Also, a school has to have SOME standards, as the degree that they issue signifies to others some meaning about that person. Without that degree stating that the person has met some level of standards, the value of the degree for everyone holding it is diminished. Now whether or not those standards should extend to attendance is debatable, but there's plenty of justification for the university dictating terms which persons pursuing a degree must meet.
A good friend of mine has an A+ average. She rarely attends classes, because most of our professors are useless, and just reads the books, spends her time studying, and does better than me. She works harder than most of the students who show up, and spend the lecture chatting on facebook and watching movies on their laptop (yes, this does happen).
Living in the UK for the last year, I've seen a lots of investment in wind here. On the horizon here in Edinburgh, there's a pretty substantial wind farm. Flying back home I noticed there's another large one in the waters between Ireland and Wales.
We've just created a sort of triangle, only it's a triangle with one side of length ci, where c is a constant and i is the infamous imaginary number, the square root of -1. Our second side is of length c2, a second constant. our third side is of length NaN, or not a number, null, etc. We've effectively just linked together the real, the imaginary, and the nonexistent, and proven that the three are distinctly different. Sweet! I shall hereby dub thee the 'Awesome Triangle!
You smoke pot, don't you? And have no idea what "proof" means either apparently.
Seriously though, this is complete rubbish. I've barely scratched the surface on approximations of TSP, but I understand enough that after reading these "solutions" I can see that the author has only the faintest idea about the problem. He thinks he is solving a problem, when he is merely approximating it, and offers no actual proofs that any of his ideas are even good at approximating, let alone solving. A basic course on algorithms and NP would do him a world of good.
If the author is reading this, please buy and read http://www.amazon.com/Introduction-Algorithms-Third-Thomas-Cormen/dp/0262033844/this book.
27 data points is not enough to draw a strong conclusion.
So why then should the court of public opinion concluded that it's Toyota's fault?
But don't worry, the full source is on the CD. Of course, it's only for visual studios, and even if you get it running on that, it has to be in a specific hard-coded directory called "D:/book/code/examples" or something.
Microsoft employees, for the most part, are just geeks, and don't hate some passionate loyalty to the company. The management know this, and know not to dare get in the way of geek gadget-love.
As long as life is not understood (and it isn't, unless we'll have succeeded in building living cells from scratch), it is not unreasonable to be cautious.
Your brain waves make me feel ill. At all times. What? You can't prove me wrong, because life is not understood yet, so, to be cautious, please move to the other side of the ocean, so that I can feel better. It's the only way. What's that? You think this argument makes no sense? That it's unreasonable for everyone else around me to have to change their lives to suit my personal form of insanity?
The flush toilet is the basis of Western civilization. -- Alan Coult