...you insensitive clod!

AKA the ruin-the-economy candidate.

Human progress since the Industrial Revolution has been based on cheap energy. While in principle I'm all for clean energy, on the timeline he's talking about it will result in a massive increase in energy costs, essentially running us backwards. (It does create jobs, but only in the broken windows sense)

He needs to find a position that's still progressive, but realistic. Voters, even the ones that are actually well-informed and think this through, are not going to pick a candidate that puts clean energy over the economy and their individual well-being.

I am not concerning myself with representations of mathematical values, except to show the parallels of why it works. IEEE 754 defines a positive and negative infinity, because it has a specific signed bit. Thus, it's easier to define a positive and negative infinity than to produce special code to handle "exceptions"... note also that IEEE 754 defines a positive and negative 0 separately. No, they really do.

My model is a theoretical one that hasn't reached mathematical consensus, and it likely never will. I just note that this is an argument for infinity being signless.

Ah it doubles as a nice Chromebook!

Plutonium dioxide has an 88 year half life, and is water insoluble. When RTGs are used, they're heavily encased and designed to survive catastrophic launch failures, and have done so, only to be collected and reused on later launches. If they had put an RTG on Philae, your chances of being harmed by it would have been approximately equal to your chances of being devoured by an Indomitus Rex. Unless you're planning to break into the sealed casing, slice off a chunk PuO2, and put in in a sandwich, you'll probably be okay.

It would have massed about 1/10th the solar panels and lasted longer. "Justified" doesn't enter the equation.

Let's assume that the set of integers is Z_\inf. K? We can now define negative numbers as the 1's compliment of the number plus 1. 1 = 999...9998. then plus 1 = 999...9999. This plus 1 results in an infinite carry out, and the value 0. Awesome.

Now, let's look at 1/0, we see that from the right it's approaching \inf from the bottom, while we see that from the left, it's approaching \inf from the top. Now, at 0, obviously these two will be coincident, because we're working in Z_\inf, that value is the same value. Namely, -\inf = \inf. But that doesn't make sense, only 0 can be it's own negative!

But we've already known for a long time about Z_n where n is even, -(-128) in Z_256 is -128. -(-65536) in Z_2^16 = -65536. So, there's no trouble in making -\inf = \inf ...

Basically, 1/0 grows so fast that it manages to wrap around the entire infinite series of numbers. Which is exactly what it does...

Dude... you perhaps haven't heard, but computers run entirely upon theoretical mathematics... I know, it's popular to say it's engineering, rather than mathematics, but it's mathematics. It's always been mathematics.

The problems with a closed source blackbox system always show it's face. The string entered into a search bar is only a very small part of your search.

The rest happens by watching your browsing habbits when other sites install tracking code which phones home and keeps a running tab on you. Most of this tracking code by all accounts are trojan horses. Most web developers probably aren't even aware of what they are participating in when they install such things.

If we could see all the information Google uses to find our results, many would probably be appalled. If you wanted a giant Advanced Search page that let you tweak your settings such as age, gender, browing habits, then getting a job at Google as an analyst is probably what you want. Openness and transparency would make the clean and friendly homepage at Google look a lot uglier and intimidating to the end users.

We need to liberate search through open source. However, the framers of such must be careful to not create some monster like Bitcoin that allows all to see all transactions. I sometimes wonder where coders with no "feel" for security earn their wings. /endrant

I see this with many of the older light airplanes. Types like the Cessna 150 and Piper Cub were designed when people weighed less, and it's difficult to get two 2015-size people plus a usable fuel load in either. There have been commercial plane crashes due to portly passengers (e.g. Air Midwest 5481).

I can fly a Cessna 152 solo with full fuel tanks, but if I have anybody in the plane with me I have to calculate how much fuel I can carry without being overweight. I can't do anything meaningful with a 150, and I'm not that heavy.

...laura

and just like the X-files, the FBI agent is being jerked around and his progress closely followed.

What's the refresh rate and response time?

It sounds like they're using Samsung's 1440p AMOLED panels. So the response time is almost instant, but I don't know if those panels can be driven at 90Hz.

I get where you're coming from, but at the same time that's not something I would call censorship.

Censorship is when speech is suppressed. Slashdot choosing not to publish stories is scummy, but it's not the same as preventing users from speaking about it. You can still talk about it, Slashdot just isn't give you a specific platform for it.

When comments get deleted and users get banned, then that's censorship.

while at the same time censoring discussion and posts related to the recent and ongoing Sourceforge controversy

Apparently I've missed something. What precisely got censored?