It seems people like virtualities precisely because they incorporate a communicational fluidity that is diametrically opposed to the the hierarchical constraints in real life - you cannot really aks to change anything out there, the best you can do is answer when someone asks you whether you want to have it changed.
Now, I don't want all of my life to hang of a menu-driven system, with somebody else designing the menu. I think that if the online games culture rigidifies to the same extent as political life has rigidified in its transition from Greek direct democracy to today's mediated democracies, pople are going tu rush to alternate fora.
The first issue is scholarship: Many, many results published by living specialists in Cellular Automata are given without footnoting the original author. This has made almost everyone in the CA community really, really angry at Wolfram.
The second issue is the soundness of the fundamental thesis This goes "CAs are responsible for many natural complex phenomena. CAs are undecidable therefore nature is based on CAs and by the way, undecidable". The book fails as evidence of the thesis because it fails to give convincing evidence of a single natural instance of a CA, with the corresponding ruleset. Indeed it digs a deep grave for the thesis, because if Wolfram cannot, with 10 years of work of his undoubted intellect, conclusively exhibit some naturally occurring CAs, that is already evidence that there are fewer such objects than he would wish.
Aside from the issues above, comes the argument that computational complexity is contributory to naturally occurring complexity in say hydrodynamics. And that computation should be treated as a first class citizen in physics - this argument is well presented in the book and deserves to be taken seriously, but again - it does not originate in any way with Wolfram.
By the way, my name is Edmund Ronald. I stand behind my nutshell review.
If the russians are so smart, why not let them do it alone ? And, if Nasa is so smart, why haven't they got a flying shuttle ? is that the russian's fault too ?
This is now the second story at least about the same trivial topic. Slash has only one page, the frontpage, and this is an item that should be buried on page 10. Get a new editor folks -
At least some high-profile software is now verifiably authored in the USA . I guess having the virus writers too far from Mc. Affee, Norton etc. didn't work;)
Slashdot has paid more for its lawyer to write rules, than the winner will get for the design. The worst part of the rules is the "work for hire" part, which I believe denies the winner the right to affix his *name* to the design, a much stronger act than copyright assignment. Now I wonder why the design cannot just be GPLed ?
Interactive means something is "clicking around" . Interactive is very different from "behaviour under load" although the latter is also an important issue. I am not saying that behavior under load is unimportant; but a car shifts gears for a slope and for high speed.
Maybe KDE could auto-magically change the scheduler to speed up reactivity whne it sees the user clicking around ?
Will be adding a gearshift to a Linux box soon, ie a control that allows us to switch the machine from Web Server to DVD machine to interactive development station ?
The difference between waiting 60 seconds and 15 seconds for a login prompt MATTERS !
Methinks we need new benchmarks that take interactivity into account explicitly, or things will never improve.
I wish there were some interactive workload benchmarks - I know this is history, but when the kernel went 1.2 I found my machine really slow; the benchmarks were better but somehow the usability had gone down. It would be neat to measure the way the mouse tracking feels, the "snap" with which menus open in an application, Netscape getting a page and rendering it, etc. . Kernel compilation and numerics are not the main use of a desktop machine these days...
On a related note, my Mac Powerbook was really sluggish until I managed to kill some unneeded processes; they weren't really eating up time by themselves, but were somehow impacting system reactivity: The load factor hardly moved but the system became responsive to mouse clicks.
Absent Palladium, just generating a collision pwould probably be enough to get a bootloader through. A neat trick would be to add to some existing software which has already run the checksum . Of course, distributing such a disk would be a gross violation of Microsoft's copyright , and thus defeat the point of the exercise. However a patch might be a different matter, especially in countries that do not agree with the DCMA.
There are LOTS of ways to get around protection when the hardware can be tampered with, even if you don't modify its structure... just think of a server with an unknown root pasword sitting on your desk.
It's the revenge of the geeks. A mindset, not a technical issue. If you cannot figure out how to configure the OS the geeks wrote, you do not deserve to be using it.
In an interview of an IBM director, I asked why their then current OS had no GUI (when Windows was chipping at the userbase). Reply:
We do not need mice - We are not children !"
Mindsets change - at the speed at which glass flows:)
The following is tendacious:In 1992, Berkeley released its version of Unix and TCP/IP to the public as open-source code, and the combination quickly became the backbone of a network so vast that people started to call it, simply, "the Internet." This is almost as good as the New York Times lead Tim Berners Lee, a physicist at MIT who invented the world-wide web
If I buy a CD I want to be able to rip it. Seems to me pre-ripped CDs would sell better than normal CDs, these again better than copy-fooed CDs. This should be apparent to the buisness people in the companies (not the idiot lawyers), and the copy-fooed should soon head the dodo's way.
GP is useful, as all of Artificial Evolution methods, in the context of optimisatiion, eg, scheduling, place and route, filter design, neural net training.
Unfortunately, GP and GA do not scale up too well, modularity is not being achieved. There is no easy way to define fitness for subroutines (ADFs in KozaSpeak). I believe this is the main reason why the field is stagnating.
Classification failure are usually split into false positives and false negatives. Different cost analysis applies to each failure mode.
Let us talk about eg. shoplifters. First time shoplifters will not be picked up by such a system. Retcurrent shoplifters who have not been caught in the act will not be identified and thus not filtered.
As with antimissile technology, a case can be made that defeating the system requires much less effort on the part of the baddies than erecting it requires for the angels.
This post is rude, but that does not make it either off-topic or flamebait. It expresse a course of action which is perfectly admissible, albeit risky as Apple likes lawsuits.
Slashdot Mirror
It seems people like virtualities precisely because they incorporate a communicational fluidity that is diametrically opposed to the the hierarchical constraints in real life - you cannot really aks to change anything out there, the best you can do is answer when someone asks you whether you want to have it changed.
Now, I don't want all of my life to hang of a menu-driven system, with somebody else designing the menu. I think that if the online games culture rigidifies to the same extent as political life has rigidified in its transition from Greek direct democracy to today's mediated democracies, pople are going tu rush to alternate fora.
Wolfram has had two big problems with his book.
The first issue is scholarship: Many, many results published by living specialists in Cellular Automata are given without footnoting the original author. This has made almost everyone in the CA community really, really angry at Wolfram.
The second issue is the soundness of the fundamental thesis This goes "CAs are responsible for many natural complex phenomena. CAs are undecidable therefore nature is based on CAs and by the way, undecidable". The book fails as evidence of the thesis because it fails to give convincing evidence of a single natural instance of a CA, with the corresponding ruleset. Indeed it digs a deep grave for the thesis, because if Wolfram cannot, with 10 years of work of his undoubted intellect, conclusively exhibit some naturally occurring CAs, that is already evidence that there are fewer such objects than he would wish.
Aside from the issues above, comes the argument that computational complexity is contributory to naturally occurring complexity in say hydrodynamics. And that computation should be treated as a first class citizen in physics - this argument is well presented in the book and deserves to be taken seriously, but again - it does not originate in any way with Wolfram.
By the way, my name is Edmund Ronald. I stand behind my nutshell review.
If the russians are so smart, why not let them do it alone ?
And, if Nasa is so smart, why haven't they got a flying shuttle ? is that the russian's fault too ?
the verification kit was out with the 1Ds, already.
is each site linking to the SCO release gonna get hit for copyright infringement, or only for conspiring to a DOS attack ?
in any case, slashdot by itself is a nice DOS, pity it doesn't last.
This is now the second story at least about the same trivial topic. Slash has only one page, the frontpage, and this is an item that should be buried on page 10. Get a new editor folks -
THIS IS NOT STUFF THAT MATTERS !
DYBTFA ?
Maybe Carli signed her deal with the devil already ? That would explain why they can be so certain.
At least some high-profile software is now verifiably authored in the USA . I guess having the virus writers too far from Mc. Affee, Norton etc. didn't work ;)
Slashdot has paid more for its lawyer to write rules, than the winner will get for the design. The worst part of the rules is the "work for hire" part, which I believe denies the winner the right to affix his *name* to the design, a much stronger act than copyright assignment. Now I wonder why the design cannot just be GPLed ?
Engineers have a notion called professional responsibility. M$ is proof that this does not apply to a large part of the software industry.
Interactive means something is "clicking around" . Interactive is very different from "behaviour under load" although the latter is also an important issue.
I am not saying that behavior under load is unimportant;
but a car shifts gears for a slope and for high speed.
Maybe KDE could auto-magically change the scheduler to speed up reactivity whne it sees the user clicking around ?
Will be adding a gearshift to a Linux box soon, ie a control that allows us to switch the machine from Web Server to DVD machine to interactive development station ?
The difference between waiting 60 seconds and 15 seconds for a login prompt MATTERS !
Methinks we need new benchmarks that take interactivity into account explicitly, or things will never improve.
I wish there were some interactive workload benchmarks - I know this is history, but when the kernel went 1.2 I found my machine really slow; the benchmarks were better but somehow the usability had gone down. It would be neat to measure the way the mouse tracking feels, the "snap" with which menus open in an application, Netscape getting a page and rendering it, etc. . Kernel compilation and numerics are not the main use of a desktop machine these days ...
On a related note, my Mac Powerbook was really sluggish until I managed to kill some unneeded processes; they weren't really eating up time by themselves, but were somehow impacting system reactivity: The load factor hardly moved but the system became responsive to mouse clicks.
Absent Palladium, just generating a collision pwould probably be enough to get a bootloader through. A neat trick would be to add to some existing software which has already run the checksum . Of course, distributing such a disk would be a gross violation of Microsoft's copyright , and thus defeat the point of the exercise.
... just think of a server with an unknown root pasword sitting on your desk.
However a patch might be a different matter, especially in countries that do not agree with the DCMA.
There are LOTS of ways to get around protection when the hardware can be tampered with, even if you don't modify its structure
A discussion on LOTR is where the trolls are on topic !
In an interview of an IBM director, I asked why their then current OS had no GUI (when Windows was chipping at the userbase). Reply:
Mindsets change - at the speed at which glass flows
The following is tendacious:In 1992, Berkeley released its version of Unix and TCP/IP to the public as open-source code, and the combination quickly became the backbone of a network so vast that people started to call it, simply, "the Internet."
This is almost as good as the New York Times lead Tim Berners Lee, a physicist at MIT who invented the world-wide web
If I buy a CD I want to be able to rip it. Seems to me pre-ripped CDs would sell better than normal CDs, these again better than copy-fooed CDs. This should be apparent to the buisness people in the companies (not the idiot lawyers), and the copy-fooed should soon head the dodo's way.
not the fp. hehe
It might be cheaper for everyone if the US agreed to make GPS an accurate, permanent system, independent of political events.
Becuase anytime real GPS gets scrambled, the US would probably also take any rival system down by force.
Would you like to be in an airliner that makes a 100m vertical postioning error in foggy weather ?
GP is useful, as all of Artificial Evolution methods, in the context of optimisatiion, eg, scheduling, place and route, filter design, neural net training.
Unfortunately, GP and GA do not scale up too well, modularity is not being achieved. There is no easy way to define fitness for subroutines (ADFs in KozaSpeak). I believe this is the main reason why the field is stagnating.
Classification failure are usually split into false positives and false negatives. Different cost analysis applies to each failure mode.
Let us talk about eg. shoplifters. First time shoplifters will not be picked up by such a system. Retcurrent shoplifters who have not been caught in the act will not be identified and thus not filtered.
As with antimissile technology, a case can be made that defeating the system requires much less effort on the part of the baddies than erecting it requires for the angels.
This post is rude, but that does not make it either off-topic or flamebait. It expresse a course of action which is perfectly admissible, albeit risky as Apple likes lawsuits.
Hmmm, some of the 3l33t3 crowd might be smart enough to wait until election day to make their political statement :)