Re:It's not just specialization, there is also fea
on
Where's HAL 9000?
·
· Score: 1
Stop mystifying thought. I come to that conclusion because "real thought", as you put it, is caused by chemical and electrical processes in the brain. Both are physical processes that can be emulated with a computational model. The physical chemical byproduct is not what produces thought (and if it was we could simulate that as well). In fact the brain is merely using those chemical and electrical processes to produce computation. There is no such thing as "real" for a thought; it is always an abstraction and that is why i put it in quotations. An explosion is a physical force, sodium hydroxide as an object. Your misunderstanding of my point bares no mark on the universe in and of itself. So that thought is no different if it happens in silico or in vivo.
Re:It's not just specialization, there is also fea
on
Where's HAL 9000?
·
· Score: 5, Insightful
Computers can be used to model and compute chemical reactions. If a chemical can produce "thought" than nothing stops a computer from doing it other than computation power.
So the same thing then? If the listeners don't want to pay the musicians price they won't get new content. Any artiste is perfectly able to say "donate 10 billion dollars or I'll stop making music".
Roughly 20 more accurately. So approximately 6 lines, maybe 7; still nothing to write home about. And still doesn't negate the fact that aspect ratio has no effect on pixel height and 312 is larger than 120.
Wide screen doesn't mean it isn't high. You say 1920x1080 is unsuitable for development and what you propose to make it acceptable is add 120 pixels more. So like 3 lines of text? Technically better but not nearly as big of a jump as from 768 to 1080.
It's that kind of attitude (do nothing) which allows a person to be robbed & beat-up on city streets, then left to lay there dying, while nobody does a damn thing to help.
It's pretty funny that you would say that. I think these events make it pretty clear that the attitude of "I don't like the look of that guy I need to do something!" gets people dead. No crime was committed by Martin at least and possibly beyond when Zimmerman butted into his business. It is also a natural right to be able to walk down the street don't forget (it seems some people feel the need to defend violent actions above peaceful ones). We can't have every idiot running around doing what they think is "right". It's been a hard lesson and taken us a few thousand years but I think we've almost figured that out.
I understand where you're coming from but I just can't agree that Martin can be blamed for not running away. The United States is apparently a free and just society and should not require people to run to their homes when on the street to avoid being shot. You may hate hearing about the Skittles and iced tea but they are an important aspect to this. This kid lost his life only because he did something that every other kid his age does. Enjoying candy doesn't make you innocent but a 17 year old kid buying candy is sure as hell not suspicious behaviour. The reason this is causing so much outcry is because there has been no evidence shown to indicate this kid was guilty of anything more than being black.
Both people made mistakes but one of them only made mistakes in hindsight. And he is now dead. Martin had every right to casually walk home and not be stalked or harassed by anyone.
Except Martin wasn't following anybody. You are correct that being followed or chased by anybody would make you feel threatened. Due to racial tensions in the States it probably feels more threatening to be followed by someone not of your race.
I am not pretending anything. But what I am hearing from you is "I'm white and I know for a fact it is more threatening to be followed by a black person". But that is not relevant to this case at all. I am saying that due to racial tensions in the United States (and a not too favourable past) that a 17 year old black youth would be quite uncomfortable being followed by this white guy.
How do you think this would go if it was a black man that ran down a white kid and shot him? Would the police be parroting "stand your ground"? I highly doubt it. This also wasn't just "following" it was chasing. Martin sped up his pace to try to get away from Zimmerman and chased him.
Zimmerman started this confrontation, that is the core of the issue. I can't just walk up to somebody, get in their space, harass them then shoot them dead when they retaliate.
If Zimmerman just asked what the kid was doing and Martin started beating him to death then self defense is valid. But there is no credible evidence that this is the case. Even if Martin was extremely agitated (I know I would be) and shouted at Zimmerman or pushed him away or even punched him there was no grounds to shoot a child. You don't just get to shoot somebody for punching you. I do however believe you have the right to remove somebody from your space forcibly if needed.
Very true. So why does the lunatic get to go free? You have to keep in mind that the only reason Zimmerman was attacked (if he even was attacked) was because he chased down this kid. And, repeating myself, being chased down by a "white Hispanic" as a black youth is most likely very threatening. He had every right and reason to defend himself and tell Zimmerman to fuck right off.
All we have is the hearsay report from the man who just so happens to benefit the most form it and who is also known to be overly violent. But I guess the police, like you, have decided this poor dead kid whom had no history of violence definitely brought it on himself.
I think the jury is still out on if that happened or not. So it's okay to shoot to death someone attacking you. But it is not okay to attack a lunatic carrying a gun that is chasing you?
How is this marked troll? Zimmerman's whole case seems to ride on him "feeling threatened" which apparently makes it okay to murder people in Florida. I don't know about all of you but if I was a black youth in Florida and some creepy white guy was following me around in a van I would sure as hell feel threatened. The kid had way more right (and evidently the need) to defend himself than Zimmerman ever did. Zimmerman could have walked away at any time (and was told to leave the kid alone by police dispatch).
If Zimmerman gets off on this it means in Florida you can murder anyone you want. You just have to follow them around and goad them into trying to defend themselves then shoot them dead. I don't see how this is anything but a hate crime.
The limit on other people is not being able to offer the same advantage. Very simple.
You are getting boondoggled by them using positive words. If they limit everyone and then allow themselves not to be limited they are still limiting everyone else. They just use weasle words to make it less obvious.
Yes I'm sure the whole world would be thrilled to have Microsoft tell them their current monitor is not compatible with Windows X. As a user you should care about this because it is incredibly lazy and will no doubt cause problems in the long run. Apple has committed themselves to one aspect ratio and a rather expensive upgrade path (doubling vertical and horizontal pixel counts every upgrade isn't feasible).
My only point was really that the ipad does not handle resolution independence well (definitely not better than Windows). I don't care that the ipad chose to do it this way; the high resolution is awesome. But the ipad is not resolution independent at all- it is entirely dependent on resolution. Why was resolution independence so good when you thought the ipad had it and wasted effort when informed it doesn't?
Wait, so desktop operating systems, with many different screen sizes and resolutions do not handle resolution independence as well as the ipad? The ipad which had to exactly double the resolution of the previous model so it could just be linearly scaled up by a factor of 2?
But we already have many methods of implementing credentials and privileges. They are trivial to make and very obvious as soon as "over the internet" is added to anything. Patents are not supposed to be a permutation game.
It is not supposed to matter if implementation is trivial. Let me guess: they send some kind of TCP/IP messages between nodes and a server. Let's make this clear right now; "receiving" and "distributing" information between nodes and servers should not be patentable. It is the number one use case of the server-node system. It does not matter if they are working with annotations, instant messages or email. If they have developed some novel method of message passing that deserves a patent (unlikely) then it should be about that. Annotations should never be part of the patent.
Could I patent being the member of a group that collates all the other members' analog annotations into one document and sending it back to them?
Is that not what I said? Enter the group (become part of the group) and change its dynamic to better suit one's needs. Women have been "putting up with" this crap for quite a while. Now the push for change is becoming a stronger force. There is no law anywhere that mentions how many women must be active on an open source project, rules and laws are not part of this discussion.
It is not just a couple women that want themselves accepted in CS/Engineering/Math and it is not the minority either. Most people have had enough of this crap that the minority forces on women. I have been in these circles (am part of these circles). I avoid a lot of it because it even makes me uncomfortable (I am a heterosexual male). We are the community pushing for an end to the problems.
I speak here only of the people actively making it difficult for women in the community. I do not believe this the only cause but it is a big one and one that should be rectified.
Go right ahead. If you troll them the group dynamic will push you out. If you are actually interested in gender rights and bring genuine arguments against their misandry (funny that firefox claims misandry is not a word but has no problem with misogyny) they can either listen or be shown to be in the wrong.
Slashdot Mirror
Stop mystifying thought. I come to that conclusion because "real thought", as you put it, is caused by chemical and electrical processes in the brain. Both are physical processes that can be emulated with a computational model. The physical chemical byproduct is not what produces thought (and if it was we could simulate that as well). In fact the brain is merely using those chemical and electrical processes to produce computation. There is no such thing as "real" for a thought; it is always an abstraction and that is why i put it in quotations. An explosion is a physical force, sodium hydroxide as an object. Your misunderstanding of my point bares no mark on the universe in and of itself. So that thought is no different if it happens in silico or in vivo.
Computers can be used to model and compute chemical reactions. If a chemical can produce "thought" than nothing stops a computer from doing it other than computation power.
So the same thing then? If the listeners don't want to pay the musicians price they won't get new content. Any artiste is perfectly able to say "donate 10 billion dollars or I'll stop making music".
I believed they killed the normal Macbook a while ago. It's now air or pro.
Roughly 20 more accurately. So approximately 6 lines, maybe 7; still nothing to write home about. And still doesn't negate the fact that aspect ratio has no effect on pixel height and 312 is larger than 120.
Wide screen doesn't mean it isn't high. You say 1920x1080 is unsuitable for development and what you propose to make it acceptable is add 120 pixels more. So like 3 lines of text? Technically better but not nearly as big of a jump as from 768 to 1080.
Some french-canadians pronounce it very "aboot" like. But I doubt you would hear it outside of highly francophone areas.
And PC has been retained for the evolutionary line descended from them.
Like Intel Macs?
He hadn't even finished school yet, and now he'll never get to. His life is over before it began.
The definition of "kid" is not "shorter than me".
It's that kind of attitude (do nothing) which allows a person to be robbed & beat-up on city streets, then left to lay there dying, while nobody does a damn thing to help.
It's pretty funny that you would say that. I think these events make it pretty clear that the attitude of "I don't like the look of that guy I need to do something!" gets people dead. No crime was committed by Martin at least and possibly beyond when Zimmerman butted into his business. It is also a natural right to be able to walk down the street don't forget (it seems some people feel the need to defend violent actions above peaceful ones). We can't have every idiot running around doing what they think is "right". It's been a hard lesson and taken us a few thousand years but I think we've almost figured that out.
I understand where you're coming from but I just can't agree that Martin can be blamed for not running away. The United States is apparently a free and just society and should not require people to run to their homes when on the street to avoid being shot. You may hate hearing about the Skittles and iced tea but they are an important aspect to this. This kid lost his life only because he did something that every other kid his age does. Enjoying candy doesn't make you innocent but a 17 year old kid buying candy is sure as hell not suspicious behaviour. The reason this is causing so much outcry is because there has been no evidence shown to indicate this kid was guilty of anything more than being black.
Both people made mistakes but one of them only made mistakes in hindsight. And he is now dead. Martin had every right to casually walk home and not be stalked or harassed by anyone.
Except Martin wasn't following anybody. You are correct that being followed or chased by anybody would make you feel threatened. Due to racial tensions in the States it probably feels more threatening to be followed by someone not of your race.
I am not pretending anything. But what I am hearing from you is "I'm white and I know for a fact it is more threatening to be followed by a black person". But that is not relevant to this case at all. I am saying that due to racial tensions in the United States (and a not too favourable past) that a 17 year old black youth would be quite uncomfortable being followed by this white guy.
How do you think this would go if it was a black man that ran down a white kid and shot him? Would the police be parroting "stand your ground"? I highly doubt it. This also wasn't just "following" it was chasing. Martin sped up his pace to try to get away from Zimmerman and chased him.
Zimmerman started this confrontation, that is the core of the issue. I can't just walk up to somebody, get in their space, harass them then shoot them dead when they retaliate.
If Zimmerman just asked what the kid was doing and Martin started beating him to death then self defense is valid. But there is no credible evidence that this is the case. Even if Martin was extremely agitated (I know I would be) and shouted at Zimmerman or pushed him away or even punched him there was no grounds to shoot a child. You don't just get to shoot somebody for punching you. I do however believe you have the right to remove somebody from your space forcibly if needed.
Very true. So why does the lunatic get to go free? You have to keep in mind that the only reason Zimmerman was attacked (if he even was attacked) was because he chased down this kid. And, repeating myself, being chased down by a "white Hispanic" as a black youth is most likely very threatening. He had every right and reason to defend himself and tell Zimmerman to fuck right off.
All we have is the hearsay report from the man who just so happens to benefit the most form it and who is also known to be overly violent. But I guess the police, like you, have decided this poor dead kid whom had no history of violence definitely brought it on himself.
I think the jury is still out on if that happened or not. So it's okay to shoot to death someone attacking you. But it is not okay to attack a lunatic carrying a gun that is chasing you?
6'3" at 140 pounds is anything but well built.
How is this marked troll? Zimmerman's whole case seems to ride on him "feeling threatened" which apparently makes it okay to murder people in Florida. I don't know about all of you but if I was a black youth in Florida and some creepy white guy was following me around in a van I would sure as hell feel threatened. The kid had way more right (and evidently the need) to defend himself than Zimmerman ever did. Zimmerman could have walked away at any time (and was told to leave the kid alone by police dispatch).
If Zimmerman gets off on this it means in Florida you can murder anyone you want. You just have to follow them around and goad them into trying to defend themselves then shoot them dead. I don't see how this is anything but a hate crime.
The limit on other people is not being able to offer the same advantage. Very simple.
You are getting boondoggled by them using positive words. If they limit everyone and then allow themselves not to be limited they are still limiting everyone else. They just use weasle words to make it less obvious.
Yes I'm sure the whole world would be thrilled to have Microsoft tell them their current monitor is not compatible with Windows X. As a user you should care about this because it is incredibly lazy and will no doubt cause problems in the long run. Apple has committed themselves to one aspect ratio and a rather expensive upgrade path (doubling vertical and horizontal pixel counts every upgrade isn't feasible).
My only point was really that the ipad does not handle resolution independence well (definitely not better than Windows). I don't care that the ipad chose to do it this way; the high resolution is awesome. But the ipad is not resolution independent at all- it is entirely dependent on resolution. Why was resolution independence so good when you thought the ipad had it and wasted effort when informed it doesn't?
Wait, so desktop operating systems, with many different screen sizes and resolutions do not handle resolution independence as well as the ipad? The ipad which had to exactly double the resolution of the previous model so it could just be linearly scaled up by a factor of 2?
But we already have many methods of implementing credentials and privileges. They are trivial to make and very obvious as soon as "over the internet" is added to anything. Patents are not supposed to be a permutation game.
It is not supposed to matter if implementation is trivial. Let me guess: they send some kind of TCP/IP messages between nodes and a server. Let's make this clear right now; "receiving" and "distributing" information between nodes and servers should not be patentable. It is the number one use case of the server-node system. It does not matter if they are working with annotations, instant messages or email. If they have developed some novel method of message passing that deserves a patent (unlikely) then it should be about that. Annotations should never be part of the patent.
Could I patent being the member of a group that collates all the other members' analog annotations into one document and sending it back to them?
Your hypothetical situation was causing problems for Youtube not that long ago: Flaw in Youtube Takedown Process Exposed.
No worries. It's a slashdot post, a score:1 slashdot post. It's a wonder anyone read past the "Re:" in the title.
Is that not what I said? Enter the group (become part of the group) and change its dynamic to better suit one's needs. Women have been "putting up with" this crap for quite a while. Now the push for change is becoming a stronger force. There is no law anywhere that mentions how many women must be active on an open source project, rules and laws are not part of this discussion.
It is not just a couple women that want themselves accepted in CS/Engineering/Math and it is not the minority either. Most people have had enough of this crap that the minority forces on women. I have been in these circles (am part of these circles). I avoid a lot of it because it even makes me uncomfortable (I am a heterosexual male). We are the community pushing for an end to the problems.
I speak here only of the people actively making it difficult for women in the community. I do not believe this the only cause but it is a big one and one that should be rectified.
Go right ahead. If you troll them the group dynamic will push you out. If you are actually interested in gender rights and bring genuine arguments against their misandry (funny that firefox claims misandry is not a word but has no problem with misogyny) they can either listen or be shown to be in the wrong.