Wow. This is completely unlike Java. Microsoft is really innovating here. Just think how fast interpreted code could run if you optimize the interpreter. I wonder why Sun hasn't thought of that? I'm going to send them an e-mail right now with my suggestion.
The scale is logarithmic because, get this, the human ear has a logarithmic response.
So while I'm sure there's some variation over the entire range, if you were to do a test, plotting the smallest noticible change in sound pressure on log graph paper, you'd wind up with a more or less straight line.
Redundant? I only posted this once. If there's anything redundant about me, it's my clue. I can see you have no clue, so you can have my extra if you want.
Best computer support in any category that I've run into was back in the very early '90's. Phar-Lap had a bunch of smart guys there who wrote their DOS extender. I called them once to ask them a simple question, and happened to mention some of the frustrating things I was running into on an unrelated problem. Without even blinking, the support guy proceeded to give me great advice on how to fix the problem, and gave me a detailed explanation at the BIOS level of what was going wrong. I was amazed. They didn't have to do that, first of all. The level of pure competence displayed by a tech support person is something that I still remember clearly.
Think about it: at the north pole, you're just spinning in place. At the equator, you move 1000 miles east every hour. You can take advantage of that movement to save fuel.
Check out the hypergolic propellants that the proton uses. This is not your typical kerosine or H2 and LOX rocket. The propellants ignite on contact, and produce lots of nitrogen oxides. The exhaust is orange.
BTW, the U.S. Titan ICBM's used this same type of propellant.
Even the great French impressionists were snubbed by the mainstream art circles when they started out. Can you imagine what people would say if a gallery refused to show off a Monet because they didn't consider it "art"? Yet, this is exactly what happened.
Professor Abraham Malamat of Hebrew University infers from this that the Hebrews were forced to build the city of Ramasses. "This evidence is circumstantial at best," notes Malamat, "but it's as much as a historian can argue."
I do not think the website you cited says what you think it says. The evidence that the Israelites were in Egypt is extremely poor. I don't find it convincing at all. The fact that the majority of the record is in the Bible only adds to my skepticism.
Re:Hardware companies don't "shift to software" --
on
Compaq Shifts Focus
·
· Score: 4
Microsoft isn't a hardware company, except for their mice, joysticks, keyboards, and frisbees (but I'm still not certain why they keep putting them in CD jewel cases.)
I read it yesterday in the shower. No, I won't explain how I managed to keep the magazine dry -- the solution contains a lot of quantum theory and wax paper and other complicated stuff)
And vaseline. The solution also contains vaseline. But don't switch hands. Vaseline will dissolve the soybean based ink on the lovely pictures of the big machines.
There's actually no good evidence that the Israelites were actually in Egypt. There's no Egyptian records of it, and they wrote a lot of stuff on their buildings. The Israelite written record was probably created about 580BC. Before that, it was an oral history, which could have been embellished.
Dude, take a pill. We were programming Pascal on TRS-80's. He was just telling us what the future of big computers was going to be, and he was DEAD ON. Even this shitty box that I have to work on this week has 4 processors.
He meant that it changed the world of benchmarking forever. Before computers were tested by running Quake, the program of choice was Sublogic Flight Simulator.
This is true for the software side of the 5th gen system, but the major concept for the hardware side, massively parallel supercomputers, is still very much with us. I can remember my high school computer teacher telling us that computers of the future will have multiple processors, and that programming those machines was harder than programming the TRS-80's we had back then. The reason he was telling us all that was because he was reading quite a bit about the 5th gen project in Japan. Turned out he was right.
I guess it must be legal for me to call the senator at his house 400 times a day. IT'S MY RIGHT.
I guess that I can knock on his front door 400 times a day too. I just want to sell him some subscriptions to a pr0n site.
We need more senators like this, expanding the rights of Americans everywhere. Anyone know his address? I want to personally deliver a dump truck of spam and manure to his home address. That's my right too.
Re:Scientific faith is different than religious fa
on
Heredity and Humanity
·
· Score: 1
I will stop if you will likewise understand that at the end of your road lies solipcism, which is way less useful than the scientific method.
Absolute truth does not exist. I suggest that it might be you who is influenced by aesthetics in your search for it. When you need water, you don't need the Holy Grail if a paper cup will suffice.
Re:Scientific faith is different than religious fa
on
Heredity and Humanity
·
· Score: 1
Who said that it is *true*? Nothing can ever 100% prove truth, unless you're in a purely logical setting such as mathematics.
But that matters little. The scientific method is a practical method, and the results are what counts. We don't have anything that's better, so we use the best we do have.
Progress a flimsy term? Hardly. 200 years ago nobody could send spacecraft out of the solar system or decode the human genome. Now we can. Simple idea, glad to help you out with it.
100% truth of the usefulness of the scientific method can never be proven. However, the immense amount of evidence that it works is enough for me. You seem to be caught in the trap of the fallacy of induction. Let me just give you two things: First, you need to be practical - go with what works. Too much idealism can really bog you down in the details. Second, forget about absolute truth. There is no such thing in the real world. Instead, find a way to approximate absolute truth as closely as posible. Get my point?
Slashdot Mirror
Ah, for fuck's sake. My article wasn't a troll. It was either sarchasm, or if your sarchasm detector was broken, I suppose it could pass for a flame.
But a troll? Come on. (eyes roll)
Wow. This is completely unlike Java. Microsoft is really innovating here. Just think how fast interpreted code could run if you optimize the interpreter. I wonder why Sun hasn't thought of that? I'm going to send them an e-mail right now with my suggestion.
The scale is logarithmic because, get this, the human ear has a logarithmic response.
So while I'm sure there's some variation over the entire range, if you were to do a test, plotting the smallest noticible change in sound pressure on log graph paper, you'd wind up with a more or less straight line.
Redundant? I only posted this once. If there's anything redundant about me, it's my clue. I can see you have no clue, so you can have my extra if you want.
Best Schwartzenegger accent:
"It's NOT a tumor"
Best computer support in any category that I've run into was back in the very early '90's. Phar-Lap had a bunch of smart guys there who wrote their DOS extender. I called them once to ask them a simple question, and happened to mention some of the frustrating things I was running into on an unrelated problem. Without even blinking, the support guy proceeded to give me great advice on how to fix the problem, and gave me a detailed explanation at the BIOS level of what was going wrong. I was amazed. They didn't have to do that, first of all. The level of pure competence displayed by a tech support person is something that I still remember clearly.
Think about it: at the north pole, you're just spinning in place. At the equator, you move 1000 miles east every hour. You can take advantage of that movement to save fuel.
Check out the hypergolic propellants that the proton uses. This is not your typical kerosine or H2 and LOX rocket. The propellants ignite on contact, and produce lots of nitrogen oxides. The exhaust is orange.
BTW, the U.S. Titan ICBM's used this same type of propellant.
The number one saying in American households in the year 2018:
Goddammit who flushed the toilet! My download was almost done.
Actually, Brett IS savage. Check out that crazy crazy hair!
Even the great French impressionists were snubbed by the mainstream art circles when they started out. Can you imagine what people would say if a gallery refused to show off a Monet because they didn't consider it "art"? Yet, this is exactly what happened.
Don't worry, they'll love you when you are dead.
Professor Abraham Malamat of Hebrew University infers from this that the Hebrews were forced to build the city of Ramasses. "This evidence is circumstantial at best," notes Malamat, "but it's as much as a historian can argue."
I do not think the website you cited says what you think it says. The evidence that the Israelites were in Egypt is extremely poor. I don't find it convincing at all. The fact that the majority of the record is in the Bible only adds to my skepticism.
Microsoft isn't a hardware company, except for their mice, joysticks, keyboards, and frisbees (but I'm still not certain why they keep putting them in CD jewel cases.)
Do not underestimate the power of pr0n. If anything could fill the network to capacity, that can.
I read it yesterday in the shower. No, I won't explain how I managed to keep the magazine dry -- the solution contains a lot of quantum theory and wax paper and other complicated stuff)
And vaseline. The solution also contains vaseline. But don't switch hands. Vaseline will dissolve the soybean based ink on the lovely pictures of the big machines.
Damn. That just leaves Zilog then.
There's actually no good evidence that the Israelites were actually in Egypt. There's no Egyptian records of it, and they wrote a lot of stuff on their buildings. The Israelite written record was probably created about 580BC. Before that, it was an oral history, which could have been embellished.
Dude, take a pill. We were programming Pascal on TRS-80's. He was just telling us what the future of big computers was going to be, and he was DEAD ON. Even this shitty box that I have to work on this week has 4 processors.
He meant that it changed the world of benchmarking forever. Before computers were tested by running Quake, the program of choice was Sublogic Flight Simulator.
This is my port for a future processor. Yes, that's right, the NetBSD chip!
begin source----------
bsd
end source------------
Of course, the chip will only need one instruction, making it a RISC machine.
re: 5th generation almost a complete bust
This is true for the software side of the 5th gen system, but the major concept for the hardware side, massively parallel supercomputers, is still very much with us. I can remember my high school computer teacher telling us that computers of the future will have multiple processors, and that programming those machines was harder than programming the TRS-80's we had back then. The reason he was telling us all that was because he was reading quite a bit about the 5th gen project in Japan. Turned out he was right.
Yes. Also, a large hard drive can be measured in jijibytes, sometimes shortened to jujubees.
I guess it must be legal for me to call the senator at his house 400 times a day. IT'S MY RIGHT.
I guess that I can knock on his front door 400 times a day too. I just want to sell him some subscriptions to a pr0n site.
We need more senators like this, expanding the rights of Americans everywhere. Anyone know his address? I want to personally deliver a dump truck of spam and manure to his home address. That's my right too.
I will stop if you will likewise understand that at the end of your road lies solipcism, which is way less useful than the scientific method.
Absolute truth does not exist. I suggest that it might be you who is influenced by aesthetics in your search for it. When you need water, you don't need the Holy Grail if a paper cup will suffice.
Who said that it is *true*? Nothing can ever 100% prove truth, unless you're in a purely logical setting such as mathematics.
But that matters little. The scientific method is a practical method, and the results are what counts. We don't have anything that's better, so we use the best we do have.
Progress a flimsy term? Hardly. 200 years ago nobody could send spacecraft out of the solar system or decode the human genome. Now we can. Simple idea, glad to help you out with it.
100% truth of the usefulness of the scientific method can never be proven. However, the immense amount of evidence that it works is enough for me. You seem to be caught in the trap of the fallacy of induction. Let me just give you two things: First, you need to be practical - go with what works. Too much idealism can really bog you down in the details. Second, forget about absolute truth. There is no such thing in the real world. Instead, find a way to approximate absolute truth as closely as posible. Get my point?