This is chemistry, everything is based on calculations and inferences. It would be wrong to assert that the buckyballs can hold volumes of hydrogen when it only appears that they can.
because the Bible is not considered to be evil. In fact, it is customarily included in every hotel room and alluded to in tons of literature.
by comparing the two, the poster is trying to illustrate that the two holy books are treated unfairly. Although the poster has not proven that this is without reason.
Again, this is where our philosophies differ. If we were to consider the "If a tree falls in a forest.." riddle, I suppose we would also have different conclusions.
Taking information before destroying a body doesn't prevent the person from dying. Do you understand that?
I suppose this is where our philosophies disagree, as I believe that by taking all the information - the person does not die. Of course, their body may die but the person does not.
What on Earth does it change? You're just getting killed in your sleep, you're still dead, and definitely in the telecopy of yourself. What is it so hard to understand about it all? Teleportation = Telecopy then death. That means you die, and a copy of you lives, not you.
Okay going back to the original argument, (to be honest I'm very confused at the conclusion we've reached so I'm going to state my viewpoint for the original debate):
Suppose that time has stopped, as in the person is not making any actions and the environment is not changing.
However, a machine is examining the person on the atomic level and transmitting information about each particle. By the time a hair has been examined by the machine, it no longer appears on the original but it floating in mid-air at the endpoint.
After transmitting each particle (yes, each and every damn particle), the person no longer appears at the startpoint but only at the end and time continues.
Although most of this is scientifically impossible (with the Uncertainty Principle), consider it as a thought experiment. Where in this experiment can you see the person dying?
What the hell are you referring to? Disassembled? The teleportation we're talking about consists in sending full information to allow the reconstruction atom by atom of your body,
the way I've been imagining it is such that the teleporter would kill parts of the person slowly. As in, it would examine one part of the person and then "kill" that part.
about your outsider comment, if no one sees the difference how does the killing actually happen?
Of course, now I seem like a mad man but bear with me with for a second. If the teleported doesn't notice a difference and the outsiders can not tell the difference, how can anyone know that the new copy is not the "original"?
Furthermore as to "tracing the consciousness", what if the person is teleported while they are asleep? There will be no break in consciousness.
and its death is no different from a regular death, that's the point. I wouldn't consider having all of your atoms disassembled within a millisecond to be death, especially if you can revived (or recreated) afterwards.
think about it as a computer program (as many Determinists also believe that a human is simply a Turing machine). If you copy a program from one area of memory to another, does it actually die?
It exists both before and after you copy.
However there are similar situations which go the other way...
I know of at least one company that didn't want to develop/test their internal apps for more than 1 browser, but they have a number of mac and solaris based workstations in the company... Their solution was to have firefox installed on every machine and make people use that. Several of their internal apps don't work with ie at all. when I designed a few AJAX apps at my workplace, I actually did just that. My boss did not seem to mind at all when I showed him how poorly IE rendered the page. (for the record, I tested it on multiple browers. All using the Gecko engine and Webkit ran perfectly, IE struggled and did not render tons of things improperly.)
At this point, it LOOKS like a pretty lopsided situation to me. Add in that while supposedly HD-DVD players (and PCs with HD-DVD in them) have outsold bluray players, (again supposedly) bluray titles themselves seem to have outsold HD-DVD, especially in non US markets. This is accurate only if you exclude the number of PS3 sales from Blu-Ray players.
see here: http://www.tgdaily.com/content/view/35008/97/
when HD-DVD players reached 750 000 (including the HD DVD add-on for the Xbox360), stand-alone Blu-Ray players were only around 200 000. However as of November 11th, the PS3 had 2.1 million sales in North America alone. (http://kotaku.com/gaming/sales-charts/a-look-back-at-the-years-npd-sales-320210.php)
to say that HD DVD players have outsold Blu-Ray players is completely inaccurate unless you specify which type of players you include.
even if there are only 4 commands, the percent error this machine should have in discerning between the commands should be less than 0.1% (1/1000).
Think about it, how often do you tell yourself to stop walking? Now what if one of those is to tell yourself to stop walking across the street.
while this technology seems useful, they'll sure have to test the hell out of it before it gets anywhere near production.
the IB program is a GREAT program, tons of work but it'll help her in the long term. It's also good to get her into some sort of standard curriculum after some time too.
the company I work at has a few Macs (we do graphic design and printing) and we're actually still using Leopard - what the Macs shipped with. Although the newer Mac releases are useful, they don't add much extra functionality. We'll probably be updating when Leopard comes out though (CS3 only runs on Tiger or newer). Note though, you don't need to purchase every upgrade.
using Camino, also on OS X, I tried a few things (hiding Camino, pressing command+w), none of which worked. Then I just used Exposé, brought focus to Camino, and pressed command+w.
Problem solved.
But I think there is a flaw in that logic (note: I am not a mathematician). The theorem doesn't preclude that a given arithmetic system (e.g. human mind) will be able to prove a truth that a weaker system ignored. Thus our ability to see certain truths doesn't mean that there are not other truths that are unprovable to us. IANAM either but that sounds a lot like the halting problem being solved by an "Oracle". For those that don't know: the "Oracle" solution to the halting problem would be a Turing machine that called upon an "Oracle" which provided the answer. (The process that the Oracle goes through is of course, not known)
Also, the Oracle version of the halting problem is not solvable by, you guessed it, Oracles.
But having no separate volume control really harms the usability of the device. While I'm listening to music, I don't want to have to look at the screen. I don't know about you, but when I'm LISTENING to music I don't feel the need to see how much I'm changing the volume by.
Slashdot Mirror
Repeat after me: People are humans. Humans error.
this line, complete with mistake, should be written on the back-hand of every system administrator.
This is chemistry, everything is based on calculations and inferences. It would be wrong to assert that the buckyballs can hold volumes of hydrogen when it only appears that they can.
because the Bible is not considered to be evil. In fact, it is customarily included in every hotel room and alluded to in tons of literature.
by comparing the two, the poster is trying to illustrate that the two holy books are treated unfairly. Although the poster has not proven that this is without reason.
you are correct. it's why all the wallpapers at my school changed on friday the 13th.
it's also funny to see the folks that come here just to waste time at work. Bravo sir! *cough*
Outsider point of view..
Again, this is where our philosophies differ. If we were to consider the "If a tree falls in a forest.." riddle, I suppose we would also have different conclusions.
Taking information before destroying a body doesn't prevent the person from dying. Do you understand that?
I suppose this is where our philosophies disagree, as I believe that by taking all the information - the person does not die. Of course, their body may die but the person does not.
What on Earth does it change? You're just getting killed in your sleep, you're still dead, and definitely in the telecopy of yourself. What is it so hard to understand about it all? Teleportation = Telecopy then death. That means you die, and a copy of you lives, not you.
Okay going back to the original argument, (to be honest I'm very confused at the conclusion we've reached so I'm going to state my viewpoint for the original debate):
Suppose that time has stopped, as in the person is not making any actions and the environment is not changing.
However, a machine is examining the person on the atomic level and transmitting information about each particle. By the time a hair has been examined by the machine, it no longer appears on the original but it floating in mid-air at the endpoint.
After transmitting each particle (yes, each and every damn particle), the person no longer appears at the startpoint but only at the end and time continues.
Although most of this is scientifically impossible (with the Uncertainty Principle), consider it as a thought experiment. Where in this experiment can you see the person dying?
What the hell are you referring to? Disassembled? The teleportation we're talking about consists in sending full information to allow the reconstruction atom by atom of your body,
the way I've been imagining it is such that the teleporter would kill parts of the person slowly. As in, it would examine one part of the person and then "kill" that part.
about your outsider comment, if no one sees the difference how does the killing actually happen?
Of course, now I seem like a mad man but bear with me with for a second. If the teleported doesn't notice a difference and the outsiders can not tell the difference, how can anyone know that the new copy is not the "original"?
Furthermore as to "tracing the consciousness", what if the person is teleported while they are asleep? There will be no break in consciousness.
think about it as a computer program (as many Determinists also believe that a human is simply a Turing machine). If you copy a program from one area of memory to another, does it actually die?
It exists both before and after you copy.
I know of at least one company that didn't want to develop/test their internal apps for more than 1 browser, but they have a number of mac and solaris based workstations in the company... Their solution was to have firefox installed on every machine and make people use that. Several of their internal apps don't work with ie at all. when I designed a few AJAX apps at my workplace, I actually did just that. My boss did not seem to mind at all when I showed him how poorly IE rendered the page. (for the record, I tested it on multiple browers. All using the Gecko engine and Webkit ran perfectly, IE struggled and did not render tons of things improperly.)
This is accurate only if you exclude the number of PS3 sales from Blu-Ray players. see here: http://www.tgdaily.com/content/view/35008/97/
when HD-DVD players reached 750 000 (including the HD DVD add-on for the Xbox360), stand-alone Blu-Ray players were only around 200 000. However as of November 11th, the PS3 had 2.1 million sales in North America alone. (http://kotaku.com/gaming/sales-charts/a-look-back-at-the-years-npd-sales-320210.php)
to say that HD DVD players have outsold Blu-Ray players is completely inaccurate unless you specify which type of players you include.
Move along, nothing to see here.
even if there are only 4 commands, the percent error this machine should have in discerning between the commands should be less than 0.1% (1/1000). Think about it, how often do you tell yourself to stop walking? Now what if one of those is to tell yourself to stop walking across the street. while this technology seems useful, they'll sure have to test the hell out of it before it gets anywhere near production.
the IB program is a GREAT program, tons of work but it'll help her in the long term. It's also good to get her into some sort of standard curriculum after some time too.
the company I work at has a few Macs (we do graphic design and printing) and we're actually still using Leopard - what the Macs shipped with. Although the newer Mac releases are useful, they don't add much extra functionality. We'll probably be updating when Leopard comes out though (CS3 only runs on Tiger or newer). Note though, you don't need to purchase every upgrade.
30 minutes until an American teenager makes one?
300GB? I'd hit that.
using Camino, also on OS X, I tried a few things (hiding Camino, pressing command+w), none of which worked. Then I just used Exposé, brought focus to Camino, and pressed command+w. Problem solved.
Also, the Oracle version of the halting problem is not solvable by, you guessed it, Oracles.