I agree, I've never seen this term before, and when I Google waar, I just get a bunch of German stuff and non-related items. Cyberwaar links to this article.
Agreed. I was pretty excited till I saw the video (posted above). Some of the moves the bots do in that animation were just pure BS. You can't do anything like that with today's tech.
You ever seen the best of what MIT can do? It's not even 1/4 of what's in the vid.
Battery power to fly, do that crazy jump, wireless communication, etc, etc just does NOT exist yet. These guys are fishing for a government grant and put some CGI pics together... nothing more.
Would you buy a Metallica online album despite their former views? Answer: Fuck no. I remember Metallica as the band who hacked into my registry to not allow me to download or use Napster. For that reason, I'm not interested in them at all.
Yeah, because Lord knows the spammers don't have spare CPU capacity at hand on all the hijacked machines they control.
It's worth a shot at thinking outside the box, but they have the CPU cycles and can likely hack past any kind of attempt to node lock the work units.
I suppose a minor benefit would be that some kind of work gets done before a spam message was sent out, but there's got to be a way to get past that requirement -- F@H is based on a measure of trust (and some cross-validation) that participants aren't gaming the system. With the email plan, the incentive is to offer incorrect results quickly, rather that accurate results slowly.
But like I said, at least it was a try at a different approach.
I highly doubt the validity of the figures you quote for folding @ home's cost. This has been a perennial topic on/.
But even if you were right, I'd say one cannot (for example) complain about the government not funding NASA and at the same time not run Folding @ home for economical reasons. Both are great science and both are worthy of (at least) a modest amount of investment.
This is not correct. If I am researching something and wikipedia is one of the first hits on Google, I'll read it, look for a credible source for what is said in the wikipedia article, and if none is present, I'll do additional research.
If/when I find a credible source to confirm (or refute) what is said on the page, I will edit it. I think it is only courteous and takes a few extra seconds.
This is what wikipedia was meant to do and within 10 years it will truly be what it is intending to be... namely a credible source of human knowledge (with references).
Has anyone recently ordered a Lenovo laptop? I just bought a pretty sweet x61 and they charged me tax!
I live in Arizona and any time I've ordered anything online (including Amazon), I've never been charged tax.
Even with the tax, they were cheaper than everything else, but calling something "tax" when they are obviously not paying the taxman seems crappy to me.
I wonder if anyone else has seen Lenovo do this in their state?
Yes, but the reality is that not only is Bill Gates parched, the vendor is going to go out of business because people are sick of walking to the crappy, inconvenient desert location that is Yahoo.
Why on Earth would MSFT offer so much when they could/should develop the search technology, content, and customer base themselves? I don't think they can.
Why would Yahoo refuse to accept an offer that is clearly more than they'd get from anyone else? Maybe management has its head in the sand as to its marketplace position.
Going hostile on the acquisition is really, really stupid since one of the best parts of an IT company is the IT talent.
Going hostile will antagonize the whole company, including the best IT talent, IMO.
I KNOW. I can only imagine what it's like to see this attitude from the outside in.
Being an American (USA) I find it natural, though thinking logically about it, I can see how bizarre this must seem to a foreigner. Not only do I live in the USA, but I live in Arizona. Here in AZ you can purchase a firearm and carry it around in public, in a holster, without a license (though it takes a license if you want to conceal it.)
I used to work in a bank, and I had a guy come in with a revolver holstered on his side. He didn't point it at me, so I didn't really care. It is rare, but it is part of being Arizonan.
And in terms of being able to fight the military... yes, that is part of who we are too. Government oppression is always something we are acutely aware of and prepared to defend ourselves against.
Like it or not, the USA will always have firearms. We are like no other country in the world in that respect, right or wrong. We were founded on individualism and being tough SOBs (like it or not).
I say this with as much objectivity as I can, being a US citizen. We are prone to consumerism, decadence and overall "whinyness" because of our success as a nation. BUT, I think most of us take a (perhaps twisted) sense of pride that we will NEVER be conquered and occupied for any length of time. You could put every soldier in the world on US soil and we'd still win (eventually). This was a major concern of the Soviets during the cold war.
Twisted and paranoid? Yep, but that goes to our very roots, because of the way we were born as a nation. Australia, India, Canada... all were born from relative peace. Not us, we were born in fire and remain a violent society in no small part, because of that fact.
Less guns work in the UK and Australia because you are both island nations. It works in the UK and Australia because you are less aggressive (arguably more mature) societies. It will NOT work in the USA.
Also, it should be noted that an extremely important decision will be made by the supreme court directly pertaining to the interpretation of the 2nd amendment for the first time (assuming they don't dodge it, like they did in '39) this session. http://jurist.law.pitt.edu/forumy/2008/04/middle-ground-supreme-courts.php
Yeah, I believe the company wants to, and does good things. But let's face it, they're in it to make their shareholders money, not save the world.
If they can save the world in the process, then good, but they're in it for the buck... and IMO that's the way it should be. I don't want a nanny for a company, I want them to make me shit to play with.
I'm always skeptical when I see an ellipsis (...) preceeding any quote - makes me wonder if it's taken out of context. This appears to have some kind of case law context, which I'm not familiar with. However, I can't think of any case where the fourth amendment would be thrown out like this.
Here's the context, if you're as skeptical as me...
Indeed, drawing in part on the reasoning of Verdugo-Urquidez, as well as the Supreme Court's treatment of the
destruction of property for the purposes of military necessity, our Office recently concluded that the Fourth
Amendment had no application to domestic military operations. See Memorandum for Alberto R. Gonzales,
Counsel to the President, and William J. Haynes, n, General Counsel, Department of Defense, from John C. Yoo,
Deputy Assistant Attorney General and Robert J. Delahunty, Special Counsel, Re: Authority for Use of Military
Force to Combat Te17'0rist Activities Within the United States at 25 (Oct 23, 200 I). So basically, total bullshit. John Yoo was featured in an excellent Frontline episode about these topics. He's a tool, in every sense of the word.
They tend to get modded up, unless you mention you're going to get modded up... then I'd guess your odds decrease and actually swing to getting modded down.
BUT, you've got a "fuck the establishment" type post, which is always good for karma whoring (and can anyone honestly say they haven't done it?), so you'll probably stay at a 5.
Sweet.
Not that I'm the kind of bastard that would (or maybe even could) write something like that. But I'm always happy to see a literary anachronism stay around.
So I've always wondered... is there any way to force a snow crash nowadays? I mean a true, totally F'd up snow crash on a system monitor. My instincts and common sense would tell me no, at least not in the classical meaning of the term snow crash, but we've got a lot of smart people on this board who might know if it's actually possible. Ever since I read Snow Crash a couple years ago, I've wondered.
Apparently, men's faces are more difficult to grade. Rather, what kind of dude wants to (or perhaps is even able to) code for MALE face attractiveness? I can't help but think the guys coding this said "hey let's do the women faces first, because I don't mind looking at chicks all day", rather than it being too hard.
Yes, I'm assuming the team was mostly male... hopefully I don't offend anyone with this obvious assumption.
Slashdot Mirror
I agree, I've never seen this term before, and when I Google waar, I just get a bunch of German stuff and non-related items. Cyberwaar links to this article.
Did we just invent a term? How exciting!
Agreed. I was pretty excited till I saw the video (posted above). Some of the moves the bots do in that animation were just pure BS. You can't do anything like that with today's tech.
You ever seen the best of what MIT can do? It's not even 1/4 of what's in the vid.
Battery power to fly, do that crazy jump, wireless communication, etc, etc just does NOT exist yet. These guys are fishing for a government grant and put some CGI pics together... nothing more.
DAMNIT! Where are my mod points when I need them...
If GP doesn't agree with military action, so be it, but to personally insult those who are putting their butts on the line is repugnant and arrogant.
Plus it helps their music sucks nowadays.
Yeah, because Lord knows the spammers don't have spare CPU capacity at hand on all the hijacked machines they control.
It's worth a shot at thinking outside the box, but they have the CPU cycles and can likely hack past any kind of attempt to node lock the work units.
I suppose a minor benefit would be that some kind of work gets done before a spam message was sent out, but there's got to be a way to get past that requirement -- F@H is based on a measure of trust (and some cross-validation) that participants aren't gaming the system. With the email plan, the incentive is to offer incorrect results quickly, rather that accurate results slowly.
But like I said, at least it was a try at a different approach.
I highly doubt the validity of the figures you quote for folding @ home's cost. This has been a perennial topic on /.
But even if you were right, I'd say one cannot (for example) complain about the government not funding NASA and at the same time not run Folding @ home for economical reasons. Both are great science and both are worthy of (at least) a modest amount of investment.
First time I've read it, I must admit -- there's nothing quite like classic Clarke. Certainly, +1 if I had the mod points!
This is not correct. If I am researching something and wikipedia is one of the first hits on Google, I'll read it, look for a credible source for what is said in the wikipedia article, and if none is present, I'll do additional research.
If/when I find a credible source to confirm (or refute) what is said on the page, I will edit it. I think it is only courteous and takes a few extra seconds.
This is what wikipedia was meant to do and within 10 years it will truly be what it is intending to be... namely a credible source of human knowledge (with references).
Has anyone recently ordered a Lenovo laptop? I just bought a pretty sweet x61 and they charged me tax!
I live in Arizona and any time I've ordered anything online (including Amazon), I've never been charged tax.
Even with the tax, they were cheaper than everything else, but calling something "tax" when they are obviously not paying the taxman seems crappy to me.
I wonder if anyone else has seen Lenovo do this in their state?
Shit. I accidentally modded you (damn sensitive mouse). I've got to throw this reply in to undo it
Nothing to see here, please move along...
True. I don't know enough about those cultures to say definitively.
I probably should've said we are like no other industrialized, western country in that respect.
Though I'd still guess there's something uniquely American (US) about our mentality when it comes to firearms.
But again, you may have a point, I don't know.
Yes, but the reality is that not only is Bill Gates parched, the vendor is going to go out of business because people are sick of walking to the crappy, inconvenient desert location that is Yahoo.
Why on Earth would MSFT offer so much when they could/should develop the search technology, content, and customer base themselves? I don't think they can.
Why would Yahoo refuse to accept an offer that is clearly more than they'd get from anyone else? Maybe management has its head in the sand as to its marketplace position.
Going hostile on the acquisition is really, really stupid since one of the best parts of an IT company is the IT talent.
Going hostile will antagonize the whole company, including the best IT talent, IMO.
And you get an insightful mod?
Sounds like you don't have any kind of logical response and just wish to troll...
I KNOW. I can only imagine what it's like to see this attitude from the outside in.
Being an American (USA) I find it natural, though thinking logically about it, I can see how bizarre this must seem to a foreigner. Not only do I live in the USA, but I live in Arizona. Here in AZ you can purchase a firearm and carry it around in public, in a holster, without a license (though it takes a license if you want to conceal it.)
I used to work in a bank, and I had a guy come in with a revolver holstered on his side. He didn't point it at me, so I didn't really care. It is rare, but it is part of being Arizonan.
And in terms of being able to fight the military... yes, that is part of who we are too. Government oppression is always something we are acutely aware of and prepared to defend ourselves against.
Like it or not, the USA will always have firearms. We are like no other country in the world in that respect, right or wrong. We were founded on individualism and being tough SOBs (like it or not).
I say this with as much objectivity as I can, being a US citizen. We are prone to consumerism, decadence and overall "whinyness" because of our success as a nation. BUT, I think most of us take a (perhaps twisted) sense of pride that we will NEVER be conquered and occupied for any length of time. You could put every soldier in the world on US soil and we'd still win (eventually). This was a major concern of the Soviets during the cold war.
Twisted and paranoid? Yep, but that goes to our very roots, because of the way we were born as a nation. Australia, India, Canada... all were born from relative peace. Not us, we were born in fire and remain a violent society in no small part, because of that fact.
Less guns work in the UK and Australia because you are both island nations. It works in the UK and Australia because you are less aggressive (arguably more mature) societies. It will NOT work in the USA.
Also, it should be noted that an extremely important decision will be made by the supreme court directly pertaining to the interpretation of the 2nd amendment for the first time (assuming they don't dodge it, like they did in '39) this session. http://jurist.law.pitt.edu/forumy/2008/04/middle-ground-supreme-courts.php
What THE CRAP was THAT?!
Yeah, I believe the company wants to, and does good things. But let's face it, they're in it to make their shareholders money, not save the world.
If they can save the world in the process, then good, but they're in it for the buck... and IMO that's the way it should be. I don't want a nanny for a company, I want them to make me shit to play with.
Here's the context, if you're as skeptical as me... Indeed, drawing in part on the reasoning of Verdugo-Urquidez, as well as the Supreme Court's treatment of the destruction of property for the purposes of military necessity, our Office recently concluded that the Fourth Amendment had no application to domestic military operations. See Memorandum for Alberto R. Gonzales, Counsel to the President, and William J. Haynes, n, General Counsel, Department of Defense, from John C. Yoo, Deputy Assistant Attorney General and Robert J. Delahunty, Special Counsel, Re: Authority for Use of Military Force to Combat Te17'0rist Activities Within the United States at 25 (Oct 23, 200 I). So basically, total bullshit. John Yoo was featured in an excellent Frontline episode about these topics. He's a tool, in every sense of the word.
A few centuries? Hegal? I think you're off by a few thousand years...
Socrates/Plato beat them to it...
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:Allegoryofthecave.png
They tend to get modded up, unless you mention you're going to get modded up... then I'd guess your odds decrease and actually swing to getting modded down.
BUT, you've got a "fuck the establishment" type post, which is always good for karma whoring (and can anyone honestly say they haven't done it?), so you'll probably stay at a 5.
Sweet. Not that I'm the kind of bastard that would (or maybe even could) write something like that. But I'm always happy to see a literary anachronism stay around.
So I've always wondered... is there any way to force a snow crash nowadays? I mean a true, totally F'd up snow crash on a system monitor. My instincts and common sense would tell me no, at least not in the classical meaning of the term snow crash, but we've got a lot of smart people on this board who might know if it's actually possible. Ever since I read Snow Crash a couple years ago, I've wondered.
Yes, I'm assuming the team was mostly male... hopefully I don't offend anyone with this obvious assumption.