gsteinb88

12 ms·

61.
by gsteinb88 12y ago
But as was mentioned in another comment, what you mention as a key appeal for sysadmins is exactly why I can't stand perl. In particular "extremely flexible syntax" makes taking over the sysadmin job from another person, or
62.
by gsteinb88 12y ago
Ah yeah, to be fair it's not a _huge_ correction, but in what I do (single-mode confocal microscopy) it definitely becomes an issue around NA=0.3 when trying to characterize spot sizes and collection efficiency functions. Namely, the o
63.
by gsteinb88 12y ago
Also, ignores that Fourier optics only holds for the paraxial approximation (i.e. the small angle approximation). I'd put the rule of thumb somewhere around a numerical aperture of 0.3 [0] -- beyond that, polarization effects start to
64.
by gsteinb88 12y ago
Fair; I'm more curious about the technical aspects / whether the doubled cost translates into anything more than immediacy.
65.
by gsteinb88 12y ago
Is this at all different from the Melon[0] headband (a Kickstarter backed project from ~a year ago, and half the price)? [0] http://www.thinkmelon.com/
66.
by gsteinb88 12y ago
Very long story short, the overhead in maintaining the link state information in meshed networks swamps the available bandwidth for even modest (think 20-40) numbers of nodes. Basically, as nodes are constantly moving/coming on- and of
67.
by gsteinb88 13y ago
Re: reducing ligature risk. Would having a rigid cable (i.e. hard/unbendable metal shell) that's short be a reasonable solution? Similar to the indiegogo project posted in a sister comment, but could be slightly longer and cheaper
68.
by gsteinb88 13y ago
That was the sarcasm, I think. That there's no need to harvest usernames and phone numbers anymore.
69.
by gsteinb88 13y ago
This is still an open question, and a really good one. The predictive power of quantum theory is amazing; it gives excellent numerical predictions as to the outcome of experiments. But as to how we interpret that, especially the question of
70.
by gsteinb88 13y ago
Canonically, a circle is the set of points equidistant from a given point (the center of the circle). The set of points inside the circle is known as a disc. Generalizing slightly, a circle is a 1-sphere and a disc is a ball in 2 dimensions
71.
by gsteinb88 13y ago
> Entangled particles can't communicate information any better than classical methods. Actually, with the aid of entangled particles, there's also superdense coding, which allows for two-bits-per-qubit coding (i.e. information
72.
by gsteinb88 14y ago
Yes. The fundamental energy requirements come out of the destruction of information from a bit flip (or from a 2 bit -> 1 bit gate). Qubits don't undergo that transition - until the final measurement, they're in a superposition of both
73.
by gsteinb88 14y ago
[Tangent about math articles on Wikipedia] I'd like to respectfully disagree. 'Nonvanishing continuous tangent vector field' is a phrase that can be understood after freshman level multivariable calculus. More generally, Wikipedia articles
74.
by gsteinb88 14y ago
Sometimes, yes. Frequently it's very difficult to explain to a client that the way you[1] interpret the words they[2] are using is rather different than what may be in their head. That is, from the technical perspective it may be 'impossibl
75.
by gsteinb88 14y ago
A search for 'surface keynote' yields, as the top hit, http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OCmudUDv3GA