You know, if you were just joking, then you should have just let it go. Now you look like you're grasping at straws to justify what you said, since any (reasonably-educated) native English speaker will be familiar with the definition of 'fraction' that he was using.

Sarten-X is 100% correct — and his original post was hilarious in my opinion. Fractions do not need to be less than 1 (or greater than -1, for that matter). Common English definitions are irrelevant here; this is a mathematical definition.

Actually, any real number (not just the rationals) is a fraction. For example, pi/4 is a fraction (one fourth of pi).

For that matter, any complex number is also a fraction.

>Imaging with Hubble, they located a small red dot which, over the course of the following two weeks, dimmed.

So that's why my cat has been frantically pawing at the sky for the last two weeks!

- The right size for buttons is about the size of my finger (Which is fairly constant for most adults)

FTFY

Is anyone as tired as I am over these security risks, especially from CNET? I remember when it was announced that someone could spy thru your window, video tape the lights on your modem and decode your communication.

Videotape?!? That would not even work for 100 baud modems. An NTSC videotape will give you 60 fields per second; a PAL videotape will give you 50 fps.

We already have laser reflectors on the moon. Left by Apollo 13 or so I believe.

Um, Apollo 13 never made it to the Moon.

Apollo 13 article on Wikipedia

Software that's single-threaded, no it doesn't benefit from more cores.

Well that's not entirely true. If you're running several single-threaded programs simultaneously, your computer will still run faster with multiple cores than it would with a single core (at the same clock speed, obviously). But if a single-threaded program is the only thing running on the system, then it won't see benefits from multiple cores.

you can use a 2 finger "stretch" gesture to zoom in.

That's what she said.

Thanks, I appreciate that. :)

I could definitely have chosen "flexible" or "nimble" or some other random adjective. It didn't quite just pop into my mind, though -- I'm definitely familiar with the agile programming movement and have seen it in action in very positive ways. (I'm sure it can go horribly wrong, just like anything.) So, the title isn't completely an accident. I do want to evoke some of the agile manifesto: focus on interactions and individuals, responsiveness in the face of change, and so on. In general, I think we need to make some room for "worse is better" underneath the Fedora umbrella (while still keeping the core to a "the right thing" model) -- that's not agile in specific but is part of the same vein from which it developed.

Question all you like. I don't mind. However, I'd really prefer questions to the trolling. *

Which, given all the posts, by tibit, I have to assume is the case. If I were to take it seriously, though, I would say that probably what's happened is that much of the concrete part of the proposal uses labels which are unlikely to be familiar to someone not active in Fedora development (Fedora Formulas, Software Collections) without explaining them. You might know OpenShift, but "OpenShift Gears, decoupled" just sounds like gibberish. Even the term "base design" sounds vague but actually relates to a specific ongoing effort (http://sched.co/11El9OZ).

I didn't really think about how this would read to an outside audience, because Fedora developers are the intended audience, and because this is a presentation, not an in-depth white paper.

(* I know, I know, am I new here or what?)