Want to read Slashdot from your mobile device? Point it at m.slashdot.org and keep reading!


Forgot your password?
DEAL: For $25 - Add A Second Phone Number To Your Smartphone for life! Use promo code SLASHDOT25. Also, Slashdot's Facebook page has a chat bot now. Message it for stories and more. Check out the new SourceForge HTML5 Internet speed test! ×

Comment Re:History repeats itself (Score 1) 387

"Time is real" - Einstein might disagree. Time is the imaginary part in the complex equations of space-time.

depending on personal authority, however great , is not part of science. your last sentence says a lot about what is wrong . theoretical assumptions should not be taken for unquestionable facts.

Really ?
.. well... hmmm.. sorry but, just woosh
It's not like it was a very original or super funny joke but it most certainly was an obvious one, you must have been got carried by the overall tone I suppose

Comment Re:Quantum computing in layman's terms (Score 1) 52

I know what you mean, but
This wasn't just any "your everyday typo"
I mean, peek and poke... you know ?
I would also have a hard time being convinced by anyone unfamiliar with how to write peek to have much of a deep insight about computers... and quantum computing at that
I think you were replying to a sort of joking/not so joking reply
But I could be wrong and this could just be our regular grammar nazi :) you probably red-doted him for some reason before after all...

Comment Re:What is the greatest lower bound? (Score 1) 194

The proof as laid out is correct for an arbitrary N. The induction step is to show that it is also true for N+1

Appart for the major woosh, as you didn't get the obvious joke "this holds for any N" -> "no !!! only for N-2" (and I'm not sure at this point that you will even get the hint)
You seem to have a major problem understanding the induction process which you claim to be your prefered and most intuitive way of understanding mathematical proofs. (but since you're a nice person you still admit that your GP's post is good enough for slashdot standards (thank you very much for him/her and the rest of us))
So "The proof as laid out is correct for an arbitrary N" as you said... Why in the world would you need to show that it is also true for N+1 ? N+1 *is* an arbitrary N
Induction is about having specific working examples (not arbitrary !!!) and proving that from here the next candidates must also be valid.
Also, induction is not just about having N and proving N+1, or I could 'prove' you many funny things (sometimes you need more than just one element to get the next and depend on several ones (P(0) and P(1) are true, thus P(2) (depending on the previous two) is true) :)

Comment Re:AMD (Score 1) 310

So there we were, following a nice, civilized, interesting conversation about "alot" vs "a lot", "dumbass" vs "dumb ass", "incorrectly" vs "wrongly", "your" vs "you're", black vs white, good vs evil, ...
I made some popcorn (vs pop corn), I come back, and you completely ruin it by talking about the Xbox One (vs XBone)
Shame on you...

Comment Re:What the fuck is a "Feedly"? (Score 1) 251

Yep, same here
I "noscript block" anything coming from google, block cookies, and only allow them when someone finally calls me to say "hey I sent you an email why don't you answer ?"
I temporarily then accept the cookies, check the mail, block and clean again
I unfortunately have many mails there, but more than that, it's the way I'm supposed to be reached for important notifications, or, say, recover a lost password (from slashdot among others)
So it will take some time, but, I'll be closing this account with great satisfaction soon enough

Slashdot Top Deals

Faith may be defined briefly as an illogical belief in the occurence of the improbable. - H. L. Mencken