lotsofmangos

Is that another pseudonym of Grant Shapps?

To drill down to trying to even roughly predict rates and kinds of evolution, you are no longer at a simple conjecture as you have to include all the detail of the interplay of biochemical reactions, which is insanely complicated.

Well, given you are invoking the support of Pierre P. Grasse, I guess you mean the evolution of forms through heritability of acquired characteristics.

If you have systems which can propagate copies of themselves imperfectly and that have a varying environment to contend with that has effects on their ability to propagate, then the subsequent copies of those systems will undergo an evolution of forms with a selection bias.

Mathematically you can demonstrate this pretty conclusively.

Then all you really need to do is demonstrate that there are systems in the physical world that meet the set of criteria required for evolution to occur and you can then be pretty sure that evolution is occurring.

Though if you also have some extra microphones, then you can do dynamic adjustments on top and even account for people moving through the space so that they do not block sound or even so a stereo recording follows them around.

Would basically be a self-modifying ambisonics system. It looks doable, though possibly a bit expensive.

I'd say that's rule No. 2 and needs the obvious caveat of "unless you really know what you are doing." Encryption didn't come from nowhere.

Rule No. 1 is "Know what you are doing."

I don't think I would call kevlar a carbon fiber, is more like nylon.

Add an adult to the story then. Hell, add a teacher, knock yourself out. For making the point of not merely doing as instructed though and having personal responsibility, this need for official confirmation in the metaphor seems awfully weird.

Don't assume everybody does cheap puns and invalidly makes up connections

I didn't, I said I thought you were probably being unintentionally funny.

Especially when they are literally holding a card with the name of the person they are looking for on it.

There are fairly well established social methods for dealing with that conundrum and none of the good ones involve the waiter handing the card to the person they think is most likely.

If you tend to make a lot of assumptions about someone just from their name before encountering them, then you are pretty much guaranteeing that you are going to get burnt a lot over time, unless you don't meet many people, as it simply isn't that good a guide.

Now that is funny, though I suspect unintentionally, and in horrifically bad taste either way.

It's easy to assume that. It really is a very rough guide though, so if you stick to it, don't be surprised if you end up looking like a complete idiot on several occasions throughout your life.

The most extreme example of a thing you can find is not usually the ideal example to use for most contexts. Rather than clarifying things, if it dwarfs the context, it then appears automatically ridiculous even if the basic argument is sound.

edit - and a wheel of Le Brouère cheese was on the first Dragon flight in honour of the Monty Python Cheese Shop sketch.

Of Course I Still Love You