Name a microbe (bacteria/virus) that can kill a person. I don't know of one. It takes countless millions of them replicating and replicating to kill anything. Humans aren't necessarily so different...
As long as a person can only vote once per post, I don't think it'll be a problem.
If someone wants to rate every single comment, I say why not. Theirs is only one voice in 500. I'll only rate the comments I feel deserve my attention, as will you. But this way, you don't have all the moderator points getting used up in the first fifteen minutes after a story is posted. I think this "running average" system would allow ratings to better reflect the genuine worth of a post.
...or, allow every moderator to moderate EVERY post, once per post. And instead of the one point up vs one point down system, go to a running average system.
Every post from a logged-in user begins its life with 60 points. Anonymous starts at 50pts.
Every moderator can moderate every post, so say one moderator thinks an anonymous post sucks and gives the post a rating of 5pts. This would make it (50+5)/2 = 28pts. The next moderator also thinks it sucks but not so much, so he gives it 30pts. (50+5+30)/3 = 28pts. Another moderator like doesn't like the post, but really likes the guy's.sigs and decides to score up this post by assigning it 90pts. (50+5+30+90)/4 = 44. As more moderators "vote" on a post, the better an overall picture of a post's worth.
Users can set their threshhold to 05% if they want to see everything.
Anyway, I am going to mention it. This has absolutely nothing whatsoever to do with Slashdot. I read Slashdot to get past the punditry and fluff pieces-- and I am starting to see way too many of them.
I like seeing updates/new articles... even if they aren't something that I'm interested in reading. I think the cadre of trained mammals have a good handle on what's appropriate slashdot fodder and what's not. I read this article and the comments because reading a slashdot review on these movies mattered to me. It's not "pure tech, all the time". It's "stuff that matters".
Besides, I have the theory that People Like to Make Comments (PLMC). If SlashDot were to post fewer articles, I don't think the comment load would decrease, it would just make reading the comments for any particular story that much less doable. PLMC implies that if you spread the grits and portman posters across enough articles, esp. the articles they are more likely to read, then the more tech/geek articles of speciality interest will end up having better comments due to lack of participation by the whimsical and bored.
Take this bit of noise and do with it what you will...
Somewhat unrelated, and not really an abuse, but last night I was called by MCI, who wanted me to switch long distance from AT&T. They knew I had an account with Blockbuster and offered me 4 free rentals with Blockbuster if I switched. I wonder what other info MCI has about me.
Heh, aren't mountains formed by tectonic events? Doesn't that imply that areas around mountains are inherently unsuitable for large scale interconnected building projects?
Can't you just put the works in a tube and suck the air out? Of course you'd have to stop up the end and open it at the right time (or make the stopper disposable that the craft could break through... Would the inrushing air at the time of opening negate the effects of accelleration through a near-vacuum? Could fans (or something) be placed near the end to maintain some kind of decreased pressure within the tube? Perhaps simply heating the last 50 meters or so of the tube would be enough of a plug?
it would be MUCH more impressive if he could start with raw chemicals When you reduce to a certain level, you ARE using raw chemicals (indistinguishable as coming from any particular host). Think of it more like... he is doing object-oriented genetic construction.
How about if, during the 5 minute lag between Ground Control and the Mars Explorer, the rover had managed to knock itself upside down. A person could easily nudge it back over with their foot, but radio transmissions from Earth aren't going to do squat. Also, that 5 minute lag only gets longer and longer the further away from Earth you go, so having a person on the scene will dramatically affect the outcome in time-sensitive, mission-override type scenarios. AI is great for accomplishing the tasks the engineers can think of, but not for the unknown.
I suspect that more energy has been expended acoustically talking about CF than has ever been produced by the process, worldwide. Remember, the claims are of the (100W in, 100.01 +/-.008 out) variety rather than the "boil a lobster with an AA cell" variety.
Okay troll, point out a single other instance of any other fuel source creating more energy than is put into it. Even if it is.01 per 100W, a city-sized power plant isn't going to be interested in creating power 100W at a time. They are going to be creating huge amounts of power and those extra.01W will quickly add up to free, useful, clean power.
Also, I don't know enough about it, but perhaps the effect is more potent/more stable on a larger scale?
I think that if we can get cold fusion working reliably and get broad use of it, we will be able to have perpetual motion-esque effects (devices that run so long with so little fuel and with little waste product).
So you have a larger central light source that brightens and dims randomly. You have a series of LEDs around it's border. These LEDs turn on one at a time in a random fashion. The combination of these two random events, coupled with your iris's reponse to them should provide a pretty compelling security arrangement. But I don't think that this is sufficient. It would be nice to have a brainwave recognition complement to the iris ID. When you are getting your iris scan, you think of something in particular and don't tell anyone. So your iris pattern is recognized in conjunction with how your eye responds to what you are thinking of, combined with the particular pattern of your brainwaves upon thinking of this something. Even if everyone thought of Sex with the same person in the same position in the same setting, etc., everyone would think of it in different ways, would have different brainwave patterns, and different iris reactions. It'd be interesting to see a spoof that circumvented this.
IIRC, the article stated that they were working on a system with three colors, so that it would work just like a television (which uses three colors), or a printer, etc. I think enough time has passed between then and now for an advance from 2 color.
But I'm just trying to remember from that old article, too. I don't have it around anymore.
That's all I remember, and it may well prove to be more than I remember.
The only thing I have to contribute to your comment is my disagreement of abstract thought (as you defined it) occurring after/during adolescence. I've tutored low-GPA 3rd graders and easily taught them about x=5, but then x=3 in the next problem. And then showed them how if x=3, then x^3=27, etc. I've found these particular kinds of abstract thinking are pretty easy to teach if you have the time and good nature to explain it in a way they can understand.
Cheesy to follow up my own reply, but incorporating the tracker into headphones would also assist 3D sound efforts, by allowing the user to experience 3D sound depending on the position of the user's head, not the position of the character's head, so a user could "look around" for a sound source while keeping the character's weapon trained on a particular location, etc.
But do the scientists right now really understand what they do? I don't think so. It seems like take this gene here and put it there, lets switch some sequences here and there and lets see what will happen. Trial and error mostly. I tend to think that's how nature does it, too. Only with the human-controlled chicken environment, the chickens that are best suited to being eaten are allowed to reproduce, rather than the other way around of nature. Come to think of it, I wonder why nature hasn't developed a breed of critter that's outside the food chain. Something that tastes bad to everything and breeds like a porn show. Sure it would be bad for the world, but I see nature as a random force and not an intellectual one. But back to the original point, I don't think that nature causing mutations is better or worse than humans doing so. Nature (I believe) doesn't have a Plan for it's mutations. Most of it's experiments are horrible flops and don't even make it out of the womb, much less proceed to create a discoverable species. If mankind creates a 5-assed chicken and lets it loose into the wild, I'll just bet it will either find an embarrassing niche in nature or it won't. Most likely won't, and nature will never know the difference between this one failed mutation and the countless others before and after it.
I don't think nature is so resilient as it is dynamic. Perhaps it will change from what you think it "ought to be" but will continue to flourish along whatever track it does. Mankind may be able to create animals better suited to the environments mankind creates (cages, apartments, workstations, etc.), but I really doubt something like a miniature pinscher would find a place in a forest of bears, ticks, and wolves (who in turn are having a hard time finding a place in man's world).
So, mutation is simply mutation. Whether it's good or bad based on what causes it is a subjective matter.
Their main product is completely incompatible with Windows.
.... is INCORRECT! Thank you for contributing. R4 has read and write access to FAT/FAT32 partitions. You can even run Windows apps (painfully slowly so far) using BOCHS.
But it is not Free Software.
Well, yes and no. The OS is (as has been exhaustively researched) not Open Source, nor Free as in Beer. But there are many apps that have been made and are being made for Be that are both Speech and Beer. And the demo CD is pretty cheap as far as Beer goes.
All Linux has to do is get *good enough*...
Ah, the clarion call of the mediocre. Now THAT'S a standard to strive for. I understand your point that "Even though Linux rocks ass, it wouldn't even need to, to beat Windows, since it's free" but you seem to be giving Linux the short end of the stick with your point.
And I laugh out loud thinking of my next trolling response (in this forum) to: Most people won't spend extra money for software that's a *little* better than what they already have.
Response: Good thing Linux is free, then.
And it's also the reason that BeOS will explode beyond its niche. Because it easily beats Windows for price/performance. Hardware support is coming along nicely (it's The Big Priority), and apps are beginning to pop up all over the place. It's a fun place. And we'd love to have you stop by sometime.
I've looked at the news.com story, seen the veronica.org site, and visited the archie comics site. I just can't shake the feeling that something fishy is going on here and not in the way everyone seems to think. It's just a feeling, I don't have any evidence or inside information on this, but upon evaluating the situation... it just seems so ludicrous. I am continually amazed at the creative stupidity of corporations, and if this situation is everything that it is reported to be, I'll be amazed yet again. But my gut feeling is that someone is pulling a fast one on news.com at the expense of Archie comics. And we are providing the Rent-A-Mob element. Or perhaps someone at news.com has an agenda all their own... conspiracy theory, anyone?
But my first reaction to any obvious situation is to be skeptical. Sometimes a cigar is just a cigar. At this moment, I can't imagine a worse scenario for Archie Comics to be in. I'm sure their lawyers know little Veronica Sam isn't competing with their comic Veronica. I'm sure they know the ReadyWhip Bad PR potential of something like this. It just isn't worth it. To my mind, there's just gotta be something more to this.
Slashdot Mirror
Name a microbe (bacteria/virus) that can kill a person. I don't know of one. It takes countless millions of them replicating and replicating to kill anything. Humans aren't necessarily so different...
If someone wants to rate every single comment, I say why not. Theirs is only one voice in 500. I'll only rate the comments I feel deserve my attention, as will you. But this way, you don't have all the moderator points getting used up in the first fifteen minutes after a story is posted. I think this "running average" system would allow ratings to better reflect the genuine worth of a post.
Every post from a logged-in user begins its life with 60 points. Anonymous starts at 50pts.
Every moderator can moderate every post, so say one moderator thinks an anonymous post sucks and gives the post a rating of 5pts. This would make it (50+5)/2 = 28pts. The next moderator also thinks it sucks but not so much, so he gives it 30pts. (50+5+30)/3 = 28pts. Another moderator like doesn't like the post, but really likes the guy's .sigs and decides to score up this post by assigning it 90pts. (50+5+30+90)/4 = 44. As more moderators "vote" on a post, the better an overall picture of a post's worth.
Users can set their threshhold to 05% if they want to see everything.
It seems like the Right Way, to me.
Trolls lurks under bridges and eat billy goats.
I like seeing updates/new articles... even if they aren't something that I'm interested in reading. I think the cadre of trained mammals have a good handle on what's appropriate slashdot fodder and what's not. I read this article and the comments because reading a slashdot review on these movies mattered to me. It's not "pure tech, all the time". It's "stuff that matters".
Besides, I have the theory that People Like to Make Comments (PLMC). If SlashDot were to post fewer articles, I don't think the comment load would decrease, it would just make reading the comments for any particular story that much less doable. PLMC implies that if you spread the grits and portman posters across enough articles, esp. the articles they are more likely to read, then the more tech/geek articles of speciality interest will end up having better comments due to lack of participation by the whimsical and bored.
Take this bit of noise and do with it what you will...
Somewhat unrelated, and not really an abuse, but last night I was called by MCI, who wanted me to switch long distance from AT&T. They knew I had an account with Blockbuster and offered me 4 free rentals with Blockbuster if I switched. I wonder what other info MCI has about me.
Heh, aren't mountains formed by tectonic events? Doesn't that imply that areas around mountains are inherently unsuitable for large scale interconnected building projects?
Can't you just put the works in a tube and suck the air out? Of course you'd have to stop up the end and open it at the right time (or make the stopper disposable that the craft could break through... Would the inrushing air at the time of opening negate the effects of accelleration through a near-vacuum? Could fans (or something) be placed near the end to maintain some kind of decreased pressure within the tube? Perhaps simply heating the last 50 meters or so of the tube would be enough of a plug?
it would be MUCH more impressive if he could start with raw chemicals
When you reduce to a certain level, you ARE using raw chemicals (indistinguishable as coming from any particular host). Think of it more like... he is doing object-oriented genetic construction.
How about if, during the 5 minute lag between Ground Control and the Mars Explorer, the rover had managed to knock itself upside down. A person could easily nudge it back over with their foot, but radio transmissions from Earth aren't going to do squat. Also, that 5 minute lag only gets longer and longer the further away from Earth you go, so having a person on the scene will dramatically affect the outcome in time-sensitive, mission-override type scenarios. AI is great for accomplishing the tasks the engineers can think of, but not for the unknown.
Say, that's not a bad idea. Instead of dropping it back into the atmosphere, fill it up with fuel. Use it as a big tanker.
Okay troll, point out a single other instance of any other fuel source creating more energy than is put into it. Even if it is .01 per 100W, a city-sized power plant isn't going to be interested in creating power 100W at a time. They are going to be creating huge amounts of power and those extra .01W will quickly add up to free, useful, clean power.
Also, I don't know enough about it, but perhaps the effect is more potent/more stable on a larger scale?
I think that if we can get cold fusion working reliably and get broad use of it, we will be able to have perpetual motion-esque effects (devices that run so long with so little fuel and with little waste product).
So you have a larger central light source that brightens and dims randomly. You have a series of LEDs around it's border. These LEDs turn on one at a time in a random fashion. The combination of these two random events, coupled with your iris's reponse to them should provide a pretty compelling security arrangement.
But I don't think that this is sufficient. It would be nice to have a brainwave recognition complement to the iris ID. When you are getting your iris scan, you think of something in particular and don't tell anyone. So your iris pattern is recognized in conjunction with how your eye responds to what you are thinking of, combined with the particular pattern of your brainwaves upon thinking of this something. Even if everyone thought of Sex with the same person in the same position in the same setting, etc., everyone would think of it in different ways, would have different brainwave patterns, and different iris reactions. It'd be interesting to see a spoof that circumvented this.
But I'm just trying to remember from that old article, too. I don't have it around anymore.
That's all I remember, and it may well prove to be more than I remember.
You can't (accurately) determine someone's intelligence based on whether you agree with them.
The only thing I have to contribute to your comment is my disagreement of abstract thought (as you defined it) occurring after/during adolescence. I've tutored low-GPA 3rd graders and easily taught them about x=5, but then x=3 in the next problem. And then showed them how if x=3, then x^3=27, etc. I've found these particular kinds of abstract thinking are pretty easy to teach if you have the time and good nature to explain it in a way they can understand.
Cheesy to follow up my own reply, but incorporating the tracker into headphones would also assist 3D sound efforts, by allowing the user to experience 3D sound depending on the position of the user's head, not the position of the character's head, so a user could "look around" for a sound source while keeping the character's weapon trained on a particular location, etc.
So incorporate the tracker into a set of headphones.
I tend to think that's how nature does it, too. Only with the human-controlled chicken environment, the chickens that are best suited to being eaten are allowed to reproduce, rather than the other way around of nature. Come to think of it, I wonder why nature hasn't developed a breed of critter that's outside the food chain. Something that tastes bad to everything and breeds like a porn show. Sure it would be bad for the world, but I see nature as a random force and not an intellectual one. But back to the original point, I don't think that nature causing mutations is better or worse than humans doing so. Nature (I believe) doesn't have a Plan for it's mutations. Most of it's experiments are horrible flops and don't even make it out of the womb, much less proceed to create a discoverable species. If mankind creates a 5-assed chicken and lets it loose into the wild, I'll just bet it will either find an embarrassing niche in nature or it won't. Most likely won't, and nature will never know the difference between this one failed mutation and the countless others before and after it.
I don't think nature is so resilient as it is dynamic. Perhaps it will change from what you think it "ought to be" but will continue to flourish along whatever track it does. Mankind may be able to create animals better suited to the environments mankind creates (cages, apartments, workstations, etc.), but I really doubt something like a miniature pinscher would find a place in a forest of bears, ticks, and wolves (who in turn are having a hard time finding a place in man's world).
So, mutation is simply mutation. Whether it's good or bad based on what causes it is a subjective matter.
But it is not Free Software.
Well, yes and no. The OS is (as has been exhaustively researched) not Open Source, nor Free as in Beer. But there are many apps that have been made and are being made for Be that are both Speech and Beer. And the demo CD is pretty cheap as far as Beer goes.
All Linux has to do is get *good enough*...
Ah, the clarion call of the mediocre. Now THAT'S a standard to strive for. I understand your point that "Even though Linux rocks ass, it wouldn't even need to, to beat Windows, since it's free" but you seem to be giving Linux the short end of the stick with your point.
And I laugh out loud thinking of my next trolling response (in this forum) to:
Most people won't spend extra money for software that's a *little* better than what they already have.
Response: Good thing Linux is free, then.
And it's also the reason that BeOS will explode beyond its niche. Because it easily beats Windows for price/performance. Hardware support is coming along nicely (it's The Big Priority), and apps are beginning to pop up all over the place. It's a fun place. And we'd love to have you stop by sometime.
But my first reaction to any obvious situation is to be skeptical. Sometimes a cigar is just a cigar. At this moment, I can't imagine a worse scenario for Archie Comics to be in. I'm sure their lawyers know little Veronica Sam isn't competing with their comic Veronica. I'm sure they know the ReadyWhip Bad PR potential of something like this. It just isn't worth it. To my mind, there's just gotta be something more to this.
Egad. I hadn't thought of that.