While I think that exploring and colonizing space are cool, here are a couple reasons I don't really agree with Hawking:
I'm always sceptical of the idea of superpathogens. I mean, are we claiming suddenly that we can engineer more successful bacteria than millions of years of evolution? I haven't seen any evidence of that. Sure, there will be dangerous pathogens created, by us and by natural selection, over the next millennium. But it's highly unlikely that any of them would wipe out the human race. Rather, they'd decimate us and we would adapt. Not a pretty picture, but not the end of humanity. Besides, I don't see how getting off the planet helps this: we'll bring pathogens with us and who knows how they'll mutate in their new environment.
Moving to space is hard. No, really: we haven't even mastered the technology to live underwater on our own planet for indefinite periods of time. Or to live in a self sustaining way in other harsh environments indefinitely. Like the dessert, tundra, or the top of Mt. Everest. And these are many many orders of magnatude easier than living in space or on another planet. We are so tied to our environment we could almost qualify as parasites. Yet we fancy oursleves as these standalone creatures. But any steps we've taken away from our environment involve some type of major life support tethering us back to our host. Of course with enough time and resources this could be overcome, but I think this would be far more difficult than just addressing the problems Hawking is worried about directly. Escaping the planet is a nice dream, but it's not a practical backup plan.
The stuff he's talking about is all stuff we can adapt to more easily than we could escape from, or in the case of pathogens, can't escape from at all. So while I think humanity should keep it's eyes on the stars, it's not a bad idea to make sure the homestead is running well first.
Not quite... the format itself is something you need to know. I don't know how that effects the outcome, but if the cracker doesn't know whether they're using just letters, two english words, capitalizing any letters in the words, adding a symbol between the words... overall I think it's a decent password scheme if the words are chosen randomly (not hand picked) and if you vary them just a little with captalization, 1337 speak, or a concatination symbol. Oh, and my dictionary has over 200K words in it too.
Ah yes, these books were my favorite form of entertainment between the 4th grade or so and the 7th (when I got my C64). There were a few imitations, too, that could be occasionally just as good as the original brand, like twist-a-plot and endless quest. I was a bit surprised they all went out of print, as though there wasn't going to be any kids left to read them or something. Though perhaps that was the case during the early computer era. I wonder why they think there's a market now?
For an immature-yet-adult take on choose your own adventures online, I've always dug BRAD: The Game. Just about the weirdest choose your own adventure one could imagine.
I agree there's no soul. Should we allow the killing of any dependent? I can't think of an airtight reason why not. Still, there's something missing from that argument.
I can't understand why companies willfully lock themselves into a Fisher-Price platform just because all the kiddies use it.
I don't think that's it at all. Games are written by people and people have a limited desire to learn and adapt. What I mean by that is that most programmers will write what they know and like. And as far as I can tell, most game programmers know and like Windows & Direct X. I've don't know why that is, but it probably has something to do with momentum... they start by learning how to write mods for their favorite game and they go from there. Why in the world would they throw all that knowledge out so they can capture a tiny market share?
As a mac user with a dell at home for games, it doesn't matter that much to me. I don't play games that often anyways. I'm happy with my mac being my creative/work machine. And then I have a gamecube and a dell at home.
I think you misunderstand the term "scientific study". But that's okay, most do. I'm also not sure I agree with your reading of history.
I think you are not realizing that everyone who has ever accomplished any social change has had a group of people who would claim they are "ranting, raving and demonizing those who agree with them", from Jesus to Gandhi to Malcom X. I'm not saying that everyone who rants and raves makes positive social change, and yes persuasion is important too, but you (or anyone) complaining about an activist being abrasive is certainly not reason enough they stop. If it were, there wouldn't be much happening.
But it sounds like we live in different worlds, you and I. Enjoy yours.
Really, and you've done a scientific study to determine that the abrasiveness of these groups outweighed the benefit of bringing the issues into the public eye for discussion by more level heads? Not sure exactly how you would determine that to be the case, but it's an interesting view.
Sure, there is some amorphous "best" way to go about getting things changed, but taking into account mankind's general ignorance of social machinery I tend to think it's better to do something than waiting for the perfect strategy. Every group that has ever achieved anything has pissed people off and been the target of ridicule... at least until they succeeded. Sometimes the ridicule continues even then. But things keep rolling on regardless.
Yes, it will sort itself out. You know why? Because people, including those like Mr. Stallman, will make a stink and raise awareness.
I mean, you can say that about anything in history: it will sort itself out. But that's no reason to avoid action. The "sorting itself out" is a result of peoples' action. A more accurate statement would be "everything that is a problem brings about resistance, and if large enough the resistance overcomes the problem". But that doesn't make much of an impact because it's so obvious and it implies action and responsibility on the part of the writer and listener. So we'll always here someone like this guy who is essentially saying "let someone else make the free market the work".
Games are a relatively new medium and so things will take some time to settle. Who knows how it'll all pan out? But there is GarageGames, an early entry in expanding the indie gaming market. They're still relatively small, but MarbleBlast just got ported to the xbox 360.
I actually don't really understand our obsession with "hits". There are good indie games out there for anyone who wants to look, and there are indie developers making a living off their games, as far as I can tell. I recently had a ball playing Darwinia, and Rag Doll Kung Fu.
I've made games, movies, and music, and I think it's just about artists and audiences getting over their obsession with being a big hit and dominating the world. Many of my favorite things are smaller scale things that touched me personally, and would not necessarily appeal to the mass market. And I think that's okay.
On the consoles it is far more limited, but I feel that is just an issue of openness. I mean, there wasn't much indie music on minidisc either. But the music in other formats exists, and games on the PC or online exist, and anyone with the talent and skills can still make something cool. And if they can't dominate the world and make millions like EA or Sony... oh well. I still appreciate it.
I would bet that the majority of people here could care less that there is ongoing rampant rape and physical abuse in US prisons. They may not have a desire for it, but they aren't going to do anything to stop it.
I understand the desire for karmic balance. Raping a extortionist is not karmic balance.
Wait... why is rape funny? Oh yeah: because we are as inhumane as anyone we've ever called evil.
I'm super glad these two pricks got caught. And I am glad they'll be removed from society for a while, or at least financially punished. But I hope they don't get raped, as they would be a) condoning torture, b) likely make them even more problematic members of the society in which I live and c) give an even worse criminal the pleasure of raping.
Why can't you have your simple phone AND I have my complex phone? Is there any reason why one of these should be "better" as opposed to "better for you" or "better for me"?
You know, that's a great question, and one that has bugged me for a long time. There is an idea (in the tech world at least) that there is the "right" way to do things, and all companies chase after that. You'd think that someone would try a different tack, offering something actually different that appeals to a different type of consumer, but in fact most companies merely copycat each other. There's no reason for complex cell phones to go away, but there's no reason for simple ones to have gone away either.
When I look at cars, there's a much wider margin of option. It's well understood that some people want a Lexus, some want a Ford Pickup, some a Prius, and some a Taurus. But even there people (not the companies) still argue about what is "best", which is a ridiculous concept.
People just have too much an idea of "ultimate", and they feel they need to guard their preference by putting down and calling for the death of the other options. The way Mac, Windows, and Linux people bash each other. Who cares? Use what you like! And let there be more variety of companies and products out there!
Yeah, my family revealed themselves on that one, too. After years of being vehemently pro-life, someone in the family had an abortion (not medically necessary) and they all found ways to justify it so they wouldn't have to condemn the person. It's paper-thin morality. And they haven't learned a thing from either experience or fessed up. Don't know what to do with people like that except ignore them. Which is hard when it's your family:)
I'd have to agree with this. Members of my own family flipped out over the Terry Schiavo thing, calling it murder. And this was after they had pulled the plug on my grandmother for being in a similar state after a stroke. This was back in '91 and she was in PVS for only a couple weeks. All I had to do was remind them and they shut up. Around me, anyways... they'd still go on preaching to others who didn't know they had made the same decision for their own loved ones.
Yeah, that was my guess; that it wasn't common in the real world.
I wonder how much research there has been as to what the optimal size for the heap threshold is. It's just interesting that the malloc implementations differ so much. It sure makes sense to distinguish between small/fast allocations and larger allocations. But is 35K really optimal? Maybe it is. Do they publish data on this anywhere?
It's a good article. I wonder why OSX isn't compiled with a larger heap threshold, though? I'd do with a 2x performance increase on common operations even if it cost more memory (in the form of fragmentation). My only guess is that in real world usage this is not common, and thus it wouldn't improve real-world performance much?
Heh... well, just download the macsaber program from the article. When you start it up it has a realtime readout of the roll, tilt, and force. Pretty neat, though I can't say how accurate it is. You might be better off with an old fashioned bubble level from the local hardware store:)
Slashdot Mirror
While I think that exploring and colonizing space are cool, here are a couple reasons I don't really agree with Hawking:
I'm always sceptical of the idea of superpathogens. I mean, are we claiming suddenly that we can engineer more successful bacteria than millions of years of evolution? I haven't seen any evidence of that. Sure, there will be dangerous pathogens created, by us and by natural selection, over the next millennium. But it's highly unlikely that any of them would wipe out the human race. Rather, they'd decimate us and we would adapt. Not a pretty picture, but not the end of humanity. Besides, I don't see how getting off the planet helps this: we'll bring pathogens with us and who knows how they'll mutate in their new environment.
Moving to space is hard. No, really: we haven't even mastered the technology to live underwater on our own planet for indefinite periods of time. Or to live in a self sustaining way in other harsh environments indefinitely. Like the dessert, tundra, or the top of Mt. Everest. And these are many many orders of magnatude easier than living in space or on another planet. We are so tied to our environment we could almost qualify as parasites. Yet we fancy oursleves as these standalone creatures. But any steps we've taken away from our environment involve some type of major life support tethering us back to our host. Of course with enough time and resources this could be overcome, but I think this would be far more difficult than just addressing the problems Hawking is worried about directly. Escaping the planet is a nice dream, but it's not a practical backup plan.
The stuff he's talking about is all stuff we can adapt to more easily than we could escape from, or in the case of pathogens, can't escape from at all. So while I think humanity should keep it's eyes on the stars, it's not a bad idea to make sure the homestead is running well first.
Cheers.
Not quite... the format itself is something you need to know. I don't know how that effects the outcome, but if the cracker doesn't know whether they're using just letters, two english words, capitalizing any letters in the words, adding a symbol between the words... overall I think it's a decent password scheme if the words are chosen randomly (not hand picked) and if you vary them just a little with captalization, 1337 speak, or a concatination symbol. Oh, and my dictionary has over 200K words in it too.
Cheers.
Ah yes, these books were my favorite form of entertainment between the 4th grade or so and the 7th (when I got my C64). There were a few imitations, too, that could be occasionally just as good as the original brand, like twist-a-plot and endless quest. I was a bit surprised they all went out of print, as though there wasn't going to be any kids left to read them or something. Though perhaps that was the case during the early computer era. I wonder why they think there's a market now?
For an immature-yet-adult take on choose your own adventures online, I've always dug BRAD: The Game. Just about the weirdest choose your own adventure one could imagine.
Cheers.
I agree there's no soul. Should we allow the killing of any dependent? I can't think of an airtight reason why not. Still, there's something missing from that argument.
Cheers.
I can't understand why companies willfully lock themselves into a Fisher-Price platform just because all the kiddies use it.
I don't think that's it at all. Games are written by people and people have a limited desire to learn and adapt. What I mean by that is that most programmers will write what they know and like. And as far as I can tell, most game programmers know and like Windows & Direct X. I've don't know why that is, but it probably has something to do with momentum... they start by learning how to write mods for their favorite game and they go from there. Why in the world would they throw all that knowledge out so they can capture a tiny market share?
As a mac user with a dell at home for games, it doesn't matter that much to me. I don't play games that often anyways. I'm happy with my mac being my creative/work machine. And then I have a gamecube and a dell at home.
Cheers.
Unfortunately, you're wrong.
Cheers.
I think you misunderstand the term "scientific study". But that's okay, most do. I'm also not sure I agree with your reading of history.
I think you are not realizing that everyone who has ever accomplished any social change has had a group of people who would claim they are "ranting, raving and demonizing those who agree with them", from Jesus to Gandhi to Malcom X. I'm not saying that everyone who rants and raves makes positive social change, and yes persuasion is important too, but you (or anyone) complaining about an activist being abrasive is certainly not reason enough they stop. If it were, there wouldn't be much happening.
But it sounds like we live in different worlds, you and I. Enjoy yours.
Cheers.
Really, and you've done a scientific study to determine that the abrasiveness of these groups outweighed the benefit of bringing the issues into the public eye for discussion by more level heads? Not sure exactly how you would determine that to be the case, but it's an interesting view.
Sure, there is some amorphous "best" way to go about getting things changed, but taking into account mankind's general ignorance of social machinery I tend to think it's better to do something than waiting for the perfect strategy. Every group that has ever achieved anything has pissed people off and been the target of ridicule... at least until they succeeded. Sometimes the ridicule continues even then. But things keep rolling on regardless.
Cheers.
Yes, it will sort itself out. You know why? Because people, including those like Mr. Stallman, will make a stink and raise awareness.
I mean, you can say that about anything in history: it will sort itself out. But that's no reason to avoid action. The "sorting itself out" is a result of peoples' action. A more accurate statement would be "everything that is a problem brings about resistance, and if large enough the resistance overcomes the problem". But that doesn't make much of an impact because it's so obvious and it implies action and responsibility on the part of the writer and listener. So we'll always here someone like this guy who is essentially saying "let someone else make the free market the work".
Cheers.
What's sad is that it's hard to recognize the irony because so many people would make the same argument seriously.
Cheers.
You are a strange one, son.
I figure this oxygen would be stored inside a sealed moonbase. But I'm curious if the moon has enough gravity to hold an atmosphere?
Cheers.
Games are a relatively new medium and so things will take some time to settle. Who knows how it'll all pan out? But there is GarageGames, an early entry in expanding the indie gaming market. They're still relatively small, but MarbleBlast just got ported to the xbox 360.
Cheers.
I actually don't really understand our obsession with "hits". There are good indie games out there for anyone who wants to look, and there are indie developers making a living off their games, as far as I can tell. I recently had a ball playing Darwinia, and Rag Doll Kung Fu.
I've made games, movies, and music, and I think it's just about artists and audiences getting over their obsession with being a big hit and dominating the world. Many of my favorite things are smaller scale things that touched me personally, and would not necessarily appeal to the mass market. And I think that's okay.
On the consoles it is far more limited, but I feel that is just an issue of openness. I mean, there wasn't much indie music on minidisc either. But the music in other formats exists, and games on the PC or online exist, and anyone with the talent and skills can still make something cool. And if they can't dominate the world and make millions like EA or Sony... oh well. I still appreciate it.
Cheers.
Nobody here condones or advocates torture.
I would bet that the majority of people here could care less that there is ongoing rampant rape and physical abuse in US prisons. They may not have a desire for it, but they aren't going to do anything to stop it.
I understand the desire for karmic balance. Raping a extortionist is not karmic balance.
Cheers.
LOL! ROTFL!
Wait... why is rape funny? Oh yeah: because we are as inhumane as anyone we've ever called evil.
I'm super glad these two pricks got caught. And I am glad they'll be removed from society for a while, or at least financially punished. But I hope they don't get raped, as they would be a) condoning torture, b) likely make them even more problematic members of the society in which I live and c) give an even worse criminal the pleasure of raping.
Cheers.
Why can't you have your simple phone AND I have my complex phone? Is there any reason why one of these should be "better" as opposed to "better for you" or "better for me"?
You know, that's a great question, and one that has bugged me for a long time. There is an idea (in the tech world at least) that there is the "right" way to do things, and all companies chase after that. You'd think that someone would try a different tack, offering something actually different that appeals to a different type of consumer, but in fact most companies merely copycat each other. There's no reason for complex cell phones to go away, but there's no reason for simple ones to have gone away either.
When I look at cars, there's a much wider margin of option. It's well understood that some people want a Lexus, some want a Ford Pickup, some a Prius, and some a Taurus. But even there people (not the companies) still argue about what is "best", which is a ridiculous concept.
People just have too much an idea of "ultimate", and they feel they need to guard their preference by putting down and calling for the death of the other options. The way Mac, Windows, and Linux people bash each other. Who cares? Use what you like! And let there be more variety of companies and products out there!
Cheers.
Yeah, my family revealed themselves on that one, too. After years of being vehemently pro-life, someone in the family had an abortion (not medically necessary) and they all found ways to justify it so they wouldn't have to condemn the person. It's paper-thin morality. And they haven't learned a thing from either experience or fessed up. Don't know what to do with people like that except ignore them. Which is hard when it's your family :)
Cheers.
You sanctamonious types are all mouth.
I'd have to agree with this. Members of my own family flipped out over the Terry Schiavo thing, calling it murder. And this was after they had pulled the plug on my grandmother for being in a similar state after a stroke. This was back in '91 and she was in PVS for only a couple weeks. All I had to do was remind them and they shut up. Around me, anyways... they'd still go on preaching to others who didn't know they had made the same decision for their own loved ones.
Cheers.
why bother, when any meaningful contributions will succumb so soon to entropy?
:) Nonetheless, I take part. Both in life and Wikipedia.
Heh. That's a pretty reasonable question to ask about life itself
Cheers.
I didn't understand what the palladium was for. But from the Wikipedia entry:
Pallaium has the uncommon ability to absorb up to 900 times its own volume of hydrogen at room temperatures.
The page includes lost of other tidbits, too. I had no idea it was such a useful metal.
Cheers.
Yeah, that was my guess; that it wasn't common in the real world.
I wonder how much research there has been as to what the optimal size for the heap threshold is. It's just interesting that the malloc implementations differ so much. It sure makes sense to distinguish between small/fast allocations and larger allocations. But is 35K really optimal? Maybe it is. Do they publish data on this anywhere?
Cheers.
It's a good article. I wonder why OSX isn't compiled with a larger heap threshold, though? I'd do with a 2x performance increase on common operations even if it cost more memory (in the form of fragmentation). My only guess is that in real world usage this is not common, and thus it wouldn't improve real-world performance much?
Cheers.
Heh. I think that would be rather frightening :)
Heh... well, just download the macsaber program from the article. When you start it up it has a realtime readout of the roll, tilt, and force. Pretty neat, though I can't say how accurate it is. You might be better off with an old fashioned bubble level from the local hardware store :)
Cheers.