.4% And a several percent boost to the free amount.

DDR, along with almost all desktop memory, has a 64-bit interface. So DDR 400 is at 3200MB/s, and if you go dual-channel you get 6400MB/s. Still, having bulk storage only an order of magnitude below main memory is wonderful.

Equal probability, equal when rounded, sure. Having the exact same occurrence of each digit is not something you can presume without a strong reason.

It's just translated TLDs as far as I can tell. Domain names can already be in Chinese; that's the important part. I think a controversial-content TLD is more news than that.

The problem is exactly that your eyes don't focus at different depths with virtual 3D.

News links off of slashdot, forums, imageboards, wikis, none of these need javascript. I have it on for youtube, even if I don't understand why it's needed to load flash, mail, newegg, and gmane.org. Probably a couple more, but very few out of the total of sites I visit. Saves me a lot of memory, and there are a few sites where javascript actually hurts the experience to take into account.

75%? When I turn off javascript it only seems to affect about a tenth of the sites I visit.

It's an informal discussion; opinions are often phrased that way.

I think haystack first makes more sense as haystack is the subject you're working on, but if the needle is going to be first just make the first parameter optional, don't screw up the pattern.

32bit integers have more precision than 32bit floats, too. You still can't represent 1/3.

Actually, since .5 only affects the exponent, not the mantissa, your example is probably fine.

No, a fallacious argument doesn't go for or against what it concludes, it is merely there. If I claim that 1 + 1 = 2 because fish, the failed argument does not imply it isn't 2.

As far as I'm concerned, the safest and expected way of driving is slightly over the speed limit, matching the speed of most other drivers.

Different namespaces, it's safe to use K for both.

'baud rate' could be parsed incorrectly as 'rate of bauds', or correctly as 'rate (type baud)' It's important to make sure it's understood correctly, but I wouldn't say that that wording is actually wrong.