Comment Re:No, this is not what the developing world needs (Score 1) 89
So why don't they focus on training to use the equipment they already have?
So why don't they focus on training to use the equipment they already have?
see if that fork
Good luck with that...
That still doesn't answer his question.
Yes, you can see that there is a thing that is 1/100th the width of a hair. Can you see what it is? Can you distinguish it from other similarly sized things in close proximity?
I've never once seen a browser do that, and if I did I would stop using it immediately. That's a huge security issue.
And a very strong reason why we won't be sending our child to public schools.
Do you really think that just because a school is private bullying automagically will cease to happen? Allow me to burst that bubble for you.
A private school for children of Sweden's wealthy elite has been shut down following accusations that boys were burned with hot irons by older pupils.
The latest allegations about severe bullying at Lundsberg boarding school emerged at the weekend after one of the boys was taken to hospital and the police were informed. Nine boys were involved in the assault, police said.
Following a visit to the school in rural Värmland, in south-west Sweden, inspectors announced its immediate closure until measures are taken to prevent abuse.
But I'd say that 99.999% of today's programmers have no fucking clue what code optimization really means..
CPU power is cheap, let the compiler optimize what it can, take care of larger bottlenecks, and who cares? The rapid development we have now allows us to progress at an amazing rate because it usually doesn't matter if we waste a few cycles. You can continue to do F1 at the edges, but the mass in the middle is fine with a Civic.
He has recited pi to the last decimal digit. Twice.
He doesn't even need a Mossberg 500. He just tells a circle to fucking square itself.
What will people not do to get an IgNobel Prize?
Honestly, I'd be OK with another space race. Even if we lose.
Just because he thinks you're an idiot doesn't necessarily mean he disagrees with what you said. Even a broken clock is right once a day, maybe he thinks you were just an idiot who happened to be right?
No, the original statement is a fabrication so the conclusion is a non-sequitur.
The original statement from rubycodez was as follows:
we cannot ascertain the temperatures of past centuries with enough precision to make any such study nor claims
That's not a fabrication. That's just wrong. Calling it a fabrication bestows too much grace on it.
Sadly, the anti-science (and particularly anti-AGW) crowd has no shortage of wrong statements, because unlike scientists, they are not tethered to facts.
We may not have direct records but that's not what the paper presents. Science is not always able to have first-hand accounts, but only indirect data sources, and yet we rely on it for a shocking amount of findings. Will you start dismissing those as well because they don't suit your agenda? Because an agenda it must be, for you to make such unreasonable demands and yet draw unrelated conclusions from them, while trusting other science based on similar methods.
This. Claiming that indirect evidence does not count is a desperate, sophomoric attempt by the anti-science crowd.
Recall the recent debate between Bill Nye and Ken Ham on the theory of evolution. One of Ken Ham's favourite strategies was an attempt to make a distiction between "observational" science and "historical" science, with the latter being invalid in his opinion. How often did we hear him say "you don't know, you weren't there" in response to indirect evidence?
What if, after the debate, Ken Ham had walked to the parking lot of his museum and discovered that the driver-side front fender of his car was damaged, with debris from his front driver-side headlight strewn on the ground? He would no doubt conclude that someone hit his car while he was parked there. But not so fast, Mr. Ham. Let's apply your own standards of evidence: You don't know. You weren't there.
(IAalsoAP) I'd think the EMP can be reasonably mitigated with a timely chaff release, or similar shielding ideas.
A Faraday Cage built around the rail-gun might help with shielding. I'm not sure how chaff would help in that regard, unless the pieces of chaff are comparable to or larger than the majority of the wavelengths in the EMP's power-spectrum.
However, I'm wondering about the path of the projectile. The thing is hypersonic, the path will be superheated - that might ionize the air. And ionized air *will* show up on radar. You have a 200 mile trajectory pointing right back at the launch site. Don't worry if you miss a few miles here and there, or even if the launch site is beyond your horizon.
Excellent point. We've been bouncing radio waves off ionized gases (aka plasmas) since the time of Marconi.
Makes sense to me - the primary function of the wings is to provide lift "up" - so for a more effective turn you pivot so that the maneuver is always "up" before you execute.
To write good code is a worthy challenge, and a source of civilized delight. -- stolen and paraphrased from William Safire
