A lot of open source projects have a small core team that vets and selects contributions from external contributors.
In relation to the visualization, this could be misleading, as that person gets credit for the work of all the contributors they select.
In general, this is quite a robust method of development, and most large organizations use it too (the actual job is called "Configuration Manager" or something similar). The difference between open source and commercial development is that the commercial system is under more pressure to deliver, whereas the open source people can (usually) take time to get things right if they need to - they're more likely to be in the game for the product, not the return. As a result, contributions from inexperienced or unfamiliar developers are probably vetted more carefully than those in the closed-source world.
I've often wished that governments and politicians would use a blog system like Slash. Contentious issues are so prone to all the problems slash was designed to deal with - think how good it would be!
Hopefully this is the first step in that direction.
I wonder if slash is up to the task of handling such contentious material? Politicians and their "offices" can be so viciously manipulative sometimes...
However, it costs (according to Physical Review) more than $1000 to publish an article. There is a lot of typesetting, they might pay reviewers, and they have to be reliable. Everyone at a university gets free access to the articles anyway, through their library proxy. I've just written an assignment on a Phys. Rev article, actually, and did you know that you can now pay ~$1300 and make an article public?
* Technology will continue to improve exponentially (it is right now - see Moore's law)
A lot of science is about spotting trends. Unfortunately, no trend (apart from abstract mathematical ones) continues indefinitely. There is always some limiting factor that only becomes noticeable past a certain threshold - as some posts above say, the threshold this time is quantum effects. Chips can't keep getting more dense - complexity will have to increase in other ways past this point.
A machine that can design more advanced versions of itself is an open problem.
Tor was set up by the US. My understanding is that it is a way for spies to communicate anonymously.
Since the system relies on having many different users, I doubt they are going to prohibit civilian access, as it would make the system far less effective.
You're right. We get typos in summaries all the time; articles about cold fusion only come along every week or so! It's quite clear which one is more important.
renaming products to get rid of words people don't like is just dumb Unfortunately, it also works. For an example, see Nuclear Magnetic Resonance Imaging.
It is amazing what people will do for a prettier interface.
Microsoft seem to know this well. I have had similar experiences with other products that were much prettier than their obsolete versions but also had much-reduced functionality.
What it shows is that religious experience is hardwired into us. It is not learned and it is not a mystical thing. It is a physical part of the brain. It's interesting to think about why this might be the case.
Presumably, predisposition towards "religion" helped us survive in some way. I think part of it would be that "religion" makes it easier for people to work together. "Religious" people are easier for leaders to direct?
Perhaps "religious" people are also more community oriented, to the benefit of all?
Well, if the AI was developed using evolutionary methods, then it's quite likely.
Evolution can be quite hard to prevent, given a reasonably complex system.
Well, you have to admit that their chances don't look good.
All the planning in the world won't get you out of an impossible situation.
A jury trial may not be impossible, but perhaps they've worked out that the odds aren't in their favour (I don't know if they are or not, not having read TFA).
I'm involved in a final year undergraduate software engineering project at the moment, to develop a CMS. We looked at Django as well as many others, and finally chose Pylons.
Django is great if all you care about is content; if you want to develop something more flexible, I think Pylons is the way to go as it is far more customizable and powerful (although the two projects are very similar).
Of course, they're both quite young projects, with the associated instability of the APIs.
The best thing about Pylons is that all they're trying to do is integrate (the best) components into one framework: SQLAlchemy, Mako templates, and so on... and you can switch between the competing components easily.
For some reason I feel that NASA is going to end up with crafts with similar engineering caveats.
Just because this is possible doesn't mean that it's likely. In fact, it's much more likely that a flexible and well-designed system wins the contest, simply because it is more robust.
Even if it doesn't, people are doing tests and working on the problem. Something has to come out of it, even if it has nothing to do with space flight.
Perhaps they think they'll make more money if they get rid of the Red Cross entirely?
I mean, come on. It's an international symbol, and it's been in use since forever. No-one owns it.
Disclaimer: I watched Sicko recently (it was funny)
The flight simulator X-Plane has dynamics for Mars (or did have, years ago), and there were a few planes that would fly in a Mars atmosphere. They had to fly quite fast and had fairly (but not obscenely) large wings.
Slashdot Mirror
A lot of open source projects have a small core team that vets and selects contributions from external contributors.
In relation to the visualization, this could be misleading, as that person gets credit for the work of all the contributors they select.
In general, this is quite a robust method of development, and most large organizations use it too (the actual job is called "Configuration Manager" or something similar). The difference between open source and commercial development is that the commercial system is under more pressure to deliver, whereas the open source people can (usually) take time to get things right if they need to - they're more likely to be in the game for the product, not the return. As a result, contributions from inexperienced or unfamiliar developers are probably vetted more carefully than those in the closed-source world.
I thought that the visualizations were beautiful.
--
All generalizations are false.
I've often wished that governments and politicians would use a blog system like Slash. Contentious issues are so prone to all the problems slash was designed to deal with - think how good it would be!
Hopefully this is the first step in that direction.
I wonder if slash is up to the task of handling such contentious material? Politicians and their "offices" can be so viciously manipulative sometimes...
Can it spot the difference between a live face and a photo?
Sounds like a bit of a gimmick to me.
However, it costs (according to Physical Review) more than $1000 to publish an article. There is a lot of typesetting, they might pay reviewers, and they have to be reliable.
Everyone at a university gets free access to the articles anyway, through their library proxy.
I've just written an assignment on a Phys. Rev article, actually, and did you know that you can now pay ~$1300 and make an article public?
Rhapsody (Ubuntu's default iTunes clone) has two free music services: Jamendo and Magnatune.
A lot of science is about spotting trends. Unfortunately, no trend (apart from abstract mathematical ones) continues indefinitely. There is always some limiting factor that only becomes noticeable past a certain threshold - as some posts above say, the threshold this time is quantum effects. Chips can't keep getting more dense - complexity will have to increase in other ways past this point.
A machine that can design more advanced versions of itself is an open problem.
Tor was set up by the US. My understanding is that it is a way for spies to communicate anonymously.
Since the system relies on having many different users, I doubt they are going to prohibit civilian access, as it would make the system far less effective.
You're right. We get typos in summaries all the time; articles about cold fusion only come along every week or so! It's quite clear which one is more important.
I would be very surprised if evolution had not already arranged things so that the mutation rate was optimal.
Or just use an alternative DNS record: still works.
That's also an excellent way to completely scramble anything that relies on stored magnetism inside your laptop.
It's amazing how much this sounds like something produced by the Sirius Cybernetics Corporation.
It is amazing what people will do for a prettier interface.
Microsoft seem to know this well. I have had similar experiences with other products that were much prettier than their obsolete versions but also had much-reduced functionality.
It's interesting to think about why this might be the case.
Presumably, predisposition towards "religion" helped us survive in some way. I think part of it would be that "religion" makes it easier for people to work together. "Religious" people are easier for leaders to direct?
Perhaps "religious" people are also more community oriented, to the benefit of all?
Well, if the AI was developed using evolutionary methods, then it's quite likely. Evolution can be quite hard to prevent, given a reasonably complex system.
Well, you have to admit that their chances don't look good.
All the planning in the world won't get you out of an impossible situation.
A jury trial may not be impossible, but perhaps they've worked out that the odds aren't in their favour (I don't know if they are or not, not having read TFA).
I'm involved in a final year undergraduate software engineering project at the moment, to develop a CMS. We looked at Django as well as many others, and finally chose Pylons.
Django is great if all you care about is content; if you want to develop something more flexible, I think Pylons is the way to go as it is far more customizable and powerful (although the two projects are very similar).
Of course, they're both quite young projects, with the associated instability of the APIs.
The best thing about Pylons is that all they're trying to do is integrate (the best) components into one framework: SQLAlchemy, Mako templates, and so on... and you can switch between the competing components easily.
And if those "reposter" news outlets do become more original (or die off), the wire service loses big time - as it loses lots of subscribers.
Perhaps Google is doing this as a way to hit back at AFP for all the lawsuits?
Just because this is possible doesn't mean that it's likely. In fact, it's much more likely that a flexible and well-designed system wins the contest, simply because it is more robust.
Even if it doesn't, people are doing tests and working on the problem. Something has to come out of it, even if it has nothing to do with space flight.
I think it is time to stop using the word "free". Use "no cost" or "unrestricted" instead.
At this rate, "free" will have about the same semantic content as "good".
Perhaps they think they'll make more money if they get rid of the Red Cross entirely? I mean, come on. It's an international symbol, and it's been in use since forever. No-one owns it. Disclaimer: I watched Sicko recently (it was funny)
The lead author receives no benefit from you using NoScript!
It's not surprising that he is investigating this area anyway, given that he is probably very interested in this area.
Just because you never would doesn't mean that there aren't people out there who don't mind giving something to the community...
Hah.
I picked up my laugh from a guy I spent a week hiking with, about the age of 17. Bastard. I laugh like a donkey.
The flight simulator X-Plane has dynamics for Mars (or did have, years ago), and there were a few planes that would fly in a Mars atmosphere. They had to fly quite fast and had fairly (but not obscenely) large wings.
I don't think the Shuttle would cut it, however.