> I thought it had potential but I don't know how you'd fund it.
The same way we fund other social services here in Europe. If an individual is incapable of caring for themselves, the state is expected to care for them.
I just don't like busy movies. I like long, contemplative panning shots around the scenery, when it isn't taking part in the plot and we're just having a look at it because there's no rush. I'd watch a compilation of those, with all the stories edited out. I like pauses, I hate constant gabble. There was a movie with no dialog at all that I enjoyed once, I can't remember anything about it, would watch again - it might have been a noir, actually, following one guy on the run as he skulks around cheap hotels and talks to nobody.
Yeah, I was doing a variation on this recently (wondering about the same question). Reversing the latitude of the island of Jersey ("extreme weather is rare due to the island's mild climate") takes you to the Kerguelen Islands ("snow throughout the year as well as rain"). But the contrast there is to do with the Azores High and the Roaring Forties. Local climates are complicated.
I'm wary of asking questions (my curiosity is bounded), but what changes if you limit the range of allowed angles to multiples of, say, 10°? How about 90°, does pi go away then?
Author here. If I understand the question, the answer is that the average number of lines that the "noodle" intersects depends only on the length of the noodle. If you change the angles between the segments, the average stays the same.
So taking the limit of a large number of segments converging to a circle of diameter W leads to the result that the average number of intersections must be 2L/\pi.
I was thinking along these lines: suppose it's a needle, but it can't rotate. It always falls at the same angle. Then there's no noodle, and no apparent connection to circles. Is pi still involved? Next, suppose there are two perpendicular angles that are permitted, and the needle always falls at one of those. That means you can have square noodles, but rotations still aren't allowed, so the squares must always be aligned the same way, and the only suggestion of a circle is if you consider a square to be an approximation to a circle. Then three angles, hexagonal noodles. Does an approximation to pi therefore slowly creep in as you increase the sides on the polygon?
For the first question, the answer is just cos(\theta)*L/W, where theta is the angle off horizontal (assuming the floorboards are vertical). So a trig function shows up, if not pi.
If you don't allow rotations, but somehow still take a polygonal limit to circles, I suspect you'll end up with the same answer. But the limit is necessarily restricted relative to highly symmetric polygons going this route.
In general, rotational symmetry gives a ton of power to simplify the math, and leads to highly general results like arbitrary "noodles" having the same average crossing count as needles of the same length.
Now I'm entertaining myself by reframing the rebel barons (magna carta) as an oppressed minority, fleeing into their castles where they get harassed by siege engines.
I was interested in the others, but https://www.internetarchive.eu is a horrible corporate-looking site with a hero image, a boast about AI, a carousel of news that won't scroll with doing its slow scroll animation, a huge "meet the team" section with mugshots and boring profiles, social media links, a newsletter signup form, and nothing to say where the actual archive is.
Reading what little information they have there, they aren't a public facing or public serving organization. They seem to provide their services to institutions only:
"working with dozens of European libraries and government agencies to build web collections, Internet Archive Europe prioritized collaboration with cultural heritage organizations to safeguard our collective history."
They do exist and involved in archiving. Someone reached out to our amateur radio club and offered to archive any documents we might have. They even asked to archive the video recording of one of our monthly meetings.
You can't predict culture, you can't predict fashion, you can't predict the course of history, you can't predict innovations, you can't predict any of this creativity-mediated stuff.
One of you ought to find out what really did happen, and tell us. I can only do the lame thing and quote Wikipedia:
> China had no such legislation until 1997. That year, China's sole legislative body – the National People's Congress (NPC) – passed CL97, a law that deals with cyber crimes, which it divided into two broad categories: crimes that target computer networks, and crimes carried out over computer networks. Behavior illegal under the latter category includes, among many things, the dissemination of pornographic material, and the usurping of "state secrets."
reply