NAT sucks. I want to be able to reach any computer on my LAN from the outside by its own IP address. So I hope IPv6 is implemented sooner rather than later.
But of course that won't come out of the US. The US has 70% of the IP addresses, there won't be a shortage there any time soon. Asia doesn't really have another option though. This will soon be yet another area in which the US lags behind the world.
A real conservative should believe that anything done for any reason other than to make a profit is necessarily wrong.
Regardless of your political views, making money is just the means, not the end. You need money to live your life. Making a profit is the means to get money, it's never a reason by itself.
There's this thing with Java... It's meant for big things. It is really irritating and a lot of hard work to make something small with Java. However, it's relatively not much more work to make something bigger.
If you want to log something to a file or so, simply print some debug statements, and you don't want to fight the system, setup Log4J. Make all the config files, instantiate the objects, etc, etc. For a small program that's a lot of work. For a huge program, it's the same amount of work:-) And then you have a cool logging system. Look at the files and structure you need to make 1 servlet. Frameworks like Struts are even worse. But once it works, adding a bit is pretty clean.
Somehow, through all its stupid little irritations it has in addition to this (all the cruft you get because an int isn't an Object etc), I still sort of like Java. But I'll use Python if I'm making something small.
Given all that, I don't care about a "print" statement.
I just think the chance that he'll shoot is much higher if it's likely that you are armed.
Of course, I'm from Europe. Where it's highly unlikely that a burglar will be armed, for precisely this reason... if he's disturbed, he'll just run away, or perhaps knock you unconscious (I'd rather have that than a bullet). Even when caught he's looking at a month of jail time, instead of a year if he were caught and in possession of a firearm, or ten years if he actually used it successfully.
I don't know about the spoilers bit. Before I read the spoilers, I spent years not getting very far. The game has improved a lot for me since I read the spoilers. I simply had no idea there was so much depth to it.
First five years of playing, I saw the castle once. Then read spoilers. Next five years, about 18 ascensions. In thousands of attempts, it's still not very easy, Nethack will never be easy:-)
Most people will get the official minimum required intake of most vitamins in their diets, yes.
However, there is evidence that larger doses have benefits (preventing cancers, that sort of thing). And extra vitamins don't do any harm. See it as a bit of insurance.
There is the feeling many techies have, that real DRM on audio at least will always be ineffective. If you can play it over your stereo, you can record it and thus copy it. With other types of data it's not so obvious, but still, my impression is that DRM will never stop any serious pirate and will just be a hassle for consumers. In short, it won't work.
So calling a company a good solid tech company because it does DRM does sound a bit shaky to me.
The test was over 10 days. People who get the option to download a demo will usually do that first, even if they plan to buy anyway. If they like the game, come back to buy it. Probably, say, a few days later.
There is no such delay in people coming to the site, planning to buy it anyway, seeing no demo, thus buying the game.
Which means that if you only test for 10 days, this effect is significant. Not everyone who downloaded the demo and will buy it after a few days has come back yet.
And worse, half the people who do come back happen to get the "no demo available" page that time, so that they're counted wrong (as someone else mentioned).
In total, this is meaningless until you a) keep track of which page people got, and always give them the same one, and b) do it over a longer period.
Which is why they said it was "less than scientific". Which makes me wonder why they still tried to conclude things from it, if they knew the numbers were bogus...
Well, it's hard. Although most people aren't totally opposed to proprietary software, I would only use it on Linux if an open source solution doesn't exist and I need the software. OSS just has a much better reputation, to me at least, considering only software to be used on Linux. If I find an open source program that currently does what I need, if barely, I won't look further to find proprietary stuff.
The only non OSS we use in our current (web app/site) project is Java, we use Sun's JDKs. And with the way Sun is going lately, I wonder if in two years we won't view that as a mistake... Consider the way you feel screwed over by Microsoft. The whole point of OSS is to avoid getting screwed over like that again. Being dependent is a bad thing.
There are loads of businesses currently employing this model. If IBM isn't a business, I don't know what is.
No, there won't be many companies writing free software and trying to profit from it. Some companies pay programmers to make software that goes with their hardware, many companies pay programmers to customize existing open source software.
Programmers and software companies can profit from contributing to OSS in their own time if they can sell services like that, using the software, to others. If they can't, they'll go bankrupt/jobless, obviously.
Yes that means there will be fewer programming jobs overall, eventually. That also means that business is ripping itself off if it doesn't use OSS.
This is progress. Some lines of work become obsolete and no longer profitable. Saying programmers writing closed source software are traitors, or something like that, is ridiculous. Programmers don't get to decide what a company uses and should use. Deal with it.
We think it's frightening, and it's wrong, that the same American textbooks our stores buy here for $100 can be shipped in from some other country for $50.
Why don't the stores buy from the other country as well?
It's a phone. People get them with new phone contracts (well, many people do - I went for an extremely cheap contract and bought a seperate phone).
Getting a heavy contract means huge discounts on the phone. I've already seen ads that had the NGage for 0. That's quite common, just means you have an expensive contract for two years.
For young people who get their phones that way, the NGage may well be pretty tempting. But it's not going to show in the first week sales.
This is of course from Europe, specifically the Netherlands.
Google is already nicely internationalized. If I go to www.google.com from the Netherlands, I'm redirected to www.google.nl, the French go to www.google.fr, etc.
It would be nice (I don't know if it works this way) if they had to abide to this judgement on www.google.fr, but not on their other versions.
I thought we had already realized that processing power has nothing to do with intelligence. It's about self awareness -- which is a function of being able to adaptively model the world around you (including yourself) through some type of sense.
In my opinion intelligence is about problem solving, or decision making. In new situations (situations that the intelligence hasn't encountered before) and with incomplete information.
Consider, e.g., a program that regulates traffic around a city that needs to model where every car is going with some probability, that encounters a car doing some strange maneuver it hasn't seen before (it's chased by 10 police cars and swerves onto the wrong side of the road). In this situation, the system decides to divert traffic away from this section of road, even thoug this specific situation is not programmed in (as an assumption).
Such a program would be clearly intelligent to me, yet it has no need at all for a concept of "self".
Godel has proved that no formal system can prove all true statements expressable in that system unless it can also prove things that are clearly false.
Human mathematicians can prove anything if they set their minds to it.
Since humans can set their minds to things that are clearly false, this is pretty consistent:-)
If you believe, like most scientists, that we humans evolved from random mutations and natural selection, then no, it really doesn't.
The result of two billion random mutations and natural selection is a large set of complex adaptations. We have specific brain mechanisms for loads of situations, and none of them are simple. We need to recreate a structure like that. That's harder than just getting the computing power.
This has nothing to do with actual AI, and everything with Hollywood movie cliches.
Humans are the result of billions of years of evolution. Humans want to stay alive. Humans consider themselves more important than others. Humans have egos. Humans will fight for their lives when threatened. Humans may have competing interests with other humans. Humans want to lead, want to control, want to be in power.
All of these are rather obvious traits to have, for a creature that evolved as a social animal over the last several million years.
It is, however, nonsense to assume an AI will have these traits, unless you propose to evolve one over the equivalent of a billion years, in a social environment as rich as the environment humans grew up in, with a process that mimics DNA, etc etc. Which doesn't sound like a very good way of building AI.
Assuming that we build an AI, from scratch, there is no reason for it to have any of these traits. You can have a system that can intelligently find solutions to a huge problem space, even in new situations, even using limited information, without having it strive for world domination as a side effect.
Just that we have a built in will to survive doesn't mean that any intelligence considers itselves any more important than the electricity it runs on.
Slashdot Mirror
NAT sucks. I want to be able to reach any computer on my LAN from the outside by its own IP address. So I hope IPv6 is implemented sooner rather than later.
But of course that won't come out of the US. The US has 70% of the IP addresses, there won't be a shortage there any time soon. Asia doesn't really have another option though. This will soon be yet another area in which the US lags behind the world.
A real conservative should believe that anything done for any reason other than to make a profit is necessarily wrong.
Regardless of your political views, making money is just the means, not the end. You need money to live your life. Making a profit is the means to get money, it's never a reason by itself.
There's this thing with Java... It's meant for big things. It is really irritating and a lot of hard work to make something small with Java. However, it's relatively not much more work to make something bigger.
If you want to log something to a file or so, simply print some debug statements, and you don't want to fight the system, setup Log4J. Make all the config files, instantiate the objects, etc, etc. For a small program that's a lot of work. For a huge program, it's the same amount of work :-) And then you have a cool logging system. Look at the files and structure you need to make 1 servlet. Frameworks like Struts are even worse. But once it works, adding a bit is pretty clean.
Somehow, through all its stupid little irritations it has in addition to this (all the cruft you get because an int isn't an Object etc), I still sort of like Java. But I'll use Python if I'm making something small.
Given all that, I don't care about a "print" statement.
I just think the chance that he'll shoot is much higher if it's likely that you are armed.
Of course, I'm from Europe. Where it's highly unlikely that a burglar will be armed, for precisely this reason... if he's disturbed, he'll just run away, or perhaps knock you unconscious (I'd rather have that than a bullet). Even when caught he's looking at a month of jail time, instead of a year if he were caught and in possession of a firearm, or ten years if he actually used it successfully.
I didn't forget it. I just consider the life of a burglar to be more important than your property. If you shoot a burglar, you're an outlaw to me.
If you outlaw guns, only the outlaws will have guns.
Exactly! Which means that:
- Outlaws will be easier to identify as outlaws
- Outlaws won't automatically have to use lethal force if an non-outlaw catches them in the act
- Outlaws will opt to use knives etc instead of guns in robberies etc, because the victim won't have a gun, and the jail time is lower
- Fewer non-outlaws shoot people by accident
- Fewer non-outlaws shoot people in a fit of rage
This is the best argument for gun control.
I don't know about the spoilers bit. Before I read the spoilers, I spent years not getting very far. The game has improved a lot for me since I read the spoilers. I simply had no idea there was so much depth to it.
First five years of playing, I saw the castle once. Then read spoilers. Next five years, about 18 ascensions. In thousands of attempts, it's still not very easy, Nethack will never be easy :-)
But, for any of you loking for the 'right' answer to that age old question,
The answer is actually defined as a constant in the calculator.
Just reading in the number and printing it is O(n), unfortunately (takes time proportional to the number of characters of the input).
Nice troll!
Since when is tiny form factor a good thing for a keyboard? That thing will kill my wrists in two days.
I just need these "ergonomic" keyboards, Microsoft Natural Elite, etc... can't stand to type on a normal one anymore.
Otherwise it looks great. Just split it into a left and a right part with a bulge in the middle.
Most people will get the official minimum required intake of most vitamins in their diets, yes.
However, there is evidence that larger doses have benefits (preventing cancers, that sort of thing). And extra vitamins don't do any harm. See it as a bit of insurance.
There is the feeling many techies have, that real DRM on audio at least will always be ineffective. If you can play it over your stereo, you can record it and thus copy it. With other types of data it's not so obvious, but still, my impression is that DRM will never stop any serious pirate and will just be a hassle for consumers. In short, it won't work.
So calling a company a good solid tech company because it does DRM does sound a bit shaky to me.
The test was over 10 days. People who get the option to download a demo will usually do that first, even if they plan to buy anyway. If they like the game, come back to buy it. Probably, say, a few days later.
There is no such delay in people coming to the site, planning to buy it anyway, seeing no demo, thus buying the game.
Which means that if you only test for 10 days, this effect is significant. Not everyone who downloaded the demo and will buy it after a few days has come back yet.
And worse, half the people who do come back happen to get the "no demo available" page that time, so that they're counted wrong (as someone else mentioned).
In total, this is meaningless until you a) keep track of which page people got, and always give them the same one, and b) do it over a longer period.
Which is why they said it was "less than scientific". Which makes me wonder why they still tried to conclude things from it, if they knew the numbers were bogus...
Well, it's hard. Although most people aren't totally opposed to proprietary software, I would only use it on Linux if an open source solution doesn't exist and I need the software. OSS just has a much better reputation, to me at least, considering only software to be used on Linux. If I find an open source program that currently does what I need, if barely, I won't look further to find proprietary stuff.
The only non OSS we use in our current (web app/site) project is Java, we use Sun's JDKs. And with the way Sun is going lately, I wonder if in two years we won't view that as a mistake... Consider the way you feel screwed over by Microsoft. The whole point of OSS is to avoid getting screwed over like that again. Being dependent is a bad thing.
There are loads of businesses currently employing this model. If IBM isn't a business, I don't know what is.
No, there won't be many companies writing free software and trying to profit from it. Some companies pay programmers to make software that goes with their hardware, many companies pay programmers to customize existing open source software.
Programmers and software companies can profit from contributing to OSS in their own time if they can sell services like that, using the software, to others. If they can't, they'll go bankrupt/jobless, obviously.
Yes that means there will be fewer programming jobs overall, eventually. That also means that business is ripping itself off if it doesn't use OSS.
This is progress. Some lines of work become obsolete and no longer profitable. Saying programmers writing closed source software are traitors, or something like that, is ridiculous. Programmers don't get to decide what a company uses and should use. Deal with it.
We think it's frightening, and it's wrong, that the same American textbooks our stores buy here for $100 can be shipped in from some other country for $50.
Why don't the stores buy from the other country as well?
It's a phone. People get them with new phone contracts (well, many people do - I went for an extremely cheap contract and bought a seperate phone).
Getting a heavy contract means huge discounts on the phone. I've already seen ads that had the NGage for 0. That's quite common, just means you have an expensive contract for two years.
For young people who get their phones that way, the NGage may well be pretty tempting. But it's not going to show in the first week sales.
This is of course from Europe, specifically the Netherlands.
Google is already nicely internationalized. If I go to www.google.com from the Netherlands, I'm redirected to www.google.nl, the French go to www.google.fr, etc.
It would be nice (I don't know if it works this way) if they had to abide to this judgement on www.google.fr, but not on their other versions.
I thought we had already realized that processing power has nothing to do with intelligence. It's about self awareness -- which is a function of being able to adaptively model the world around you (including yourself) through some type of sense.
In my opinion intelligence is about problem solving, or decision making. In new situations (situations that the intelligence hasn't encountered before) and with incomplete information.
Consider, e.g., a program that regulates traffic around a city that needs to model where every car is going with some probability, that encounters a car doing some strange maneuver it hasn't seen before (it's chased by 10 police cars and swerves onto the wrong side of the road). In this situation, the system decides to divert traffic away from this section of road, even thoug this specific situation is not programmed in (as an assumption).
Such a program would be clearly intelligent to me, yet it has no need at all for a concept of "self".
Just that a program knows it's going to end doesn't mean it sees any need for "retribution".
Think "computer program" here please. Do you think Mozilla despises being shut down?
Since humans can set their minds to things that are clearly false, this is pretty consistent :-)
If you believe, like most scientists, that we humans evolved from random mutations and natural selection, then no, it really doesn't.
The result of two billion random mutations and natural selection is a large set of complex adaptations. We have specific brain mechanisms for loads of situations, and none of them are simple. We need to recreate a structure like that. That's harder than just getting the computing power.
This has nothing to do with actual AI, and everything with Hollywood movie cliches.
Humans are the result of billions of years of evolution. Humans want to stay alive. Humans consider themselves more important than others. Humans have egos. Humans will fight for their lives when threatened. Humans may have competing interests with other humans. Humans want to lead, want to control, want to be in power.
All of these are rather obvious traits to have, for a creature that evolved as a social animal over the last several million years.
It is, however, nonsense to assume an AI will have these traits, unless you propose to evolve one over the equivalent of a billion years, in a social environment as rich as the environment humans grew up in, with a process that mimics DNA, etc etc. Which doesn't sound like a very good way of building AI.
Assuming that we build an AI, from scratch, there is no reason for it to have any of these traits. You can have a system that can intelligently find solutions to a huge problem space, even in new situations, even using limited information, without having it strive for world domination as a side effect.
Just that we have a built in will to survive doesn't mean that any intelligence considers itselves any more important than the electricity it runs on.
the point of patenting is to protect creative ideas, not to protect the first person to exploit a new technology for obvious ideas
Not even that - the point is to protect specific implementations of an idea.