I've been of the opinion for some time that the solution lies in with China in this manner.
Here's what I think would work. Talk with the Chinese leadership and I bet they'd agree to the following plan. Have them propose to the North Koreans to send in troops to help them stage their own "military games" at the same time the US and South Korea are staging theirs. Once the Chinese army is in Pyongyang under this pretext, they cut the head off the snake. After North Korea falls, South Korea takes over and the US military withdraws from the peninsula as well. The US also agrees to cut all arms supplies to Taiwan and end that protective pact.
Sure, this sucks for Taiwan, but Taiwan under red China with a unified Korea under Seoul is a hell of a lot more stable the status quo, and better for the world over all. The needs of the many outweigh the needs of the few - further the suffering of Taiwan under China would not be nearly as bad as North Korea under Kim.
Trump can't successfully run independently now. More than half the states have "sore loser" laws prohibiting a candidate who lost in the preceding primary from being on the ballot.
This April we are holding our annual war games with South Korea. We expect North Korea to rattle it's sabers and embarrass you again while this exercise is conducted. We propose the following: Approach the leadership of North Korea with helping them conduct a war game of their own. Get a couple hundred divisions of your army into Pyong Yang under those pretenses, then capture or kill Kim and destroy his regime before he even realizes what's happening. Allow the South Korean army to take over the north and in exchange we will completely withdraw all troops from the Korean peninsula.
It could blow up and kill a lot of people. It could fail to make it to orbit and crash into NYC. It could make early investors billions. It could do a lot of things.
Jupiter seems to be at a curious point between being a planet and a star. Planets don't get much bigger, by volume, than Jupiter - they just start getting denser and denser until nuclear fusion begins. A brown dwarf an order of magnitude more massive than Jupiter would still be roughly the same size - so no, it's not a brown dwarf. Stars outright can be considerably smaller than the sun.
Viruses not so much. Way too much of that going around to make it safe to browse without adblocking - too many ad carriers do not audit the ads that are displayed, leading to all sorts of click bait and virus crap being displayed.
20. The goal of terms in science is to aid our understanding of the universe, not hinder it. For this reason, definitions, particular baseline definitions, need to be simple. I'm not an ornithologist but I have a pretty good idea of what a "bird" is and any 5 year old does as well. Yet I guarantee most if not all ornithologists cannot name all 10,000+ species of birds. In a similar vein, why does it matter if kids can't name all the planets?
Agreed that the IAU is so far off the mark it's not funny considering they are supposed to be a major scientific body. What is needed is a taxonomical approach to astronomical object classification with increasingly complex definitions - and the IAU definition itself could be allowed to one of them.
1. World - a body that is massive enough to enter hydrostatic equilibrium but lacking mass sufficient to undergo nuclear fusion at its core.
2. Planet - a world orbiting a star.
3. Moon - a world orbiting a planet
The above excluded what are now called "rogue planets" from being planets since they aren't orbiting a star, but rogue world isn't too detached. Phobos and Deimos would no longer be considered moons under the above - they are merely satellites.
Moving to the more specific: "Classical Planet" - A planet visible to the naked eye (Mercury, Venus, Mars, Jupiter, Saturn). "Major Planet" - A planet which is the dominant body in it's orbital path, meaning it has more than 99.99% of all mass in the path or other objects in that amount are in tight orbit around it (earth/moon). "Dwarf Planet" - A planet which is not the dominant body in its orbital path.
If Williams or anyone else can prove the existence of an edit-distance algorithm that runs even moderately faster than normal, SETH is history.
The edit distance between book and back is 2... In latin characters. It's 1 with kanji. The edit distance is probably several hundred if you're comparing the two on a per pixel basis instead of per letter. Edit distance varies by scope.
Surely I'm misunderstanding something. It can't be that simple.
They seek from the Bible inspiration, a cultural identity, etc., but not doctrine.
Well, I hate to tell you, but the vast majority of Christians would consider you to be a heretic at best.
Wrong. This is the stance of the Roman Catholic Church, which is larger than any other Christian denomination by an order of magnitude. The principle that all truth comes from the Bible and that it is *literally* true is known as the sola scriptura heresy, and is limited to a handful of Protestant branches.
The truth here is the reverse of what you believe.
These newfangled games are lame. I tried ET once, never again.
Have you ever *played* ET??
Over time I've gotten sick and tired of seeing it trotted out as the worst game ever, cause it isn't. Not by a long shot, not even on the Atari 2600. There are literally hundreds of worse games on the 2600 which is why it sank like a stone.
ET's largest problem was development time - 5 weeks. Beyond that though is it was ahead of its time. It was a game you had to read the manual to play in an era where no one read the manual because almost all the games of the time were too simple to require one. It had a title screen, an attempt at a soundtrack on that screen.
I own it and a working Atari 2600, though I usually play it and other games of the era on the Atari 7800. It's playable and I've dealt with far worse on even modern consoles. It's a bad game but it doesn't live up the legend. And honestly, I've gotten tired of people cracking jokes about a game most have never seen played, let alone played for themselves.
I'm not mechanically inclined but I'm looking forward to some of the response. Speaking of APS units, I had to tape a piece of cardboard over the switch to keep the cats from turning it off by stepping on it.:\
If this becomes remotely commonplace someone is going to get murdered when Comcast mistakes one of these transmissions for a Netflix packet and throttles it up past 3 or 4 seconds. Personally, I think it would be poetic justice if Ted Cruz dies this way.
Well how about a subscription or money ? I value my privacy and not getting advertising more than anything else.
Nothing irks me more than the double whammy of paying for something and having to put up with ads anyway.
Ads also don't need to involve privacy violations. Billboards don't. TV Spots don't. Why should web ads be any different? Personally I'd like to see client-side tracking scripts made illegal. Server-side gets more information than you really need anyway - IP address, user-agent strings. Click thru tracking just uses parameters on the URI itself so there's nothing personally identifiable. Those incidentally are the only tracking methods we're using, for what it's worth.
I would be happy to do without the free stuff, most of which is crap, if it meant I would never have to deal with advertising anymore.
As would I even though I'd have to find a different line of work. Musing about such things is pointless - advertising has been with us before we were even human - what the Hell do you think bird songs are for? To advertise for a mate.
There are real problems in the web ad industry and as usual the legislatures are about ten steps behind the times when it comes to enacting needed laws to protect citizen's privacy. I don't work for a company that indulges in such abuses but they're out there and we do compete with them. I'm not in favor of this plug in on Firefox at all. There's a certain irony in them stooping to this - when Firefox was new blocking pop-ups was one of its main selling points.
Aggregate tracking I have no problem with - but I'm a pragmatist. Specific tracking is something no one should be in favor of, not even the advertisers. If you have specific information on someone you're morally obliged to secure that information and personally I don't want any part in that responsibility. It needs to become a legal imperative with very stiff fines for failure to secure the data. Even then, such things should only be opt in by law.
That's a HUGE advertising tax that we're all paying.
Tax? So if you don't buy Pepsi products someone will seize your home or garnish your wages? If Pepsi doesn't buy advertising they'll pay enormous fines? If CNN refuses to run ads the company get shut down? If you don't watch CNN someone will put you in jail? Hyperbole much?
Companies run advertisements to raise brand or product awareness and increase sales. They can't raise their prices arbitrarily to do so or their competitors will put them out of business with lower prices. The advertiser either succeeds at doing what the client wants or they take their business elsewhere and he goes out of business. Content publishers, such as say, news sites, run advertising to pay the costs of not only the equipment but also the content creators - such as reporters. It ain't cheap for CNN to fly someone out to Damascus to get shot at while doing a report.
As a percentage of gross income advertising for most companies is low. Consider a blockbuster film - The ads for a $170 million dollar to make film acount for maybe 2% of that figure - the rest is in salaries for the enormous amount of people it takes to make such a film and their equipment. Most of the the lead actors are paid more individually than the advertising budget.
So yes, you think like a child and not very far past your nose at that.
Like it or not advertising shapes the world we are in. Where do you think the million dollar super-star athlete salaries come from? Advertising. Free programming? Advertising. I can go on. It's incredibly unlikely you don't own at least one thing you either got for free due to advertising or was subsidized by advertising.
No one likes advertising, but everyone wants free stuff. Why do you think advertising is attached to free stuff? Who do you think is paying for the free stuff?
Companies that pay advertisers want a return on their money spent. That's what all the tracking is about - to justify the money spent. I can understand them wanting to get that data, but I also understand not wanting to be tracked and targeted. Even if by an impersonal computer, it's creepy.
Full disclosure here - I work for an advertiser. And here's hilarity for you - nearly every computer in this department runs ad-block to stop viruses or who knows what else from getting into the system. There's a lot of abuse out there by the unscrupulous to the downright criminal "one simple trick scam" idiots.
There's a lot of problems with the current system. If you can devise a better system for all parties there's a lot of money in it for you, go for it.
But it's two-year-old level childish thinking at it's finest to think you can get all the free and subsidized stuff out here in the world without the advertising that pays for it. Sure, you can block it - but if the blocking ever rises to statistically significant levels then the revenue model will be forced to change, and probably not for the better.
I appreciate the sentiment - but the reality of legislative term limits is it empowers lobbyists because with term limits in place they'll be the only people on the hill who truly understand how to navigate parliamentary procedure and get anything done. It can take a good year or two to get up to speed on that, and another two to four years to build up enough clout to actually get anything done.
The problems isn't terms, it's gerrymandering. Most of these folks haven't faced a competitive race for their seat in years - that's the problem.
More likely than having the driver get out I imagine the drivers would physically be at the terminal. They drive the truck by remote control until they reach the interstate where the computer can take over, then they release it and take on the next vehicle.
Hell, I'd consider driving again with that arrangement. I used to have a CDL. As far as visibility, cab visibility is crappy already, and emulating it with a camera and an occulus rift would be trivial
Slashdot Mirror
I've been of the opinion for some time that the solution lies in with China in this manner.
Here's what I think would work. Talk with the Chinese leadership and I bet they'd agree to the following plan. Have them propose to the North Koreans to send in troops to help them stage their own "military games" at the same time the US and South Korea are staging theirs. Once the Chinese army is in Pyongyang under this pretext, they cut the head off the snake. After North Korea falls, South Korea takes over and the US military withdraws from the peninsula as well. The US also agrees to cut all arms supplies to Taiwan and end that protective pact.
Sure, this sucks for Taiwan, but Taiwan under red China with a unified Korea under Seoul is a hell of a lot more stable the status quo, and better for the world over all. The needs of the many outweigh the needs of the few - further the suffering of Taiwan under China would not be nearly as bad as North Korea under Kim.
Can it run Crysis?
At 8K?
Trump can't successfully run independently now. More than half the states have "sore loser" laws prohibiting a candidate who lost in the preceding primary from being on the ballot.
This April we are holding our annual war games with South Korea. We expect North Korea to rattle it's sabers and embarrass you again while this exercise is conducted. We propose the following: Approach the leadership of North Korea with helping them conduct a war game of their own. Get a couple hundred divisions of your army into Pyong Yang under those pretenses, then capture or kill Kim and destroy his regime before he even realizes what's happening. Allow the South Korean army to take over the north and in exchange we will completely withdraw all troops from the Korean peninsula.
Ok, let's start by jailing anyone calling for limits on free speech.
It could blow up and kill a lot of people. It could fail to make it to orbit and crash into NYC. It could make early investors billions. It could do a lot of things.
Could it exist?
Jupiter seems to be at a curious point between being a planet and a star. Planets don't get much bigger, by volume, than Jupiter - they just start getting denser and denser until nuclear fusion begins. A brown dwarf an order of magnitude more massive than Jupiter would still be roughly the same size - so no, it's not a brown dwarf. Stars outright can be considerably smaller than the sun.
Viruses not so much. Way too much of that going around to make it safe to browse without adblocking - too many ad carriers do not audit the ads that are displayed, leading to all sorts of click bait and virus crap being displayed.
20. The goal of terms in science is to aid our understanding of the universe, not hinder it. For this reason, definitions, particular baseline definitions, need to be simple. I'm not an ornithologist but I have a pretty good idea of what a "bird" is and any 5 year old does as well. Yet I guarantee most if not all ornithologists cannot name all 10,000+ species of birds. In a similar vein, why does it matter if kids can't name all the planets?
Agreed that the IAU is so far off the mark it's not funny considering they are supposed to be a major scientific body. What is needed is a taxonomical approach to astronomical object classification with increasingly complex definitions - and the IAU definition itself could be allowed to one of them.
1. World - a body that is massive enough to enter hydrostatic equilibrium but lacking mass sufficient to undergo nuclear fusion at its core.
2. Planet - a world orbiting a star.
3. Moon - a world orbiting a planet
The above excluded what are now called "rogue planets" from being planets since they aren't orbiting a star, but rogue world isn't too detached. Phobos and Deimos would no longer be considered moons under the above - they are merely satellites.
Moving to the more specific: "Classical Planet" - A planet visible to the naked eye (Mercury, Venus, Mars, Jupiter, Saturn). "Major Planet" - A planet which is the dominant body in it's orbital path, meaning it has more than 99.99% of all mass in the path or other objects in that amount are in tight orbit around it (earth/moon). "Dwarf Planet" - A planet which is not the dominant body in its orbital path.
The edit distance between book and back is 2 ... In latin characters. It's 1 with kanji. The edit distance is probably several hundred if you're comparing the two on a per pixel basis instead of per letter. Edit distance varies by scope.
Surely I'm misunderstanding something. It can't be that simple.
They seek from the Bible inspiration, a cultural identity, etc., but not doctrine.
Well, I hate to tell you, but the vast majority of Christians would consider you to be a heretic at best.
Wrong. This is the stance of the Roman Catholic Church, which is larger than any other Christian denomination by an order of magnitude. The principle that all truth comes from the Bible and that it is *literally* true is known as the sola scriptura heresy, and is limited to a handful of Protestant branches.
The truth here is the reverse of what you believe.
Seriously off topic...
I hate how legacy browsers act as stones around our necks.
These newfangled games are lame. I tried ET once, never again.
Have you ever *played* ET??
Over time I've gotten sick and tired of seeing it trotted out as the worst game ever, cause it isn't. Not by a long shot, not even on the Atari 2600. There are literally hundreds of worse games on the 2600 which is why it sank like a stone.
ET's largest problem was development time - 5 weeks. Beyond that though is it was ahead of its time. It was a game you had to read the manual to play in an era where no one read the manual because almost all the games of the time were too simple to require one. It had a title screen, an attempt at a soundtrack on that screen.
I own it and a working Atari 2600, though I usually play it and other games of the era on the Atari 7800. It's playable and I've dealt with far worse on even modern consoles. It's a bad game but it doesn't live up the legend. And honestly, I've gotten tired of people cracking jokes about a game most have never seen played, let alone played for themselves.
I'm not mechanically inclined but I'm looking forward to some of the response. Speaking of APS units, I had to tape a piece of cardboard over the switch to keep the cats from turning it off by stepping on it. :\
Who wants to grope that? (/sarcasm)
I'm guessing it isn't noticeable because of how slowly and deliberately they move to begin with. Surgery isn't exactly a twitch reflexes exercise.
If this becomes remotely commonplace someone is going to get murdered when Comcast mistakes one of these transmissions for a Netflix packet and throttles it up past 3 or 4 seconds. Personally, I think it would be poetic justice if Ted Cruz dies this way.
Nothing irks me more than the double whammy of paying for something and having to put up with ads anyway.
Ads also don't need to involve privacy violations. Billboards don't. TV Spots don't. Why should web ads be any different? Personally I'd like to see client-side tracking scripts made illegal. Server-side gets more information than you really need anyway - IP address, user-agent strings. Click thru tracking just uses parameters on the URI itself so there's nothing personally identifiable. Those incidentally are the only tracking methods we're using, for what it's worth.
As would I even though I'd have to find a different line of work. Musing about such things is pointless - advertising has been with us before we were even human - what the Hell do you think bird songs are for? To advertise for a mate.
There are real problems in the web ad industry and as usual the legislatures are about ten steps behind the times when it comes to enacting needed laws to protect citizen's privacy. I don't work for a company that indulges in such abuses but they're out there and we do compete with them. I'm not in favor of this plug in on Firefox at all. There's a certain irony in them stooping to this - when Firefox was new blocking pop-ups was one of its main selling points.
Aggregate tracking I have no problem with - but I'm a pragmatist. Specific tracking is something no one should be in favor of, not even the advertisers. If you have specific information on someone you're morally obliged to secure that information and personally I don't want any part in that responsibility. It needs to become a legal imperative with very stiff fines for failure to secure the data. Even then, such things should only be opt in by law.
Tax? So if you don't buy Pepsi products someone will seize your home or garnish your wages? If Pepsi doesn't buy advertising they'll pay enormous fines? If CNN refuses to run ads the company get shut down? If you don't watch CNN someone will put you in jail? Hyperbole much?
Companies run advertisements to raise brand or product awareness and increase sales. They can't raise their prices arbitrarily to do so or their competitors will put them out of business with lower prices. The advertiser either succeeds at doing what the client wants or they take their business elsewhere and he goes out of business. Content publishers, such as say, news sites, run advertising to pay the costs of not only the equipment but also the content creators - such as reporters. It ain't cheap for CNN to fly someone out to Damascus to get shot at while doing a report.
As a percentage of gross income advertising for most companies is low. Consider a blockbuster film - The ads for a $170 million dollar to make film acount for maybe 2% of that figure - the rest is in salaries for the enormous amount of people it takes to make such a film and their equipment. Most of the the lead actors are paid more individually than the advertising budget.
So yes, you think like a child and not very far past your nose at that.
Like it or not advertising shapes the world we are in. Where do you think the million dollar super-star athlete salaries come from? Advertising. Free programming? Advertising. I can go on. It's incredibly unlikely you don't own at least one thing you either got for free due to advertising or was subsidized by advertising.
No one likes advertising, but everyone wants free stuff. Why do you think advertising is attached to free stuff? Who do you think is paying for the free stuff?
Companies that pay advertisers want a return on their money spent. That's what all the tracking is about - to justify the money spent. I can understand them wanting to get that data, but I also understand not wanting to be tracked and targeted. Even if by an impersonal computer, it's creepy.
Full disclosure here - I work for an advertiser. And here's hilarity for you - nearly every computer in this department runs ad-block to stop viruses or who knows what else from getting into the system. There's a lot of abuse out there by the unscrupulous to the downright criminal "one simple trick scam" idiots.
There's a lot of problems with the current system. If you can devise a better system for all parties there's a lot of money in it for you, go for it.
But it's two-year-old level childish thinking at it's finest to think you can get all the free and subsidized stuff out here in the world without the advertising that pays for it. Sure, you can block it - but if the blocking ever rises to statistically significant levels then the revenue model will be forced to change, and probably not for the better.
I appreciate the sentiment - but the reality of legislative term limits is it empowers lobbyists because with term limits in place they'll be the only people on the hill who truly understand how to navigate parliamentary procedure and get anything done. It can take a good year or two to get up to speed on that, and another two to four years to build up enough clout to actually get anything done.
The problems isn't terms, it's gerrymandering. Most of these folks haven't faced a competitive race for their seat in years - that's the problem.
And it's just something that happens on timescales in the 10's of thousands or more years?
More likely than having the driver get out I imagine the drivers would physically be at the terminal. They drive the truck by remote control until they reach the interstate where the computer can take over, then they release it and take on the next vehicle.
Hell, I'd consider driving again with that arrangement. I used to have a CDL. As far as visibility, cab visibility is crappy already, and emulating it with a camera and an occulus rift would be trivial