bitsen

A physicist came up with the gear solution which was stated in the video and dismissed because the mock physicist didn’t understand why the gear or wheel solved the problem.

If the gear or wheel is moving at a known rate, it can define the minimum speed of light passing through it, if the gear goes sufficiently fast and is sufficiently large with a sufficiently small hole.

Einstein was not infallible or all-knowing. His insistence on having two clocks when all that is needed is one time-accurate gear just shows he wasn’t thinking clearly. Einstein was clearly not an idiot.

However the mock physicist ignoring the very solution he presented is an idiot.

That’s the stupidest argument I’ve ever heard from someone attempting to be a physicist.

The gear experiment is the simplest answer. With a gear whose diameter spans the distance between the light source and receiver, and where the speed of rotation is controlled by an atomic clock, the gear could have a small hole through it. If light sent from one side to the other while the gear is spinning is too slow, it will not make it through the gear.

The size of the bike through the gear will dictate the speed, because the gear itself measures duration and distance in a single direction.

This doesn’t seem to solve in linear time.

Skeptical in what way?

Yes- but because you’re doubting it, not because of the non-compete.

Most contracts in-general never come into play.

But you should pay attention to all of them. Don’t sign things you aren’t comfortable with, unless you know you must.

How about APNG?

I bet your ass that at least half of the developers reading HN don’t have caching of JS fully figured out such that when the JS changes server-side and immediately needs reloading on the client side that it does then and there instead of on the next request, the next page refresh, or never because they’ve f’d it up.

With server-fed, event-driven pages, you could potentially force refresh.