From what I've heard, the suggestion is that the next Indiana Jones movies would be set 10-20 years after the first ones. So he doesn't need any makeup to make him look 'younger', though obviously they'll still want him good-looking.
Connie Willis' books don't have paradoxes in them. They can have paradoxes, but they end up fixing themselves. Or possibly causing themselves. Or both.
If you are dumb enough to think that Robots and artificial intelligence are going to develop any faster this century than they did last century you need to have your balls placed in a vice for a few hours to straighten you out. Seriously. Until people get past the idealism that throwing more power at the problem is going to make Artificial Intelligence click, and realize it is going to take one massive paradigm shift before it's worth it's weight in shit, we are not going to see artificial intelligence develop at all.
Well, let's see, I have to agree with this. We ahve no reason to think AI development will speed up.
Of course, in the last 20 years we've gone from no AI to chat programs that can fool (stupid) people into thinking they're real, computers that figure out what you're trying to do and do it for you, and computers that can recognize normal speech and human faces.
Pay attention, AI development doesn't need to speed up, it's going fast enough already. Within 20 years, we should have computers that can easily parse human speech perfectly, and use video input to navigate around in the real world without hitting things. Add in fairly obvious normal advances in minaturization, and you've got real robots, walking around and doing what people tell them to.
And, hey, guess what? Throwing CPU cycles at it works. we don't need paradigm shifts, we can keep making more and more intelligent computers just by making them faster.
You mean, it's lack of communication like, oh...what the object in the box looks like?
Granted, you can't send normal information, like 'Hello world', but it certainly is possible to send 'information', as in, something that isn't know at the other end, as demonstrated by the article above.
But by switching the routing tables, you'd have be able to switch the outgoing routing tables at the same time.
You can't recieve packets on the net unless they know how to get to your computer. Ergo, every router between you and the other computer has to know what direction you're in. All you have to do is make sure that packets going in the other direction, if routed with source/dest flipped, would actually go backwards onto the network they came from.
In other words, routers shouldn't just route outgoing packets blindly, they should check the source and make sure it would be something they would be routing the other way if it was the dest. It's a very quick check, and it's something routers are very good at doing anyway.
Light doesn't get 'bent'. Space itself gets bent, and life goes 'straight' on the bent space. Think about driving a road which goes over a hill. You can hold the wheel straight, and your path is still curved. (Up and then down.)
So, yes, the path of light isn't always straight to an outside observer, but the light itself isn't bending. This part is easy to understand...but the rest is really tricky.
Light, when slowed, doesn't slow. That sounds crazy, but when light slows down, time slows down. If you go half the speed of light, , and 'look at' some light, that light *still* is going the speed of light, because time has slowed down for you.
It's the same for gravity (in fact, acceleration and gravity are completely indistguisable.) When we stand on earth, and shine a flashlight up, the light 'actually' goes C - 9.8 m/s/s (ignoring the affect of the atmosphere ont he speed of light).
Gravity sucks the light down the same as everything else. But gravity also manages to distort time to run slower in such a way as to exactly offset the slowing down of light.
All this would be completely amazing, but the really amazing thing is that this explaination is completely backwards. Time doesn't 'slow' to conteract the effect of gravity or acceleration, time is a side effect of the effect of gravity or acceleration on the speed of light. Weird, huh?
Except the fact that ether (your 'soup') vanished almost 100 years ago, when the speed of light was found to be exactly the same no matter what direction you went it.
The basic anthropic principle is not a swindle, it's an extremely obvious answer to a dumb question. The dumb question is 'Why are people able to exist in this universe?'
The extremely obvious answer is, duh, we couldn't pose the question if we didn't exist.
The fact that the universe that we exist in is capable of support us isn't really that interesting, because, if it couldn't, we wouldn't know about it. And, in fact, there are probably lots of universe that can't support human life, but there are no humans there going, "Gee, look, the universe can't support human life, that sucks."
Not to mention the fact we have exactly one data point of universal laws, so it seems pretty dumb to try to derive any meaning from them.
To prove this anthropic principle is not only obvious, but silly, ask the next person you run into if they think it's odd that you happened to be talking to them just now about the fact that you're talking to them just now. Obviously, that's not odd at all, if you weren't talking to them, you couldn't be talking about the fact you were talking to them. The anthropic principle just applies that logic to humanity in general.
Erm...so you're just going to magically verify them without knowing them?
Here's a big hint: Not everyone is running some sort of completely automated, completely external validation service, and, duh, if they aren't, they need to know the numbers so they can actually charge the people.
About the only reason they shouldn't be in your computers somewhere is if you're using a third party to handle all that stuff...and then they will be in their computer. They, rather obviously, have to exist somewhere to be send to the CC companies.
Actually, calling it an 'invention' is a bit silly. He just used the word 'robotics'. He was quite surprised later on when he was informed he was credited with inventing it, he thought it already was a word!
Dorcas was not a hologram that I remember. I just recalled a purely audio interface to her, usually. Definately when doing the dictation, as that was outside.
Someone is blowing smoke at you, as 'activations per EULA' doesn't make any sense. An EULA is a license agreement, and you don't puchase a license agreement.
Let me clarify. When you rent a car, you do not rent the license agreement. When you 'license' XP, you do not license the license agreement. Hence 'activations per EULA' doesn't make any sense.
Now, it might be five activations per license purchased, I don't know about that. But it's not per 'EULA'.
Oh good god. First of all, you're a complete idiot if you have problems with the Willow/Tara relationship. As a subnote, the word you are looking for is not 'sodomy'. As for the 'why can't we just all get along', do you actually watch the show? They just broke up, dumbass.
Second, you're even more of an idiot talking about the 'strong leading man'. Buffy managed to do fine without Angel leading the first year. And Angel certainly couldn't be called the lead, by any means, the second half of the second season, which is the season all seasons aspire to be.
And, third of all, all evidence points toward Spike being the leading man anyway, so your entire comment about 'strong leading man' is just silly, as Buffy has one at the moment.
Don't forget Buffy and Angel, which, while technically not 'sci-fi', have very stong stories and, though it had faltered a few times, The Initative arc comes instantly to mind, it keeps coming up with new and interesting ideas, while retaining continutity, all while poking fun at the format.
I mean, what other show would have a demon do a chant and magic spell around a stone statue, wait a bit, look at this watch, then light a cigarette while waiting? Or introduce the 'cute little sister no one's heard' of that other shows magically get when the cast starts aging, but literally do it by magic?
Hell, the show's even poked fun at itself, like the first episode of Angel where he smoothly leaps into his black convertable, then realizes he leaped into the wrong car, or the entire episode of 'The Zeppo', which turns a minor Xander B plot into the entire episode while the A plot goes on almost sight unseen, complete with Buffy/Angel melodramatics and the required apocalypse.
And of course, I don't have to mention Hush, or Once More, With Feeling,
Key logging is aguably the same as wiretapping - in other words probably illegal without a court order.
A) And why is it impossible to get a wiretap?
B) Wiretaps can now be used and then approved in the court system, making the entire point moot.
C) Military tribunals don't throw out illegally gathered evidence anyway, so even if you can't do B, it's still admissible in the recent military tribunals that have been set up by our great and glorious leader.
And, in fact, removing a wiretap isn't illegal. While it is illegal to interfere with a government investigation, you have to do it knowingly. You can't be prosecuted for interfering with a government investigation if you don't know that there is, in fact, a government investigation happening.
You can't just be arrested for doing some random, not normally illegal thing because it hinders the police you didn't know were there.
Now, you presumably do not know about wiretaps on yourself, so if in some theoretical universe you found a physical wiretap, you could quite rightly claim that you didn't know it was the police bugging your, and you just thought it was someone illegally doing it. In fact, you don't even have to claim that, the phone line on your property is your property and you don't need a reason for doing anything to it.
In fact, it's pretty much never illegal to interfere in an investigation of yourself. I'm sure people can think of counter-examples to that, but I can't actually come up with one off the top of my head. most things that would count as 'interfering' also count as 'not helping the police', and you aren't required to help the police gather evidence against you.
Of course, if the wiretap wasn't on your property, then, yeah, it's illegal modification of telephone lines or something, but what the hell were you doing combing over the miles of telephone between your house and the local switching place anyway?
Slashdot Mirror
I suspect they were plannig a sequel way back then.
From what I've heard, the suggestion is that the next Indiana Jones movies would be set 10-20 years after the first ones. So he doesn't need any makeup to make him look 'younger', though obviously they'll still want him good-looking.
Connie Willis' books don't have paradoxes in them. They can have paradoxes, but they end up fixing themselves. Or possibly causing themselves. Or both.
Well, let's see, I have to agree with this. We ahve no reason to think AI development will speed up.
Of course, in the last 20 years we've gone from no AI to chat programs that can fool (stupid) people into thinking they're real, computers that figure out what you're trying to do and do it for you, and computers that can recognize normal speech and human faces.
Pay attention, AI development doesn't need to speed up, it's going fast enough already. Within 20 years, we should have computers that can easily parse human speech perfectly, and use video input to navigate around in the real world without hitting things. Add in fairly obvious normal advances in minaturization, and you've got real robots, walking around and doing what people tell them to.
And, hey, guess what? Throwing CPU cycles at it works. we don't need paradigm shifts, we can keep making more and more intelligent computers just by making them faster.
Granted, you can't send normal information, like 'Hello world', but it certainly is possible to send 'information', as in, something that isn't know at the other end, as demonstrated by the article above.
You can't recieve packets on the net unless they know how to get to your computer. Ergo, every router between you and the other computer has to know what direction you're in. All you have to do is make sure that packets going in the other direction, if routed with source/dest flipped, would actually go backwards onto the network they came from.
In other words, routers shouldn't just route outgoing packets blindly, they should check the source and make sure it would be something they would be routing the other way if it was the dest. It's a very quick check, and it's something routers are very good at doing anyway.
That would probably because it's from the automatic complaint generator. I'm sure someone knows the URL.
Light doesn't get 'bent'. Space itself gets bent, and life goes 'straight' on the bent space. Think about driving a road which goes over a hill. You can hold the wheel straight, and your path is still curved. (Up and then down.)
So, yes, the path of light isn't always straight to an outside observer, but the light itself isn't bending. This part is easy to understand...but the rest is really tricky.
Light, when slowed, doesn't slow. That sounds crazy, but when light slows down, time slows down. If you go half the speed of light, , and 'look at' some light, that light *still* is going the speed of light, because time has slowed down for you.
It's the same for gravity (in fact, acceleration and gravity are completely indistguisable.) When we stand on earth, and shine a flashlight up, the light 'actually' goes C - 9.8 m/s/s (ignoring the affect of the atmosphere ont he speed of light).
Gravity sucks the light down the same as everything else. But gravity also manages to distort time to run slower in such a way as to exactly offset the slowing down of light.
All this would be completely amazing, but the really amazing thing is that this explaination is completely backwards. Time doesn't 'slow' to conteract the effect of gravity or acceleration, time is a side effect of the effect of gravity or acceleration on the speed of light. Weird, huh?
Except the fact that ether (your 'soup') vanished almost 100 years ago, when the speed of light was found to be exactly the same no matter what direction you went it.
The extremely obvious answer is, duh, we couldn't pose the question if we didn't exist.
The fact that the universe that we exist in is capable of support us isn't really that interesting, because, if it couldn't, we wouldn't know about it. And, in fact, there are probably lots of universe that can't support human life, but there are no humans there going, "Gee, look, the universe can't support human life, that sucks."
Not to mention the fact we have exactly one data point of universal laws, so it seems pretty dumb to try to derive any meaning from them.
To prove this anthropic principle is not only obvious, but silly, ask the next person you run into if they think it's odd that you happened to be talking to them just now about the fact that you're talking to them just now. Obviously, that's not odd at all, if you weren't talking to them, you couldn't be talking about the fact you were talking to them. The anthropic principle just applies that logic to humanity in general.
In other words, the only people who could get it done, for any amount of money, are people who, with MacOS X, are in direct competition with Linux.
Seriously, if it was a matter of money, don't you think Microsoft would have a version of it by now?
Then they get sued. They can't go around claiming something is a CD if it doesn't follow the standards.
What a fucking moron.
Here's a big hint: Not everyone is running some sort of completely automated, completely external validation service, and, duh, if they aren't, they need to know the numbers so they can actually charge the people.
About the only reason they shouldn't be in your computers somewhere is if you're using a third party to handle all that stuff...and then they will be in their computer. They, rather obviously, have to exist somewhere to be send to the CC companies.
Actually, calling it an 'invention' is a bit silly. He just used the word 'robotics'. He was quite surprised later on when he was informed he was credited with inventing it, he thought it already was a word!
Dorcas was not a hologram that I remember. I just recalled a purely audio interface to her, usually. Definately when doing the dictation, as that was outside.
Duh. ;)
All MS would have to do is include an encrypted movie with XP, and then get you arrested for violating the DMCA when you cracked it.
Erm, that's not a troll. It might be karmawhoring, but it's not trolling.
Let me clarify. When you rent a car, you do not rent the license agreement. When you 'license' XP, you do not license the license agreement. Hence 'activations per EULA' doesn't make any sense.
Now, it might be five activations per license purchased, I don't know about that. But it's not per 'EULA'.
Second, you're even more of an idiot talking about the 'strong leading man'. Buffy managed to do fine without Angel leading the first year. And Angel certainly couldn't be called the lead, by any means, the second half of the second season, which is the season all seasons aspire to be.
And, third of all, all evidence points toward Spike being the leading man anyway, so your entire comment about 'strong leading man' is just silly, as Buffy has one at the moment.
Yeah, and shooting you in the arm is talking away your choice to use that arm for a while, but no one on earth calls it 'theft'.
I mean, what other show would have a demon do a chant and magic spell around a stone statue, wait a bit, look at this watch, then light a cigarette while waiting? Or introduce the 'cute little sister no one's heard' of that other shows magically get when the cast starts aging, but literally do it by magic?
Hell, the show's even poked fun at itself, like the first episode of Angel where he smoothly leaps into his black convertable, then realizes he leaped into the wrong car, or the entire episode of 'The Zeppo', which turns a minor Xander B plot into the entire episode while the A plot goes on almost sight unseen, complete with Buffy/Angel melodramatics and the required apocalypse.
And of course, I don't have to mention Hush, or Once More, With Feeling,
A) And why is it impossible to get a wiretap?
B) Wiretaps can now be used and then approved in the court system, making the entire point moot.
C) Military tribunals don't throw out illegally gathered evidence anyway, so even if you can't do B, it's still admissible in the recent military tribunals that have been set up by our great and glorious leader.
You can't just be arrested for doing some random, not normally illegal thing because it hinders the police you didn't know were there.
Now, you presumably do not know about wiretaps on yourself, so if in some theoretical universe you found a physical wiretap, you could quite rightly claim that you didn't know it was the police bugging your, and you just thought it was someone illegally doing it. In fact, you don't even have to claim that, the phone line on your property is your property and you don't need a reason for doing anything to it.
In fact, it's pretty much never illegal to interfere in an investigation of yourself. I'm sure people can think of counter-examples to that, but I can't actually come up with one off the top of my head. most things that would count as 'interfering' also count as 'not helping the police', and you aren't required to help the police gather evidence against you.
Of course, if the wiretap wasn't on your property, then, yeah, it's illegal modification of telephone lines or something, but what the hell were you doing combing over the miles of telephone between your house and the local switching place anyway?