If you're talking about passengers and engines breathing air, then any separation wouldn't be an air gap. The separation we have now is an aluminum and plastic gap. And it works.
That's a terrible definition of random. Entropy and statistics have nothing to do with randomness.
Something is random if it is not due to any deterministic cause. Yes, that definition means there is no such thing as a random event, a random number, etc in a deterministic universe. And yes, that is the correct definition. In a deterministic universe there is no such thing as a "random" ordering for a deck of cards as there is no such thing as "random".
Beyond that, their definition is based on patterning a deck after a deck that is the result of an infinite number of shuffles. If the shuffle is performed the same way each time, then the order of the deck will be completely predictable. If the shuffle is not performed the same way each time, then it does not converge into any high entropy or statistically noise state to which you can compare your deck after a finite number of shuffles. Given an infinite number of shuffles there are an infinite number of times the deck is ordered perfectly, and many more infinite number of times the deck is in a low entropy state or statistically clean.
And if you're deliberately seeking to get the deck into some high entropy state by ensuring a semi-regular shuffle pattern and a target number of shuffles, then you're not getting a random deck.
If you believe in a probabilistic universe, then you can have randmoness, but you can never know if something is actually random or not.
No special landing equipment. Except a platform able to withstand the thruster. On the open ocean. With people monitoring the landing. And crews ready to rush in once landing completes (successfully or not).
It may one day be as routine as parallel parking, but basic equipment to help corral the rocket and prevent catastrophic failure is a no brainer. Saying you don't want any special equipment because you want to be able to do this without it is like saying self-driving cars shouldn't have air bags and seat belts because you want them to avoid crashing in the first place
The problems with netting are: You need to support it fairly evenly with some sort of structure anyway. It has to be able to withstand those temperatures. It has to be decently strong, which means a fairly dense netting pattern, which means more weight to the netting itself that you must support with some structure.
Lining a funnel or the action areas of a set of arms with some sort of padding would be as effective as netting. A full-on net would get you more leeway in actually catching the rocket, but they've almost got the vertical landing down anyway.
Build a large funnel, or infundibulum, on the barge. All you have to do is hit the wide top of the funnel at a non-clusterfuck angle. Then you let the structure of the funnel contain and guide the rocket as it continues on down. If you fuck up badly, you won't lose everything. And if you do very well for 98% of the landing but tip toward the end, damage from impacting the walls of the vertically will be incidental and minor as the rocket is still thrusting to lower its velocity (and thus the force of the impact). And if you do it successfully the funnel isn't touched.
Alternatively, do the same but instead of a solid funnel, use closing arms so you can actively catch and assist the rocket if need be, or drop the arms and let the rocket fall into the ocean if you have to abort.
You could also put 8 electromagnets in a circle with the target in the center. If the rocket leans north west, increase power to the southeast magnet and decrease power to the northwest magnet.
Another idea would be to have a guy with a long stick on the barge ready to nudge it just a bit if it starts to tip.
It would be much MORE workable. Bribery and blackmail would have to hit 10 times as many targets to be as effective. Deadlocks would be more easily broken through. The sharp edge of partisan lines would become blurrier. People would have an actual chance of meeting and talking to their representatives outside of some lip service campaign event or writing a big fat check.
And it varies with each individual shuffler, deck of cards, etc. To call such a thing a "proof" is an insult to actual mathematical proofs. To use such a definition of "random" is outright blasphemy.
No, it said "the death of its owner", referring to "the two-wheeler upright scooter". The summary starts off referring to Segway as a company, but after a hyphen it refers to an individual scooter.
Further, the article never says who the owner (of Segway or "the two-wheeler upright scooter") is (or was), so your accusation that people are confusing the inventor for the owner is misguided. They may be conflating the two, as many people saw the inventor as the face of he Segway (both the scooter brand and the company behind it), and presuming him to be the owner of the company. There is no indication of confusion with regards to what the article meant (the owner of the company or the inventor of the device), however. Such confusion would be limited to the ambiguity caused by referring to Segway as a company and referring to it as an individual device, and would result in people not knowing if the owner of the company died or if the owner of an individual Segway (or the only Segway) died.
That's a limitation of the Intel chipsets. SATA Express lets you throw x lanes of PCIe y. That's the whole point of SATA Express instead of doing SATA 12 Gbps. SATA Express is scalable.
I want a bootable PCIe 4.0 (or 3.0) x16 (or x8) card that gives me 4 (or 2) m.2 slots and a RAID controller. Bonus points for passing through TRIM when possible (Intel does it with RAID 0 and RAID 1, I believe) and doing the OPAL/Bitlocker/whatever crypto passthrough so your OS can use the drive's built-in crypto instead of layering its own on top.
Alternatively, give me comparable NVMe SSDs with a PCIe connector instead of an m.2 connector, and give me a motherboard with a RAID controller connected to the PCIe bus, supporting all of the above (I'll use a PCIe riser if I have to).
Hell, I'd even settle for a bootable RAID controller behind 2 NVMe m.2 slots (PCIe 3.0 x4 or better for each) on the motherboard itself.
But as it is, these types of drives are notoriously difficult to buy because Samsung sells them to OEMs only and when you do get them (from RamCity) you're stuck with what your mobo gives you for the m.2 slot or you're stuck with some dodgy m.2 -> PCIe card that gives you 2 slots at PCIe 3.0 2x, or PCIe 3.0 4x with no boot support, and never any way to properly RAID the damned things.
If done right the current set up will save bandwidth. No need to include all the CSS in every page, just reference it and download once, then use the cache.
That's how basic HTTP works. You don't need anything fancy to do that. Your browser has a cache. Webservers can respond to a conditional GET request and say that shit hasn't been modified so you can use your cached copy.
By default, old browsers cached entire pages by default and wouldn't even send the fucking GET request until your local cache expired or you forced a refresh because every bps was precious and users were more often than not disconnected from the internet.
Over 4 hours for a game isn't unreasonable. Between games you can do whatever you want, but once you sit down to one you shouldn't be able to leave unmonitored.
Yes, you can trade off time with storage, but it's still on the order of n for storage, which is infinite in the general sense and impractical in the real-world sense. Think of all the non-reversible operations a single CPU core @ 3 GHz chews through in a year.
With XOR you don't need any additional storage, but there are functions (whether they be at the transistor level or at the application level) where many variables result in a much smaller output. You need additional storage in these cases. You are also not always free to overwrite variables if you can recover them, because many functions may take a single variable as input. Recovering X may involve stupidly long chains, and you need storage to go back through the whole chain for as far as you want to recover.
Additional storage is absolutely necessary for any non-trivial (useful) reversible computing. In the general sense, infinite storage is required (above and beyond the infinite storage for general turing machines) if you want to run them for an unbounded amount of time.
Yup. It's like the plot of Horrible Bosses 2 - they have an idea for a shitty project and score a deal with some AS SEEN ON TV / SKYMALL type company and are too excited to do the basic business legwork. (In the movie, the AS SEEN ON TV company said they wanted like 10,000 units, so the guys took out a loan on a new warehouse space, hired staff to crank out the order, etc. The company then pulled out of the order. The guys didn't get a non-refundable down payment for production costs, so they couldn't pay their lease or workers, and they lost their shit. The company then bought them and their stock of items for pennies on the dollar after they imploded.)
Reversible computing is nothing more than making everything a one-to-one function. Current computing is merely functional, but not one-to-one. Operations such as XOR are not one-to-one functions because XOR(0,1) = 1 and XOR(1,0) = 1; given the output 1 and the function XOR you cannot recover the inputs.
Reversible computing makes all operations one-to-one, and thus reversible. This is achieved by storing some of the inputs for many-to-one functions. If you want to reverse more than one step (the whole point of reversible computing), you need more storage.
Can we go back to the web being "Hey can I get your page at site.tld/page.ext ?" and "Sure, here is what you asked for, and not an entire cart of horseshit jammed in with it, alongside it, or after it! Thank you for visiting our website, valuable reader / customer!"?
More importantly, how flexible are those 50 lines of code vs the 1000 lines of code? If you're calling some functions for some MIT Picture Language object, then when you find a whole class of images where MIT's shit utterly fucking sucks, you're screwed.
Faces = FindFaces(Image) is only one line! And it's recognizes faces in 68% of our test images wowowow!!! If 68% is not acceptable, your images aren't like MIT's test images, or you want to find faces of dogs instead of people, you're going to be writing your own code.
And any increase in range would result in a a decrease in resolution. You're not getting MORE cones, you're getting DIFFERENT cones. It's like going from 24-bit RGB to 24-bit RGBY.
Conversely, color blindness was an asset in the military for certain tasks (such as analyzing aerial surveillance photos) because of the increased ability to detect camouflaged installations.
Slashdot Mirror
If you're talking about passengers and engines breathing air, then any separation wouldn't be an air gap.
The separation we have now is an aluminum and plastic gap. And it works.
That's a terrible definition of random. Entropy and statistics have nothing to do with randomness.
Something is random if it is not due to any deterministic cause. Yes, that definition means there is no such thing as a random event, a random number, etc in a deterministic universe. And yes, that is the correct definition.
In a deterministic universe there is no such thing as a "random" ordering for a deck of cards as there is no such thing as "random".
Beyond that, their definition is based on patterning a deck after a deck that is the result of an infinite number of shuffles. If the shuffle is performed the same way each time, then the order of the deck will be completely predictable. If the shuffle is not performed the same way each time, then it does not converge into any high entropy or statistically noise state to which you can compare your deck after a finite number of shuffles. Given an infinite number of shuffles there are an infinite number of times the deck is ordered perfectly, and many more infinite number of times the deck is in a low entropy state or statistically clean.
And if you're deliberately seeking to get the deck into some high entropy state by ensuring a semi-regular shuffle pattern and a target number of shuffles, then you're not getting a random deck.
If you believe in a probabilistic universe, then you can have randmoness, but you can never know if something is actually random or not.
This is fundamental shit.
No special landing equipment.
Except a platform able to withstand the thruster. On the open ocean. With people monitoring the landing. And crews ready to rush in once landing completes (successfully or not).
It may one day be as routine as parallel parking, but basic equipment to help corral the rocket and prevent catastrophic failure is a no brainer. Saying you don't want any special equipment because you want to be able to do this without it is like saying self-driving cars shouldn't have air bags and seat belts because you want them to avoid crashing in the first place
The problems with netting are:
You need to support it fairly evenly with some sort of structure anyway.
It has to be able to withstand those temperatures.
It has to be decently strong, which means a fairly dense netting pattern, which means more weight to the netting itself that you must support with some structure.
Lining a funnel or the action areas of a set of arms with some sort of padding would be as effective as netting. A full-on net would get you more leeway in actually catching the rocket, but they've almost got the vertical landing down anyway.
Build a large funnel, or infundibulum, on the barge.
All you have to do is hit the wide top of the funnel at a non-clusterfuck angle.
Then you let the structure of the funnel contain and guide the rocket as it continues on down.
If you fuck up badly, you won't lose everything. And if you do very well for 98% of the landing but tip toward the end, damage from impacting the walls of the vertically will be incidental and minor as the rocket is still thrusting to lower its velocity (and thus the force of the impact).
And if you do it successfully the funnel isn't touched.
Alternatively, do the same but instead of a solid funnel, use closing arms so you can actively catch and assist the rocket if need be, or drop the arms and let the rocket fall into the ocean if you have to abort.
You could also put 8 electromagnets in a circle with the target in the center. If the rocket leans north west, increase power to the southeast magnet and decrease power to the northwest magnet.
Another idea would be to have a guy with a long stick on the barge ready to nudge it just a bit if it starts to tip.
It would be much MORE workable.
Bribery and blackmail would have to hit 10 times as many targets to be as effective. Deadlocks would be more easily broken through. The sharp edge of partisan lines would become blurrier. People would have an actual chance of meeting and talking to their representatives outside of some lip service campaign event or writing a big fat check.
BarackObama.com was one of his campaign sites
Seems like the best way to reach that clown, even at T-19 months from irrelevancy.
And it varies with each individual shuffler, deck of cards, etc.
To call such a thing a "proof" is an insult to actual mathematical proofs. To use such a definition of "random" is outright blasphemy.
No, it said "the death of its owner", referring to "the two-wheeler upright scooter". The summary starts off referring to Segway as a company, but after a hyphen it refers to an individual scooter.
Further, the article never says who the owner (of Segway or "the two-wheeler upright scooter") is (or was), so your accusation that people are confusing the inventor for the owner is misguided. They may be conflating the two, as many people saw the inventor as the face of he Segway (both the scooter brand and the company behind it), and presuming him to be the owner of the company. There is no indication of confusion with regards to what the article meant (the owner of the company or the inventor of the device), however. Such confusion would be limited to the ambiguity caused by referring to Segway as a company and referring to it as an individual device, and would result in people not knowing if the owner of the company died or if the owner of an individual Segway (or the only Segway) died.
That's a limitation of the Intel chipsets.
SATA Express lets you throw x lanes of PCIe y. That's the whole point of SATA Express instead of doing SATA 12 Gbps. SATA Express is scalable.
I want a bootable PCIe 4.0 (or 3.0) x16 (or x8) card that gives me 4 (or 2) m.2 slots and a RAID controller.
Bonus points for passing through TRIM when possible (Intel does it with RAID 0 and RAID 1, I believe) and doing the OPAL/Bitlocker/whatever crypto passthrough so your OS can use the drive's built-in crypto instead of layering its own on top.
Alternatively, give me comparable NVMe SSDs with a PCIe connector instead of an m.2 connector, and give me a motherboard with a RAID controller connected to the PCIe bus, supporting all of the above (I'll use a PCIe riser if I have to).
Hell, I'd even settle for a bootable RAID controller behind 2 NVMe m.2 slots (PCIe 3.0 x4 or better for each) on the motherboard itself.
But as it is, these types of drives are notoriously difficult to buy because Samsung sells them to OEMs only and when you do get them (from RamCity) you're stuck with what your mobo gives you for the m.2 slot or you're stuck with some dodgy m.2 -> PCIe card that gives you 2 slots at PCIe 3.0 2x, or PCIe 3.0 4x with no boot support, and never any way to properly RAID the damned things.
That wouldn't solve anything.
If done right the current set up will save bandwidth. No need to include all the CSS in every page, just reference it and download once, then use the cache.
That's how basic HTTP works. You don't need anything fancy to do that. Your browser has a cache. Webservers can respond to a conditional GET request and say that shit hasn't been modified so you can use your cached copy.
www.w3.org/Protocols/rfc2616/rfc2616-sec10.html#sec10.3.5
By default, old browsers cached entire pages by default and wouldn't even send the fucking GET request until your local cache expired or you forced a refresh because every bps was precious and users were more often than not disconnected from the internet.
That's LCUAVST, not LOCUST.
Over 4 hours for a game isn't unreasonable. Between games you can do whatever you want, but once you sit down to one you shouldn't be able to leave unmonitored.
Yes, you can trade off time with storage, but it's still on the order of n for storage, which is infinite in the general sense and impractical in the real-world sense.
Think of all the non-reversible operations a single CPU core @ 3 GHz chews through in a year.
With XOR you don't need any additional storage, but there are functions (whether they be at the transistor level or at the application level) where many variables result in a much smaller output. You need additional storage in these cases. You are also not always free to overwrite variables if you can recover them, because many functions may take a single variable as input. Recovering X may involve stupidly long chains, and you need storage to go back through the whole chain for as far as you want to recover.
Additional storage is absolutely necessary for any non-trivial (useful) reversible computing. In the general sense, infinite storage is required (above and beyond the infinite storage for general turing machines) if you want to run them for an unbounded amount of time.
Yup.
It's like the plot of Horrible Bosses 2 - they have an idea for a shitty project and score a deal with some AS SEEN ON TV / SKYMALL type company and are too excited to do the basic business legwork.
(In the movie, the AS SEEN ON TV company said they wanted like 10,000 units, so the guys took out a loan on a new warehouse space, hired staff to crank out the order, etc. The company then pulled out of the order. The guys didn't get a non-refundable down payment for production costs, so they couldn't pay their lease or workers, and they lost their shit. The company then bought them and their stock of items for pennies on the dollar after they imploded.)
The recent wave of new TLDs was a joke, but what isn't a joke when you're talking about ICANN?
Reversible computing is nothing more than making everything a one-to-one function.
Current computing is merely functional, but not one-to-one. Operations such as XOR are not one-to-one functions because XOR(0,1) = 1 and XOR(1,0) = 1; given the output 1 and the function XOR you cannot recover the inputs.
Reversible computing makes all operations one-to-one, and thus reversible. This is achieved by storing some of the inputs for many-to-one functions. If you want to reverse more than one step (the whole point of reversible computing), you need more storage.
Reversible computing requires infinite storage. Won't and can't happen.
Can we go back to the web being "Hey can I get your page at site.tld/page.ext ?" and "Sure, here is what you asked for, and not an entire cart of horseshit jammed in with it, alongside it, or after it! Thank you for visiting our website, valuable reader / customer!"?
More importantly, how flexible are those 50 lines of code vs the 1000 lines of code?
If you're calling some functions for some MIT Picture Language object, then when you find a whole class of images where MIT's shit utterly fucking sucks, you're screwed.
Faces = FindFaces(Image) is only one line! And it's recognizes faces in 68% of our test images wowowow!!!
If 68% is not acceptable, your images aren't like MIT's test images, or you want to find faces of dogs instead of people, you're going to be writing your own code.
No leaving the table once the game starts.
If you can't handle that, you're not fit to play.
And any increase in range would result in a a decrease in resolution. You're not getting MORE cones, you're getting DIFFERENT cones.
It's like going from 24-bit RGB to 24-bit RGBY.
Conversely, color blindness was an asset in the military for certain tasks (such as analyzing aerial surveillance photos) because of the increased ability to detect camouflaged installations.
Drones make it more ubiquitous, more automated, more invasive, and allow for more collateral targets.