|
How did we all miss this? OK, it's not really a transporter but it's better than transferring information about a quantum state
Linky[^]
|
|
|
|
|
Yes, Captain. Very logical.
... Until you consider that the Internet only works because it can re-retrieve the dual-digit-percentage of packets it loses.
Who needs two legs, anyway? If you've got one, the other one's redundant, no?
I wanna be a eunuchs developer! Pass me a bread knife!
|
|
|
|
|
So long as you know it's gone, you could just run off a mirror image of whichever one's left. That's probably why we've evolved to have bilateral symmetry
|
|
|
|
|
True. It works for jpegs, so why not for mere mortals?
I wanna be a eunuchs developer! Pass me a bread knife!
|
|
|
|
|
Quote: An object at one end of the system is milled down layer-by-layer
I had a friend whose girlfriend did this to him, wasn't a pretty sight...I don't think he called it teleportation though? 
New version: WinHeist Version 2.1.0
My goal in life is to have a psychiatric disorder named after me.
I'm currently unsupervised, I know it freaks me out too but the possibilities are endless.
|
|
|
|
|
But what happens if you don't destroy the original?
Something like this perhaps? http://i.ytimg.com/vi/HLITQXRH70M/hqdefault.jpg[^]
How do you know so much about swallows? Well, you have to know these things when you're a king, you know.
modified 31-Aug-21 21:01pm.
|
|
|
|
|
Excellent! I once read a novel about a Victorian stage magician who had a special vanishing cabinet that effectively cloned him every time he used it. It ended with his rival finding a warehouse of imprisoned copies of him.
|
|
|
|
|
Sounds a lot like the film "The Prestige" http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0482571/[^]
How do you know so much about swallows? Well, you have to know these things when you're a king, you know.
modified 31-Aug-21 21:01pm.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Saw that, pretty cool actually
But as you said, no scotty beam me up till now 
if(this.signature != "")
{
MessageBox.Show("This is my signature: " + Environment.NewLine + signature);
}
else
{
MessageBox.Show("404-Signature not found");
}
|
|
|
|
|
Well, I just realized how much I suck at it.
Marvel at the art of Lars Andersen[^].
|
|
|
|
|
Hmm. I once did an evening class in archery. I won a bottle of wine in an end of term tournament. That was shooting at a standard (large) target across a small school gym and the emphasis was on keeping everything as still and quiet as possible. When we moved outside, things got a lot harder with greater distances and wind to deal with. I don't think any of us would have troubled this chap. If he really is shooting an arrow through an incoming arrow, that is incredible.
|
|
|
|
|
According to Snopes[^] he really is.
So even if it is a bamboo arrow, doesn't change the fact that it's quite incredible as far as I'm concerned.
|
|
|
|
|
In that case, I doff my Robin Hood style hat to him
|
|
|
|
|
That's how I learned archery, when I was a kid -- pushed largely by believing that the comic character Hawkeye was doing it right.
We're talking the sixties and seventies, here. I ended up being unwelcome at archery ranges, because, even though my centre (bullseye) percentage was as high as if not higher than anyone else's, the numbers obviously "lied", because I didn't take twenty-seven minutes to line up a shot, and I didn't use all the latest (utterly useless) bow modifications.
The bow is a fantastic tool. It's like mobile joint between your arms. All you have to do is practice using it as it wants to be used, and you'll do amazing things. But, the same as with anything else, people who dedicate huge amounts of time in learning how to use it "according to processes" (translation: "badly") tend to be very nasty to people who can see the obvious -- in this case, how to send arrows where they really want to go.
It's like everything else: if you practice doing anything as if you were incapable of thought and movement, the result will be cr@p; but if you practice being brilliant, you'll end up being brilliant. That's why organisations that are totally process-centric end up as lumps of rock.
I wanna be a eunuchs developer! Pass me a bread knife!
|
|
|
|
|
He's taken archery to a whole other level!
New version: WinHeist Version 2.1.0
My goal in life is to have a psychiatric disorder named after me.
I'm currently unsupervised, I know it freaks me out too but the possibilities are endless.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Link fail.
What do you get when you cross a joke with a rhetorical question?
---
The metaphorical solid rear-end expulsions have impacted the metaphorical motorized bladed rotating air movement mechanism.
---
Do questions with multiple question marks annoy you???
|
|
|
|
|
Good god, that is amazing! 
|
|
|
|
|
You just need better video editing skills!
No doubt there are literally hundreds of failed attempts that were cut out of the carefully-edited video. His gimmick is speed, not accuracy, and it’s obvious to anyone who actually knows anything about archery that his complete lack of any kind of consistent form is going to require camera tricks and a lot of luck, which is exactly what’s on display here. He may in fact be the fastest archer in the world; he just shouldn’t pretend to be accurate.
"These people looked deep within my soul and assigned me a number based on the order in which I joined."
- Homer
|
|
|
|
|
Yeah, I read that. The biggest problem with that article is that Lars Andersen is documented as a really good archer in the more classic styles as well.
Depending of course what you define as classic in this case.
You can find a better "debunking" here[^], it's a lot more factual.
But as far as I'm concerned they're not adding anything I didn't already realize, nor does it withdraw from the fact that it's really impressive shooting in any case.
|
|
|
|
|
That's nothing.
I heard from a friend of friend's uncle's pet elephant, that POH shot an arrow up Chuck Norris' arse from a mile away, while running backwards and reading fine poetry.
|
|
|
|
|
I fancy myself a 'good' programmer, as do most employed coders i suppose. But one thing that being a good programmer doesn't make you good at is setting up projects. I actually had to turn down a job as the 'sole web programmer' at a makeup start-up because I couldn't setup the project in 8 hours. I tried the for my WHOLE first day of employment to setup that project and went home as a failure. I was too darn ashamed too return the next day and give another hopeless attempt.
So as I am in setup HELL with this dang nabbit c++ and starting a new HELL MODE, I just want to know how much time would yall estimate you've spent in Project Setup HELL?
50 hours lifetime total is my estimate.
|
|
|
|
|
A week and a half.
Java/GWT with about a dozen different internal and third-party frameworks all cooperating and competing. Really makes me appreciate Visual Studio and C#/.NET...
Granted, it was my first time using a Java IDE in over ten years, but still...
EDIT: Oh, and sorry, that's not lifetime... That's one project.
|
|
|
|
|
I have the exact same experience with GWT.
No matter what third-party library you use, at some point it will be deprecated.
I never understood why we're using that stuff in the first place. (I'm a C#/.NET junkie)
Recently, we tried to switch to Vaadin. (Sort of GWT with a shell)
When installing it, we followed every step laid out on the website, then I create a new project: errors! Red squigglies all over the place. Just by creating a new project!
Never mind that stuff. Java and everything associated with it is dead to me.
C#/.NET/Visual Studio all the way! The phrase 'It just works' is so true.
|
|
|
|
General 
News 
Suggestion 
Question 
Bug 
Answer 
Joke 
Praise 
Rant 
Admin 
Submit an article or tip
