danbruc

201 ms·

2161.
by danbruc 9y ago
Why would you fire people on such a short notice? No need to hand over things? No interest in providing at least some time to look for a new job? EDIT: To clarify that a bit, I am interested in what the upsides are except for possibly savin
2162.
by danbruc 9y ago
Gornaya Shoria megaliths [1] maybe? But they are not man-made. [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gornaya_Shoria_megaliths
2163.
by danbruc 9y ago
Just randomly clicking through blocks won't give you that much insights. You'll need at least a rather comprehensive list of address together with information what they are used for. Some of the block explorers provide such inform
2164.
by danbruc 9y ago
Is any reasonable good and current analysis available showing what Bitcoins and other cryptocurrencies are actually used for and in what volume?
2165.
by danbruc 9y ago
I don't think it's that obvious, actually I think it's not actually an ordering of the rationals. If this were an ordering of the rationals, then it better included rationals with an infinite number of non-zero decimal digits
2166.
by danbruc 9y ago
I guess the following won't work then. 0 / 0.1, 0.2, 0.3...0.9 / 0.01, 0.02, 0.03...0.09, 0.11, 0.12, 0.13...0.19, 0.21...0.99 / 0.001, 0.002, 0.003...0.009, 0.011, 0.012... And when ever you list x, you also list -x, 1&
2167.
by danbruc 9y ago
But only one of them, Big K, defines the kilogram. So the ones losing mass might just gain mass more slowly than Big K. Or they might even all be losing mass but some more slowly than Big K making them apparently gain mass. I don't kno
2168.
by danbruc 9y ago
Nope. No 9 for you. Also what do you mean with repeating, you aren't suggesting strings with more than 5 symbols, are you?
2169.
by danbruc 9y ago
I don't think so. If you follow the logic of the article to eliminate 6, you essentially have to turn everything too big into integers mod 6. I guess you could also no longer have rational or real numbers or only really limited version
2170.
by danbruc 9y ago
I skimmed it in a bit less than an hour, like reading every second paragraph. If you are not a mathematician and physicist, it will probably take you weeks or months to follow the argument in any detail and even then you will still be far a
2171.
by danbruc 9y ago
The USA interfered with the middle east essentially since the end of the second world war. There were several generation since then and it seems not unreasonable that their motivation is based in different events. While the motivation for 9
2172.
by danbruc 9y ago
There is a 23 lectures course »The early universe« [1] from MIT by Alan Guth, inventor of cosmological inflation. I am only half way through and inflation is only mentioned in the introductory lectures and will not be discussed in more deta
2173.
by danbruc 9y ago
I think you are wrong, observers in different galaxies will agree on the inertial reference frame in which the background radiation is isotropic. The relative velocity between different galaxies will show up as different dipole components i
2174.
by danbruc 9y ago
Many PEG-based parser generators do not support left recursion — requiring grammar authors to use repetition or right recursion instead. But left recursion is the most straightforward way to express left associative operators, which is why
2175.
by danbruc 9y ago
It does and at least the current dotPeek 2017.2.2 decompiles it to else if and does, other than I thought, not allow to customize it.
2176.
by danbruc 9y ago
That is probably (x + 1) % 10 assuming x is non-negative. That kind of code is responsible for quite a bit of the verbosity, the author was obviously not aware of many of the little tricks usually used in this kind of code.
2177.
by danbruc 9y ago
I will try this tomorrow, I am pretty sure dotPeek can recognize and output else if. Might be a coding style option though.
2178.
by danbruc 9y ago
I am not sure about Java decompilers, but the .NET decompilers I have used all perform pattern matching in order to detect and reverse language features implemented with compiler transformations.
2179.
by danbruc 9y ago
Even variable names are usually not lost.
2180.
by danbruc 9y ago
Decompiling .NET or Java binaries usually yields code very close if not identical to the original source code, at least unless an obfuscator was used but that seems not to be the case here. Chances are very good the original source code loo
2181.
by danbruc 9y ago
That actually doesn't look too bad to me. Sure, it's verbose, repetitive, and deeply nested, but just from skimming it, it looks quite comprehensible. Load all the data from files instead of filling huge arrays and maps in code, a
2182.
by danbruc 9y ago
Those are two different things, a badly written article failing to communicate a theory well on the one hand and and a bad theory on the other hand. I wrote the comment because of the former so that people coming to the comments first can d
2183.
by danbruc 9y ago
It is mentioned under the 8086. Intel also produced the 8088 around the same time. This processor was based on the 8086, but with half of the data bus disabled. This loss in bandwidth hurt performance, but as it still had access to up to 1
2184.
by danbruc 9y ago
I can not, I am just an interested layman. I know enough to recognize the article as badly written, I know not enough to provide something better. I can not even point you to further resource because frankly I was unable to figure out what
2185.
by danbruc 9y ago
That's a bad article not really worth reading. The author either did not understand what he is talking about or did a quite bad job communicating the ideas. There are huge gaps in the article and you won't be any wiser after readi
2186.
by danbruc 9y ago
Quantum physics is a vast field, what are you interested in? The basics like single particle quantum mechanics, or quantum field theory, or something very specific like entanglement, the Higgs mechanism, or quantum electrodynamics? Some are
2187.
by danbruc 9y ago
If the proton and muon sizes were different [...] They are different, in fact the muon is believed to be a point particle and not to have any internal structure like, for example, the proton. Nonetheless one can assign a non-zero radius t
2188.
by danbruc 9y ago
$120 billion per year, you missed a factor of 10.
2189.
by danbruc 9y ago
A singularity originally referred to a single point where (the mathematical description of) a field has infinite strength. That's not really true. The term singularity was almost certainly first used in mathematics. Most physicist do
2190.
by danbruc 9y ago
Dependency Inversion ≠ Dependency Injection

More ›