Life evolves on this planet from simple things (single celled organisms) to more complex organisms and eventually humans evolve. In every step of this evolutionary ladder, intelligence increases.
Perhaps human intelligence represents the limit achievable through biological means and the next step in evolution of life on this planet can only be achieved through artificial means. That is, higher intelligence can only be achieved through artificial machines designed by us. In turn, the machine will devise smarter descendants and hence the cycle continues.
Perhaps this is our destiny in the universe, to allow life to progress to the next stage of evolution. After all it is easier for life to spread and explore the universe as machines rather than fragile biological creatures.
1. Evolution is not necessary linear. It is for example likely that virus is descendant of a single-cell organism which become simpler.
2. Evolution does not have to progress. As long as species finds stable niche it can rest there for millions of years.
3. I'd say much but not that biology is fragile. We cannot make a strings as good as spiders. Wood is very good composite etc. Human have much superior regeneration abilities that any of our machines (most of which do not regenerate). Computer can suffer amnesia after relativly short fall.
Aren't we all deterministic automotons governed by the laws of physics? How can free will exist? I think many religious followers are the first to try to claim that free will caused humanity's fall and the subsequent assholishness of people. As a neuroscientist, I don't believe in free will, but that doesn't negate the concepts of responsibility. David Hume, an early Anglo philosopher put it simply that the idea of cause-and-effect necessitates determinism, so free will (reacting to something according to your past experience) is actually determinism.
Well - I'm not a specialist but last time I checked important branch of physics was non-determined[1] - but i haven't heard that cause-effect relationship has been denied.
[1] Of course there is no concept of purly random number - every random number have certain distribution and in some cases (linear distribution) range.
I always thought that bigger risk for hospital is an random virus then DDoS attack.
Actually, the bigger risk for a hospital would be a lethal biological virus... that is immune to blue pills.
Are you familliar with the current policies of pharmacology corporations? I'm not a doctor/pharmacologist but pills tends to be in all colors - whites, blues, orange... Some lethal biological virus may not be immune to some blue pills (although there may be policy to not produce blue pills for fighting lethal biological viruses) - and hospitals have specialists who know how to use them.
1. I always thought that bigger risk for hospital is an random virus then DDoS attack. I did heard about normal virus attacking hospital - nobody has planned so just someone opened one attachment too far or something like that - but I did not about DDoS attack. Since what would he want to achive?
2. Unfortunatly we live in the world in which there are people beliving they will get 10% for transfer of money from one country to another (usually those countries for some reason don't have good reputation). And usually having AV, not opening attachments unless expected etc. helps avoiding most of the attacks for normal people - nobody will try to DDoS them. Different matter is with companies etc. They need to be secure.
I was considered paranoid whenI advised having password and not using admin account for others.
3. Yes - for most people the discovery of the next bug in IE/Fx/Opera/... does matter. I'm not interested much if there is theoretical possibility that software is safe. I'm interested in the security here and now. Numbers of bugs discovered is not the best measurement - much better is time-to-patch - but still it is important in practice.
Similary - a single shifts in prices are not important for theoretical economist - but for consumers and producers they are much more important [although thay may posses much less knoledge about origin of shift etc.].
4. Monolithic kernel does not necessary implies 3rd part drivers. OpenBSD have monolithic kernel and AFAIR does not support loading modules after boot. Linux have most of the drivers included and is perfectly operative without loading modules. There are resons why to use them but they are optional.
Except it doesn't work like that with ads. You can watch public television for free and get ads, or you can pay money to watch cable television and get ads. You can pay $50 for Battlefield 1942, or you can pay $50 for Battlefield 2142 and get ads.
Ads increase profit for companies, they never decrease the price of products, except those offered for free (like Google.)
Are you actually say that the whole microeconomics and theory of firm is actually not working?
Why would producers be not willing to produce until the stop point - i.e. until the marginal costs are equal to marginal income? Putting ad would increase a bit a cost but making the bigger income (it maks income you said) would move the stop point to left - i.e. increse output and therefore supply. If they don't want the others will be happy to enter the market with increased profits.
You might argue that ads have negative value for consumers. But we can split the following reasoning in two parts:
- Consumer are indifferent with regard to advertisment. Therfore demand stays the same and supply increase. Basicly it means that price decreased.
- Cosumers percive the ads as having negative utility for them. Therefore demand fall which means that price dropped more then in first case (quantity may increase or drop depending on elasticity etc.)
In each case price falled.
It is very easy to say that "Ads increase profit for companies, they never decrease the price of products" - but probably it is much harder to prove it.
PS. Please note that all above reasoning have used in ceteris paribus conditions.
Why not buy ORM? At least here I could buy ORM from shop which was cheaper. It had limitations (lack of support[1]) but still it was worth (i.e. total cost was lower then full version and in this specific circumstances I had to buy windows for someone).
[1] I don't use it anyway. Last time I ask simple question I needed answer really quickly they redirected me to newsgroups. I have it with my favourite OS (I only home-support Windows) for free...
Open-source implementation of.Net is on the 2.x (mono stable branch) level with some support of the 3.x (mono dev branch 1.9.x).
It is not full implementation of.Net library - especially the MS-extensions (not standarised).
The only ones pleased with this change as far as I've been able to gather are the CAD people wanting to continue to run their old, stale OpenGL bases code until the end of time. For new development, using OpenGL is a pain in the back side, which is why I just began bringing my renderer up in D3D10.
The last time I try to learn DX it was painful. Is it changed in DX 10?
You should do some research. Microsoft has $23 billion dollars in cash. They have no debt at all. Every quarter is profitable. Check out real numbers here and let those inform your rantings.
The problem is not in absolute numbers but in relative. For example Vista sells did not come up to expectations.
I'm not saying thet you are not right - I'm stating that research needs to be more deep.
What if MS implemented mount as he will IE8: # mount -o sync -t vfat/dev/sda1/mnt/c Do you really want to mount vfat with sync flag [y/N]: y Please note that untill version x.y.zz sync flag was broken. Do you want to mount with sync flag [y/N]: y/dev/sda1 has been mounted asynchronously
Because MS doesn't support xhtml, SVG and MathML have basically been killed as practical browser technologies.
Yes, so you can't really count them as advantages XHTML brings, can you?
Using this logic CSS 3 or CSS 2 brings nothing since IE do not supports it. Using this logic any non-MS, or at least without plugin, technology has no advantages.
Lack of support is disadvantage of program or exclude the technology from practical use but it is not a disadvantage of it.
Re:Bet there still isn't a decent "Stop!" button
on
HTML V5 and XHTML V2
·
· Score: 1
I would rather see to have different, hierarchical namespaces/'boxes'/jails. IE. None of the code from given box can read/write from anything except the same namespace - and having nested namespaces can be also forbidden(something like jail chroots). Sample code: <html xmlns="www.w3.org/1999/xhtml" xmlns:xr="..." xmlns:xi="http://www.w3.org/2001/XInclude">
<head>
<script type="text/javascript" xr:name="ad" src=".../ad.js"/>
</head>
<body xml:lang="en">
<xi:include href=".../ad.xhtml" xr:name="ad" xr:forbidden="nested"/>
</body> </html> Or: <html xmlns="www.w3.org/1999/xhtml" xmlns:xr="..." xmlns:xi="http://www.w3.org/2001/XInclude">
<head>
<script type="text/javascript" xr:name="ad" src=".../ad.js"/>
</head>
<body xml:lang="en">
<xi:include href=".../ad.xhtml" xr:name="ad" xr:nested="false"/>
</body> </html>
I guess that the problems starts when you want to embed the xhtml in other xml document (as you do with svg or mathml in xhtml). You have no doctype to check if it is xhtml2 or xhtml5
Morover I heard about people who actually asked while buying computer will they have assistent (of course they didn'y know the name). May be we have to, adding a option to switch it on/off, include in our software to make it popular?
Along with the effect of readability I'd feel depressed on black desktop (how much will cost healling the depression after watching too many black pages?
The main problem with mulithreading is synchronisation. Ie. how to menage with two threads/applications which want to have access to the same resource. Parallel running could be done by cheap processes which are synchronised by system (pipes for example: cat file | grep... | sed... | awk... | uniq | sort -n) which gives us possibility of not thinking of it.
Also the compiler could optimise program to run parallely.
IMHO the main problem is low level API of pp. We have to think of what resources do we use (and libraries which are used by our program).
Slashdot Mirror
Life evolves on this planet from simple things (single celled organisms) to more complex organisms and eventually humans evolve. In every step of this evolutionary ladder, intelligence increases.
Perhaps human intelligence represents the limit achievable through biological means and the next step in evolution of life on this planet can only be achieved through artificial means. That is, higher intelligence can only be achieved through artificial machines designed by us. In turn, the machine will devise smarter descendants and hence the cycle continues.
Perhaps this is our destiny in the universe, to allow life to progress to the next stage of evolution. After all it is easier for life to spread and explore the universe as machines rather than fragile biological creatures.
1. Evolution is not necessary linear. It is for example likely that virus is descendant of a single-cell organism which become simpler. 2. Evolution does not have to progress. As long as species finds stable niche it can rest there for millions of years. 3. I'd say much but not that biology is fragile. We cannot make a strings as good as spiders. Wood is very good composite etc. Human have much superior regeneration abilities that any of our machines (most of which do not regenerate). Computer can suffer amnesia after relativly short fall.
Aren't we all deterministic automotons governed by the laws of physics? How can free will exist? I think many religious followers are the first to try to claim that free will caused humanity's fall and the subsequent assholishness of people. As a neuroscientist, I don't believe in free will, but that doesn't negate the concepts of responsibility. David Hume, an early Anglo philosopher put it simply that the idea of cause-and-effect necessitates determinism, so free will (reacting to something according to your past experience) is actually determinism.
Well - I'm not a specialist but last time I checked important branch of physics was non-determined[1] - but i haven't heard that cause-effect relationship has been denied. [1] Of course there is no concept of purly random number - every random number have certain distribution and in some cases (linear distribution) range.
Actually, the bigger risk for a hospital would be a lethal biological virus... that is immune to blue pills.
Are you familliar with the current policies of pharmacology corporations? I'm not a doctor/pharmacologist but pills tends to be in all colors - whites, blues, orange... Some lethal biological virus may not be immune to some blue pills (although there may be policy to not produce blue pills for fighting lethal biological viruses) - and hospitals have specialists who know how to use them.
1. I always thought that bigger risk for hospital is an random virus then DDoS attack. I did heard about normal virus attacking hospital - nobody has planned so just someone opened one attachment too far or something like that - but I did not about DDoS attack. Since what would he want to achive? 2. Unfortunatly we live in the world in which there are people beliving they will get 10% for transfer of money from one country to another (usually those countries for some reason don't have good reputation). And usually having AV, not opening attachments unless expected etc. helps avoiding most of the attacks for normal people - nobody will try to DDoS them. Different matter is with companies etc. They need to be secure. I was considered paranoid whenI advised having password and not using admin account for others. 3. Yes - for most people the discovery of the next bug in IE/Fx/Opera/... does matter. I'm not interested much if there is theoretical possibility that software is safe. I'm interested in the security here and now. Numbers of bugs discovered is not the best measurement - much better is time-to-patch - but still it is important in practice. Similary - a single shifts in prices are not important for theoretical economist - but for consumers and producers they are much more important [although thay may posses much less knoledge about origin of shift etc.]. 4. Monolithic kernel does not necessary implies 3rd part drivers. OpenBSD have monolithic kernel and AFAIR does not support loading modules after boot. Linux have most of the drivers included and is perfectly operative without loading modules. There are resons why to use them but they are optional.
Are you actually say that the whole microeconomics and theory of firm is actually not working? Why would producers be not willing to produce until the stop point - i.e. until the marginal costs are equal to marginal income? Putting ad would increase a bit a cost but making the bigger income (it maks income you said) would move the stop point to left - i.e. increse output and therefore supply. If they don't want the others will be happy to enter the market with increased profits. You might argue that ads have negative value for consumers. But we can split the following reasoning in two parts: - Consumer are indifferent with regard to advertisment. Therfore demand stays the same and supply increase. Basicly it means that price decreased. - Cosumers percive the ads as having negative utility for them. Therefore demand fall which means that price dropped more then in first case (quantity may increase or drop depending on elasticity etc.) In each case price falled. It is very easy to say that "Ads increase profit for companies, they never decrease the price of products" - but probably it is much harder to prove it. PS. Please note that all above reasoning have used in ceteris paribus conditions.
Except that with XHTML you can easily embed other XML data such as (but not limited to): - SVG - MathML
Why not buy ORM? At least here I could buy ORM from shop which was cheaper. It had limitations (lack of support[1]) but still it was worth (i.e. total cost was lower then full version and in this specific circumstances I had to buy windows for someone). [1] I don't use it anyway. Last time I ask simple question I needed answer really quickly they redirected me to newsgroups. I have it with my favourite OS (I only home-support Windows) for free...
Open-source implementation of .Net is on the 2.x (mono stable branch) level with some support of the 3.x (mono dev branch 1.9.x).
It is not full implementation of .Net library - especially the MS-extensions (not standarised).
The only ones pleased with this change as far as I've been able to gather are the CAD people wanting to continue to run their old, stale OpenGL bases code until the end of time. For new development, using OpenGL is a pain in the back side, which is why I just began bringing my renderer up in D3D10.
The last time I try to learn DX it was painful. Is it changed in DX 10?
You should do some research. Microsoft has $23 billion dollars in cash. They have no debt at all. Every quarter is profitable. Check out real numbers here and let those inform your rantings.
The problem is not in absolute numbers but in relative. For example Vista sells did not come up to expectations.
I'm not saying thet you are not right - I'm stating that research needs to be more deep.
Also the names are not very helpful. Imagine the configuration of apache was in files named as /etc/apache/{6f35ff5c-5bcc-420d-a1f4-8e37af8eaf06}
57/100 in Firefox: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux i686; en-US; rv:1.9b3) Gecko/2008020513 Firefox/3.0b3
49/100 in Epiphany (on Gecko 1.8)
Why you don't use for example gxine?
There is a lot of gnome media players - totem is just one of them (included into the default gnome installation).
They never stated they do - MS stated that IE8 will pass ACID 2.
Something like:
/dev/sda1 /mnt/c /dev/sda1 has been mounted asynchronously
What if MS implemented mount as he will IE8:
# mount -o sync -t vfat
Do you really want to mount vfat with sync flag [y/N]: y
Please note that untill version x.y.zz sync flag was broken. Do you want to mount with sync flag [y/N]: y
That's what I thought. And since xhtml 5 can be embed in xml document as any other xml format we have problem ;) as far as I understend.
To be honest I heard that they want to introduce XHTML 5 along with HTML 5 with exactly the same rules but xml formatting. I may be wrong.
I would rather see to have different, hierarchical namespaces/'boxes'/jails. /> /> /> />
IE. None of the code from given box can read/write from anything except the same namespace - and having nested namespaces can be also forbidden(something like jail chroots).
Sample code:
<html xmlns="www.w3.org/1999/xhtml" xmlns:xr="..." xmlns:xi="http://www.w3.org/2001/XInclude">
<head>
<script type="text/javascript" xr:name="ad" src=".../ad.js"
</head>
<body xml:lang="en">
<xi:include href=".../ad.xhtml" xr:name="ad" xr:forbidden="nested"
</body>
</html>
Or:
<html xmlns="www.w3.org/1999/xhtml" xmlns:xr="..." xmlns:xi="http://www.w3.org/2001/XInclude">
<head>
<script type="text/javascript" xr:name="ad" src=".../ad.js"
</head>
<body xml:lang="en">
<xi:include href=".../ad.xhtml" xr:name="ad" xr:nested="false"
</body>
</html>
I guess that the problems starts when you want to embed the xhtml in other xml document (as you do with svg or mathml in xhtml). You have no doctype to check if it is xhtml2 or xhtml5
Morover I heard about people who actually asked while buying computer will they have assistent (of course they didn'y know the name).
//...
May be we have to, adding a option to switch it on/off, include in our software to make it popular?
GAssistant assistant = g_assistant_new(window);
g_assistant_set_animation("print");
Along with the effect of readability I'd feel depressed on black desktop (how much will cost healling the depression after watching too many black pages?
> (I assume petabyte (10^15 or 2^50, depending on convention) is the word you're looking for.)
Peta(P) is SI prefix meaning 10^15
Correct prefix for 2^50 is pebi (Pi)
The main problem with mulithreading is synchronisation. Ie. how to menage with two threads/applications which want to have access to the same resource. ... | sed ... | awk ... | uniq | sort -n) which gives us possibility of not thinking of it.
Parallel running could be done by cheap processes which are synchronised by system (pipes for example: cat file | grep
Also the compiler could optimise program to run parallely.
IMHO the main problem is low level API of pp. We have to think of what resources do we use (and libraries which are used by our program).
Well. If you have a static ip...