The law was just brought in so that the law matches the constitution (and this was acknowledged by those that passed it). It's written in such a way no one will ever be prosecuted. The only alternative would be a referendum to change the constitution, and what politician wants to seem like they support blasphemy? As well as that, when the law was passed the next referendum was for the Lisbon treaty, and the government wouldn't have wanted to hold the two referendums together (as it'd make the Christian Right more likely to vote, and so possibly sink the Lisbon referendum).
Also horsecrap. I don't think it is possible to say "yes, xyz is at fault, and nothing but xyz". I agree, coddling is a problem. I currently attend the equivalent of high school, and there are plenty of people who fit into this category. But certainly, parents not playing an active role in their children's lives is just as bad as parents playing too much of a role.
Just because *you* turned out fine, doesn't mean that everyone will. After all, everyone is different, reacts to problems differently and no one shares the same childhood (if someone is brought up by TV, there are in many cases other corollary problems). I too was mostly brought up by TV, and (thus far) I haven't exhibited any violent tendencies. However, I also doubt that if my parents had paid too much attention to me that I'd be assaulting people. I think, like most things, a combination of factors causes these problems (although IANA psychologist).
Possibly, but most likely to scare him. Especially given that they raided his house at 2AM. Their goal seems to be to try to frighten people out of questioning the authorities and the 'security' measures they've put in place (even when they're fundamentally flawed, ad in this case).
It completely depends on what I'm looking for. To quickly get the definition of a word, "define: foobar" in Firefox's search box is about as fast as you can get. If I'm looking for some application's project page, again Google. Generally, if I'm looking for some small piece of information, Google can be much faster than sifting through lengthy Wikipedia articles for one particular definition or link.
However, if I'm looking for information on a well-defined subject, or a short biography, Wikipedia works best. Sure, some of the information isn't completely accurate, but it's not like I'm using the information for anything mission critical. I think that it's important to keep in mind that Google is a search engine and Wikipedia is an encyclopedia, which serve two different purposes. Before Wikipedia, online encyclopedias weren't very well known, and so people generally used a search engine for both. Nowadays that seems to be changing - Wikipedia for a synopsis on a topic, Google to find a more authoritative source.
What are these guys think-...oh wait, *Irish*. I should've guessed. We Irish are renowned for our crazy drunken exaggeration. If/. was to accept all *my* drunken plans to change the world, there'd be no room left for the dupes that we all love so much.
Actually, his solution is correct. His workings are complete bullshit though. That last line, for example, is hilarious. "52(37 - 7)/2 = 3.313693059". 780=3.313693059? This whole review has to be a joke, otherwise I want to go to college wherever this guy got his degree. Seriously, if they give a degree to a guy who believes cos B = 3/4 => sin B = 7/4, I'll have a PhD in no time!
Here's some real maths, high school style, without any quadrance, and certainly without any lines like "4*2=42":
As the author correctly stated, cos B = 3/4 => B = 41.4096 deg. Hence BDC = 180-45-41.4096=93.5904. Then, by the sine rule, (sin 93.5904)/5 = (sin 41.4096)/d =>.199607447 = (sin 41.4096)/d => d = 3.31.
Your statement "If you have a triangle where the shortest side is 4, no line from any of the vertices to anywhere on the opposite line could possibly be less than 4." is not quite correct. I could write a long dissection of this statement, but I don't think this is the right place:)
Slashdot Mirror
The law was just brought in so that the law matches the constitution (and this was acknowledged by those that passed it). It's written in such a way no one will ever be prosecuted. The only alternative would be a referendum to change the constitution, and what politician wants to seem like they support blasphemy? As well as that, when the law was passed the next referendum was for the Lisbon treaty, and the government wouldn't have wanted to hold the two referendums together (as it'd make the Christian Right more likely to vote, and so possibly sink the Lisbon referendum).
Hah, I was wondering who would make an Ender's Game reference. Shame my mod points just expired.
...they're trying to install Tetris? Haven't they heard of Crack Attack?
Also horsecrap. I don't think it is possible to say "yes, xyz is at fault, and nothing but xyz". I agree, coddling is a problem. I currently attend the equivalent of high school, and there are plenty of people who fit into this category. But certainly, parents not playing an active role in their children's lives is just as bad as parents playing too much of a role.
Just because *you* turned out fine, doesn't mean that everyone will. After all, everyone is different, reacts to problems differently and no one shares the same childhood (if someone is brought up by TV, there are in many cases other corollary problems). I too was mostly brought up by TV, and (thus far) I haven't exhibited any violent tendencies. However, I also doubt that if my parents had paid too much attention to me that I'd be assaulting people. I think, like most things, a combination of factors causes these problems (although IANA psychologist).
No, no, yoo left out the crucial step:
1. Start-up company
2. ???
3. Google buy-out
4. Profit!
You're on /. so that shouldn't be a problem.
*ducks*
Possibly, but most likely to scare him. Especially given that they raided his house at 2AM. Their goal seems to be to try to frighten people out of questioning the authorities and the 'security' measures they've put in place (even when they're fundamentally flawed, ad in this case).
It completely depends on what I'm looking for. To quickly get the definition of a word, "define: foobar" in Firefox's search box is about as fast as you can get. If I'm looking for some application's project page, again Google. Generally, if I'm looking for some small piece of information, Google can be much faster than sifting through lengthy Wikipedia articles for one particular definition or link.
However, if I'm looking for information on a well-defined subject, or a short biography, Wikipedia works best. Sure, some of the information isn't completely accurate, but it's not like I'm using the information for anything mission critical. I think that it's important to keep in mind that Google is a search engine and Wikipedia is an encyclopedia, which serve two different purposes. Before Wikipedia, online encyclopedias weren't very well known, and so people generally used a search engine for both. Nowadays that seems to be changing - Wikipedia for a synopsis on a topic, Google to find a more authoritative source.
Yeah, these days *real* programmers code in AJAX.
*Hides*
What are these guys think-...oh wait, *Irish*. I should've guessed. We Irish are renowned for our crazy drunken exaggeration. If /. was to accept all *my* drunken plans to change the world, there'd be no room left for the dupes that we all love so much.
Actually, his solution is correct. His workings are complete bullshit though. That last line, for example, is hilarious. "52(37 - 7)/2 = 3.313693059". 780=3.313693059? This whole review has to be a joke, otherwise I want to go to college wherever this guy got his degree. Seriously, if they give a degree to a guy who believes cos B = 3/4 => sin B = 7/4, I'll have a PhD in no time! Here's some real maths, high school style, without any quadrance, and certainly without any lines like "4*2=42": As the author correctly stated, cos B = 3/4 => B = 41.4096 deg. Hence BDC = 180-45-41.4096=93.5904. Then, by the sine rule, (sin 93.5904)/5 = (sin 41.4096)/d => .199607447 = (sin 41.4096)/d => d = 3.31.
Your statement "If you have a triangle where the shortest side is 4, no line from any of the vertices to anywhere on the opposite line could possibly be less than 4." is not quite correct. I could write a long dissection of this statement, but I don't think this is the right place :)
Nah, we'll all be using Slackware with 2.6 kernel (released a few weeks earlier).
Yeah, capitalization is important. It's the difference between "I helped Uncle Jack off his horse" and "I helped uncle jack off his horse".