Ironically, it looks that way in my dorm. When Halo 2 came out, 9 of the 10 Halo owners in my dorm bought it. Halo 3? 1 person. 1.
Ah well, I suppose that one of these days, I'll get me one of those new-fangled consoles. And immediately take it apart to see if I can't improve on the manufacturer's design.
Dinosaur bones in Antarctica, shellfish on Everest. Congratulations, you found the remains of something that died a while back. Good job. I personally found the remains of a Nintendo in my storage shed the week before last... I intend to publish my findings sometime early next March. I'll keep you posted.
I propose that we should worry first about the huge amount of oxygen being removed from the atmosphere AS WE SPEAK. This whole breathing thing is selfish and damaging to the environment.
No, seriously... there is a LOT of wind in the world. Mention wind to the residents of Stockton, MO, and they can tell you exactly where they were when tornados destroyed their town 5 years ago. Where do people get this crazy idea that you are somehow going to destroy the environment by putting up what amount to windmills?
P.S. I believe the proper chain of events is the rain stops falling, and then the dust STOPS settling.
The British are cigarettes? Seriously, old boy, I'm from MISSOURI, and I know that slang means different things across the pond. If you don't catch up with the times, people are going to think you're one of those extremely unintelligent trolls. Oh, the shaminess of it all.
"All right, Beatrice, there was no alien. The flash of light you saw in the sky was not a UFO. Swamp gas from a weather balloon was trapped in a thermal pocket and reflected the light from Venus."
You can tell that it's Microsoft's version for sure. Just look at the behavior of Ballmer... and, notice the "random feature" of generating flying chairs...
I'll get right on slapping RFID tags in surgical sponges.
Hey, while we're at it, let's stick some in lunch meat, so we can keep track of who's eating what. And then we can put them in cans of soda. And diapers. Bottles of shampoo? RFID everywhere! Let's weave them in the fiber of our carpets! Let's put them in matchsticks!
"If you're implying that the storage and replication of music is comparable in difficulty to its creation or interpretation, then I can only weep at your ignorance. My computer can show me a scanned image of Monet's Water Lilies, but that doesn't make it an artist."
Cry if you want to, but that doesn't change the fact that I think a sufficiently-well-programmed computer can compose music. I'll elaborate throughout this reply, I just wanted to touch on this real quick.
"I'm not sure where you got that idea. Perhaps you're not listening to very good music? Music is, and has always been, about the manipulation of emotion and intellect. Naturally, certain structures and patterns emerge, some of which are mathematically definable. To assert that they are ALL mathematically definable is pretty arrogant. "As any Computer Science student can tell you", there are plenty of problems that are easy to formulate, but algorithmically insoluble."
Just because YOU don't understand the mathematical relationships, doesn't mean that they don't exist. You use an interesting term - "algorithmically insoluble." It's interesting that, when working with an infinite data set, almost ANY problem approaches insolubility... we simply don't know enough about infinite. So, we do what any good mathematician, computer scientist, physicist, engineer or musician does: we limit our data set.
For example, let's examine time signatures. There are an infinite number of time signatures (4/4 3/4 6/8 7/8 9/12...) but how many are useful? Theoretically speaking, a computer should be better at reading and understanding time signatures than people are, since they can generally deal with fractions more easily. But, the problem can be tremendously reduced by placing upper and lower bounds on the ratios, the numerator, and the denominator. 1/1 time is not very useful, nor is 256/8.
Likewise, what of the selection of tempo? Certainly, there are an infinite number of tempos, all greater than zero and generally accepted as being integers. But what is the number of useful tempos? 1 beat per minute would not make for a very exciting song. 9 bpm? 20? Larghissimo is a seldom-seen marking. What about the upper bound? Prestissimo is generally indicated as 200-208 bpm... just how much faster are we willing to go? At some point, the notes would be generated faster than the speaker could physically produce them. At some point, the human ear drum would be vibrating too fast to distinguish individual notes. So, we can definitely establish a theoretical upper bound on tempo, and a definite lower bound of 1 beat per minute.
Are you familiar with the concept of sopranos, altos, tenors, baritones, and basses? How about the bass clef, treble clef, alto clef, tenor clef? There is an "infinite" range of musical tones. So, let's limit our data set. First, we can discard all tones above 20 KHz. Too high to hear. Heck, I'd venture that we should consider that older people might want to listen to our music, so let's drop all tones above 15 KHz. Next, we have to limit our low end to no less than 20 Hz; I'd even go so far as suggesting that perhaps 60 Hz might be a better bound. That's not bad, but we can limit further: Musical scales consist of a certain mathematical relationship between tones, based on wavelength. (Frequencies between those precisely defined notes are still useful, and can be used to great effect, but those uses do not adversely effect our data set sufficiently to worry about.) Likewise, we almost always limit our ranges further based on instrument or vocal ability. I used to play the bassoon, and it was often frustrating to me because it had such a ridiculous range compared to my saxophone... so many octaves! However, the tuba had a greater range still, and the flute could go far higher up the scale than I could. Sopranos are not known for their ability to hit Bb below the bass clef staff, nor do basses sing
Oh yeah, because they can't design an accurate spectrum analyzer, timer, waveform shaper... It's just too much.
Geez, what will they think of next, music stored in a digital, binary format? Never happen.
Translation: Quit talking out your butt. Music is all about mathematics. Granted, sometimes the calculations are extremely complex... but as any Calculus or Physics student can tell you, complex calculations aren't impossible, they just take longer. We're talking about a COMPUTER here. Math is EVERYTHING it does.
...a return to the days when computer bugs were really bugs...
...now if we could just get back to the days when the people using the computer helped design the thing and knew better than to douse it in any kind of liquid...
I don't know about adding it to the curriculum, but it's fairly simple to get a school club started. A local young ham started a club at my old high school, and became the first female recipient of the Goldfarb Memorial Scholarship from the ARRL for spearheading the effort. Several of the teachers and the administrators started working on their licenses as a result, in addition to several students. All it takes to get ham radio in the schools is one person dedicated to starting a club.
Funny how I've seen PSK-31 (a digital mode) work perfectly without a detectable (to my Field Day trained ear) signal. Morse may be better than voice... but a computer can outdo a human ear.
Note that I say this as a computer scientist and as a ham radio operator myself. I'm not suggesting that Morse is obsolete or useless... just that it's not automatically the best thing ever. The wonderful thing about this hobby is that it breeds innovation. From the earliest days of ultra-wide-bandwidth spark gap generators to a complete packet transceiver the size of an Altoids tin, the world of amateur radio, and the amateurs that have built it, is nothing short of amazing. However, if we really want to bring life back in this hobby, we need to stop all the infighting and think. We need to look at each operating mode honestly and attempt to appreciate the merits and the shortcomings of each of them. For every great thing you can name about the code, I can name another mode that does it better. But that's not what the hobby is about.
In response to the article, good on the Oregon hams, and congrats to them for getting recognized. They deserve it.
Slashdot Mirror
But the real question is, can I change software modes and nuke a burrito with my wireless card?
Or, even better, my roommate?
You've never been to central Missouri, then.
I did. The marriage ended badly. In the dorm, at least I get regular meals.
They already have.
They turned the profits from the sales of Halo 1 into "The Abomination" sometimes referred to as Halo 2.
Ironically, it looks that way in my dorm. When Halo 2 came out, 9 of the 10 Halo owners in my dorm bought it. Halo 3? 1 person. 1.
Ah well, I suppose that one of these days, I'll get me one of those new-fangled consoles. And immediately take it apart to see if I can't improve on the manufacturer's design.
Dinosaur bones in Antarctica, shellfish on Everest. Congratulations, you found the remains of something that died a while back. Good job. I personally found the remains of a Nintendo in my storage shed the week before last... I intend to publish my findings sometime early next March. I'll keep you posted.
No, and the idea is to keep it that way.
I propose that we should worry first about the huge amount of oxygen being removed from the atmosphere AS WE SPEAK. This whole breathing thing is selfish and damaging to the environment.
No, seriously... there is a LOT of wind in the world. Mention wind to the residents of Stockton, MO, and they can tell you exactly where they were when tornados destroyed their town 5 years ago. Where do people get this crazy idea that you are somehow going to destroy the environment by putting up what amount to windmills?
P.S. I believe the proper chain of events is the rain stops falling, and then the dust STOPS settling.
The British are cigarettes? Seriously, old boy, I'm from MISSOURI , and I know that slang means different things across the pond. If you don't catch up with the times, people are going to think you're one of those extremely unintelligent trolls. Oh, the shaminess of it all.
"All right, Beatrice, there was no alien. The flash of light you saw in the sky was not a UFO. Swamp gas from a weather balloon was trapped in a thermal pocket and reflected the light from Venus."
If we combine this story with the load-balancing with your car story, we get...
You can tell that it's Microsoft's version for sure. Just look at the behavior of Ballmer... and, notice the "random feature" of generating flying chairs...
I'll get right on slapping RFID tags in surgical sponges.
Hey, while we're at it, let's stick some in lunch meat, so we can keep track of who's eating what. And then we can put them in cans of soda. And diapers. Bottles of shampoo? RFID everywhere! Let's weave them in the fiber of our carpets! Let's put them in matchsticks!
I thought that most of the resistance came from the expense of superconductors. My bad.
Try 1: In Soviet Russia, the government bails out private industry!
Try 2: I for one welcome our new private sector spacefaring overlords!
Try 3 Yes, it can exit the atmosphere, but can it run Linux?
Try 4: 2010: Google puts up a spacecraft before Microsoft. Chair sales skyrocket (as do some of the chairs).
There, that should cover it.
Well, if you insist...
"If you're implying that the storage and replication of music is comparable in difficulty to its creation or interpretation, then I can only weep at your ignorance. My computer can show me a scanned image of Monet's Water Lilies, but that doesn't make it an artist."
Cry if you want to, but that doesn't change the fact that I think a sufficiently-well-programmed computer can compose music. I'll elaborate throughout this reply, I just wanted to touch on this real quick.
"I'm not sure where you got that idea. Perhaps you're not listening to very good music? Music is, and has always been, about the manipulation of emotion and intellect. Naturally, certain structures and patterns emerge, some of which are mathematically definable. To assert that they are ALL mathematically definable is pretty arrogant. "As any Computer Science student can tell you", there are plenty of problems that are easy to formulate, but algorithmically insoluble."
Just because YOU don't understand the mathematical relationships, doesn't mean that they don't exist. You use an interesting term - "algorithmically insoluble." It's interesting that, when working with an infinite data set, almost ANY problem approaches insolubility... we simply don't know enough about infinite. So, we do what any good mathematician, computer scientist, physicist, engineer or musician does: we limit our data set.
For example, let's examine time signatures. There are an infinite number of time signatures (4/4 3/4 6/8 7/8 9/12...) but how many are useful? Theoretically speaking, a computer should be better at reading and understanding time signatures than people are, since they can generally deal with fractions more easily. But, the problem can be tremendously reduced by placing upper and lower bounds on the ratios, the numerator, and the denominator. 1/1 time is not very useful, nor is 256/8.
Likewise, what of the selection of tempo? Certainly, there are an infinite number of tempos, all greater than zero and generally accepted as being integers. But what is the number of useful tempos? 1 beat per minute would not make for a very exciting song. 9 bpm? 20? Larghissimo is a seldom-seen marking.
What about the upper bound? Prestissimo is generally indicated as 200-208 bpm... just how much faster are we willing to go? At some point, the notes would be generated faster than the speaker could physically produce them. At some point, the human ear drum would be vibrating too fast to distinguish individual notes. So, we can definitely establish a theoretical upper bound on tempo, and a definite lower bound of 1 beat per minute.
Are you familiar with the concept of sopranos, altos, tenors, baritones, and basses? How about the bass clef, treble clef, alto clef, tenor clef? There is an "infinite" range of musical tones. So, let's limit our data set. First, we can discard all tones above 20 KHz. Too high to hear. Heck, I'd venture that we should consider that older people might want to listen to our music, so let's drop all tones above 15 KHz. Next, we have to limit our low end to no less than 20 Hz; I'd even go so far as suggesting that perhaps 60 Hz might be a better bound. That's not bad, but we can limit further: Musical scales consist of a certain mathematical relationship between tones, based on wavelength. (Frequencies between those precisely defined notes are still useful, and can be used to great effect, but those uses do not adversely effect our data set sufficiently to worry about.) Likewise, we almost always limit our ranges further based on instrument or vocal ability. I used to play the bassoon, and it was often frustrating to me because it had such a ridiculous range compared to my saxophone... so many octaves! However, the tuba had a greater range still, and the flute could go far higher up the scale than I could. Sopranos are not known for their ability to hit Bb below the bass clef staff, nor do basses sing
Oh yeah, because they can't design an accurate spectrum analyzer, timer, waveform shaper... It's just too much.
Geez, what will they think of next, music stored in a digital, binary format? Never happen.
Translation: Quit talking out your butt. Music is all about mathematics. Granted, sometimes the calculations are extremely complex... but as any Calculus or Physics student can tell you, complex calculations aren't impossible, they just take longer. We're talking about a COMPUTER here. Math is EVERYTHING it does.
...a return to the days when computer bugs were really bugs...
...now if we could just get back to the days when the people using the computer helped design the thing and knew better than to douse it in any kind of liquid...
I don't know about adding it to the curriculum, but it's fairly simple to get a school club started. A local young ham started a club at my old high school, and became the first female recipient of the Goldfarb Memorial Scholarship from the ARRL for spearheading the effort. Several of the teachers and the administrators started working on their licenses as a result, in addition to several students. All it takes to get ham radio in the schools is one person dedicated to starting a club.
Funny how I've seen PSK-31 (a digital mode) work perfectly without a detectable (to my Field Day trained ear) signal. Morse may be better than voice... but a computer can outdo a human ear.
Note that I say this as a computer scientist and as a ham radio operator myself. I'm not suggesting that Morse is obsolete or useless... just that it's not automatically the best thing ever. The wonderful thing about this hobby is that it breeds innovation. From the earliest days of ultra-wide-bandwidth spark gap generators to a complete packet transceiver the size of an Altoids tin, the world of amateur radio, and the amateurs that have built it, is nothing short of amazing. However, if we really want to bring life back in this hobby, we need to stop all the infighting and think. We need to look at each operating mode honestly and attempt to appreciate the merits and the shortcomings of each of them. For every great thing you can name about the code, I can name another mode that does it better. But that's not what the hobby is about.
In response to the article, good on the Oregon hams, and congrats to them for getting recognized. They deserve it.
Funny, I often say the same thing about roommates.
I'm not sure, but I do know that Jason Bourne would limp away.
Oh, and don't forget about the explosion that almost (ALMOST) kills John McClane.
No, but I did. You'd think link whores would keep up with the latest IIS patches. Sheesh.
You forgot to mention that it has legs and you're chasing it with a shotgun.
That's okay, I'm patenting trolling on Slashdot.