapped when you have to edit in the Visual editor. Yes, you can plugin an editor of your choice in Visual. But Visual's default is pretty ascetic.
{/flamebait}
- debuggers: when you have to dig into dynamic libraries, Visual really kicks gdb-ass (shutup you ddd wimps!). And gprof doesn't really cut it if you can have Rational Quantify. AFAIK, Purify is slowly being phased out for unices, which is a shame. And edit-and-continue (Visual) is also really nice. The commands-command (gdb) is a life saver!
And so on and so on. If you use both on a regular basis, and use them seriously, you run into the limits of the tools. Not a problem. I find myself switching back and forth, and using the strongpoints of whatever tool is needed at whatever moment. Use the right tool for the right job. Sometimes a gui is better. Sometimes a cli is better.
> Oops -- make that 119 million miles, not 199.
> I'm always trying to help out NASA.
Well, 119 miles times 1.6 km/mile is getting close to 199 km (+- 5 %). Lots of people make conversion error nowadays...