I found this somewhere recently:
# let us consider the point c=(-0.75,X) of the complex plane, that is a point straight over the "neck" of the Mandelbrot set.
# Let n be the number of iterations from which the characteristic quadratic sequence of the Mandelbrot set Z(n+1)=Zn^2+c with Z0=-0 diverges (Zn2). With X being smaller and smaller we have: lim(X * n) = pi

So, I guess we have to figure out how to do recursive relations with a shotgun. (speaking of rednecks and relations... wedding...)

How unsurprising you posted as AC, given the complete falsehood of everything you wrote.

Aside from that minor observation (!!)), maybe you could try taking a look at the current, large, polio outbreaks in certain Middle East and African regions due to a lack of innoculations there, for starters.

So, no requirement for ABS in Canada? (eh?) But I agree in principle w/ your sentiment, seeing as Boston-area drivers seem to believe that 4-wheel drive means your braking system has a 1.5 g-factor even in slush and ice. And from what we see regularly on the news, Florida and LA drivers believe it's safer to speed up during a torrential downpour.

Like, say, Windows? //rim shot

The crow shrieked "Corn! Corn! Corn!" until the researcher, one J. Snow, Wall Cmdr, tossed some corn its way.

Screw credit monitoring: what we need is some CongressSockPuppets with enough nerve to pass restrictions on the credit bureaus. For starters, they could require all negatory information to be redacted upon receipt of a notarized sworn statement from the account holder (until the credit bureau can provide proof to the contrary, said proof not being based on random letters from banks or collection agencies, etc). The current situation, which is essentially "prove a negative," is worthy of the Courtroom of the King&Queen of Hearts.

After that, there are plenty of smaller things to fix. One example: I lost a few points because my monthly spending on one credit card was over 75% of my limit *on that card* . Never mind I always pay on time and in full, or that I happen to have another card with 5 times the credit limit. The lack of logic in the ratings algorithms is appalling.

Did you beat the horse with a wood, steel, or Cesium club? And does a horse carcass throw sparks?

"Hey, we were going to *use* that horse head!" -- The Godfather.

They gonna call it the "uber-cloud" ?

Or maybe the "mother of all clouds" ?

Anyway, once Cisco's got it up & running, just imagine a Beowulf cluster of them. Or don't.

I believe Scotty would like a word or two with you. Are you the same fellow who called his ship a garbage scow?

Here's hoping I recover some nerdcred after yesterday's Sherlock/Mycroft disaster:

"We Analyze Nothing."

Plastic surgery FTW, eh?

Ok, in seriousness, I could see this as a great tool for anthropologists, but so far as crime-solving goes, it's just about guaranteed to have a false- positive rate about 100x the true positive rate. OTOH, that works for the TSA...

mea culpa.

I hearby turn in 2^N nerd cards.

Turn in your nerd card, as you obviously don't understand that Sherlock can easily launch moon boulders into ballistic trajectories whose CEP is sufficiently small to wreak havoc on Earth cities.

RU serious? Have you not seen the electric car flying over buildings, or the (Hyundai?) sedan flying up a ramp, landing on an elevated commuter train, then jumping into the parking lot?

From a mathematical perspective, "solving" the cube means generating the command sequence. Physicallly manipulating the cube is unrelated. So what's the big deal here. Is it:

a) an algorithm which comes up with a solution of 22 moves every time?
b) an algorithm which does (a) in much less elapsed time than previous algorithms (or CPUs)?
c) Some cool shiny robotic manipulators which can twist a (well greased, well-aligned) Rubik's cube faster than previous manipulators?