It seems like the moment you begin to look at this question, you were just like peeling the onion.
感觉你们在看待这个,问题时,就像剥洋葱一样。
It will soften your speech so that you can pose the question without offending the other person.
它会很好地柔化你的言辞,这样你就可以在不冒犯其他人的情况下提出自己的问题。
So problems arise but they're interesting problems, and they are a function, one of the six functions, of the expression "It is raining."
问题就出现在这里,但这是有趣的问题,是六功能中的一个“
Long before Milton had begun to tackle the problem, Christians had for centuries, for millennia, puzzled over the logical inconsistency between these two concepts.
早在弥尔顿应对这个问题之前,基督教徒们就已经花了成百上千年,为这两个概念之间逻辑上的前后矛盾感到困惑。
These are stupid questions, because once you understand what they're asking, the answer is just built in. It follows trivially.
这是些很愚蠢的问题,因为一旦你明白了他们的问题,答案就在其中,一切简单明了
And very often, the answer to some of our most pressing questions lies on the children on the bus.
很多时候,最紧迫的问题的答案,就在汽车的孩子身上。
And if you come and ask a question that you could have easily answered by doing the reading, coming to lecture, or using Google, they're going to have less patience.
所以如果你过来仅仅是问一个,你能很轻松的,通过阅读、上课、或者,在谷歌上搜索就能得到答案的问题,他们会失去耐心的。
Now do that in a sound byte on a national radio station when you got two minutes to answer.
这时你就得为全国听众一字一句地,在两分钟时间内解答这个问题
- So this is where recursion gets a little trippy-- certainly initially, and that you have to kind of keep diving deeper, deeper, deeper into the problem.
在这儿就会觉得递归有点迷糊了-,起初,你必须一层一层地,深入到问题中。
What do they do? One of the problems that it produces is the more people you have, up to a point that's good.
他们都干些什么呢,其中一个问题是,人越多,产出就越大,这在达到临界点之前是好事
But the problem is, I, being a naive investor, could get stuck with the bad stuff.
但问题是,作为一名菜鸟投资者,我就有可能会套在里面
I got interested in that particular question because one of our former PHD students who is now at Texas A&M, asked me to give a lecture on that subject in honor of some anniversary of the universities.
我对这个问题也感兴趣,因为我们学校的一名博士毕业生,现在在德克萨斯农工大学,请我就这个话题演讲,当时是大学的周年纪念日。
Socrates' disillusion of that very framework,challenges, it seems to me, the very possibility of political life by questioning the question or the distinction between friend and enemy.
苏格拉底,对这个框架的醒悟,在我看来,挑战了政治生活的可能性,就在他提问,或区别友与敌的问题时。
This monumental novel about 20 hours in the life of an average man can be read and appreciated like any other great novel once its framework and form are visualized, just as we can enjoy Hamlet without solving all the problems which agitate the critics and scholars."
这部不朽的小说是关于一个,平常人生命中的二十个小时,在它的框架和形式显现出来的时候,它就能像其他伟大小说一样被阅读和欣赏,就像我们欣赏《哈姆雷特》那样,不用解决那些激发批评家和学者讨论的问题“
So, just, if you can take what I'm saying for a moment right now that in fact this should collapse in this very small time frame, we have to see that there's a problem with one of these two things, either the Coulomb force law or Newtonian mechanics. So, what do you guys think is probably the issue here?
所以如果你们考虑我,开始说的这个塌缩应该,发生在很短的时间里,那么这两者之一就有问题,要么是库伦定律,要么是牛顿力学,你们觉得应该是哪个的问题?
Fortunately, Square is a company 1 that has revenue from day 1 so we can look at constantly building that and we don't have to worry about much investment.
幸运的是,Square是一家,从第一天就有收入的公司1,所以我们可以看到在不断地建设它,而不必担心投资问题。
And the third thing I need to decide is how do I combine? You know, point out to you in the binary search case, combination was trivial. The answer to the final search was just the answer all the way up.
第三个问题是我需要决定如何进行合并?,就你们所知的,在二分查找中所打印出来的,合并的过程是非常简单的,最后查询的结果,就是一路上来所以的结果。
If you can figure out why fails on three letters instead of 12, you'll be more than half way to solving the problem.
如果你能明白为什么程序,在输入三个字母的单词的时候没法运行,你就已经解决了问题的一半了。
Kind of in the hope of getting there in one shot.
希望能一次就确定问题出在哪儿。
I got a note from him and I'm still trying to figure it all out That's what happens; the system performs very well and then it becomes vulnerable.
我对他的回答做了笔记,我还在尝试把这个问题搞清楚,事情就这样发生了,一个系统本来运行良好,然后就变得很脆弱。
But then also a little bit about your history, where you come from, some of your experiences which have helped you or informed your opinions on this very difficult issue that the entire world really is spending a lot of time trying to work on.
然后再谈谈你们各自的经历,你们从何而来,谈一些你们自己的经历,一些帮助过你们,或形成了你们,就这个复杂问题的观点,这个全世界都在投入大量时间试图解决的问题。
When we're just interacting with idol, with the interactive editor or sorry, interactive environment if you like, that's what you expect. What's happening is that we're typing in something, an expression it doesn't know how to deal. It's raising the exception, but is this simply bubbling up at the top level saying you've got a problem.
就发生了其中之一是吧,当你在交互数据处理或者是在交互编辑器,抱歉,任何你喜欢的交互式环境中,你可能会遇到这些,如果你在输入什么内容,譬如一个它不知道怎么处理的表达式,它就会报一个异常,但这是否是简单的,把你遇到的问题冒到最顶层呢?
I'd be happy to discuss with you, outside class, at greater length my favorite theories as to where the argument goes wrong and why I think it goes wrong in Descartes' case as well.
就笛卡尔的论证到底错在哪儿的问题,我很愿意在课外,和你们详细谈谈,我最信服的理论,以及我个人的看法
So the question, that question is posed, that objection is posed by Adeimantus, you remember, at the beginning of Book IV.
依循那个理性推断的话,所以问题被呈现出来,异议由,Adeimantus,提呈出来,记得吗?就在第,IV,册一开始的地方。
I have to stress, though, that scholars differ very much on where the seams in the text are, what parts of the story belong to J or E, or P, so you'll read very, very different accounts.
必须强调的是,虽然学者就,海在哪里接合,这一问题上,有很大分歧,你们会在阅读材料J,E,P的故事的时候发现。
Yes, Barthes talks about the death of the author, but even Barthes doesn't mean that the author is dead like Nietzsche's God. The author is there, sure.
是的,巴尔特谈到了作者已死的问题,但和尼采所说的上帝已死这个层面上的内容还是有所不同,作者肯定就在那里。
So if we actually go ahead and multiply it by the volume of our shell, then we end up just with probability, which is kind of a nicer term to be thinking about here.
乘以壳层的体积,我们就得到了概率,在这里从这个角度,理解问题更好一些,如果我们考虑的是。
And the question is, what do we want to count? Now, one possibility is to do best case.
问题是,我们应该针对哪种状况?,一种可能性是针对最好的情况,也就说在所有可能的输入里面。
But you see, here is the thing: People mostly do what you do, rather than what you say.
问题就在这里:,多数人都是照你做的做而不是照你说的做。
应用推荐