Speed is relative, so is velocity. Rosetta is going to rendesvous with the comet, and go into orbit around it. At that point the speed and velocity will both be quite slow. I'm guessing that the biggest problem for the lander will be not bouncing off or floating away - there's next to no gravity.
I would like the same outcome as you... I like the lifestyle of ST:NG, and would like to live in The Culture, though most of them are a bit hedonistic for my taste.
I just think that TPTB enjoy being TPTB, and aren't about to surrender their positions of privilege willingly. It will have to be by force, subterfuge, or obsolescence. Oh, and TPTB also own more guns, more information technology, and the means of production. That doesn't say it's impossible, just very difficult.
> I am fairly sure we're going to be looking at two very different classes of machine: One, the AI, isn't going to be "owned" by > anyone other than itself, just as you aren't owned by anyone. It may, or may not, have some obligations, but ownership of an > intelligent being... probably not going to happen again. I hope.
All through history we've had people doing their best to own others, as many and as thoroughly as possible. Sometimes there is out-and-out slavery, perhaps more often economic slavery, and there are other, more subtle forms of ownership. All too often these ownership-obsessed people are also in powerful places. (no surprise there) If we so commonly treat ourselves that way, there's not a snowball's chance of recognizing A.I. rights until Skynet smacks us upside the head.
Re:Isn't this the ultimate goal?
on
If I Had a Hammer
·
· Score: 5, Interesting
But the robots will be owned by someone who does want payments.
Years ago "they" talked about how in the future machines would do the work, and our problem would be figuring out how to handle our leisure time. What appears to have happened is that the machines do the work, the machine owners capture the revenue, and all of that "free time" essentially translates to lack of income.
I'm under the impression that with KMS the display-side of X no longer needs root, but that there's something about input handling that still does. As you say, non-KMS drivers would still need root.
I would expect that privilege separation could be used here, a small root stub to do the root-only things, and the rest of the server running with dropped privileges. In that situation, could the server even run as "nobody"? After all, content comes through the socket.
Before the whole NSA thing blew open, we were worried about the Chinese government working with Chinese companies to make sure their backdoors were inserted in all of the networked equipment they sold to us.
Just because the NSA fiasco currently overshadows that doesn't mean that the Chinese haven't been and aren't still doing it.
The second-worst thing about the NSA fiasco is that it has taken everyone's eyes off of the other balls.
Doesn't sound to me like he's hiding it, because the kids know when he's peeking. Hiding would be if he were doing so undetectably, then "just happening" to walk in the room when they're doing something they shouldn't, and catching them without their knowing how he just happened to come in, right then.
I'm not sure exactly what you're saying, but for sake of convenience I'll give my working definitions of a few terms :
"Hypothesis" is a "neat idea," generally with the intent to refine into a theory. "String Theory" seems to never really be testable against the real world, but I guess it's shorter to pronounce than "String Hypothesis." Still I suspect that the thing string theorists would most enjoy is a testable prediction, so they really could experiment.
"Theory" is a proposal or proposed model, along with at least a means for testing its balidity and accuracy. More commonly, theories have already been tested and refined/revised through that testing. Many theories are "practically fact," called theories because boundaries are always open and there's always room for improvement. Special Relativity would be a good example.
"conclusion" with a small "c" is what one makes based on experimental data, strengthening, modifying, or refining a theory.
"Conclusion" with a large "C" is the landing spot after a leap, often precarious. I would generally put "Intelligent Design" in this category, rather than "Theory", especially since I've never heard its proponents propose a practical, repeatable test.
Finally, "Doubt" is a necessary part of science. If you think you've got the answers all sewn up, you're very likely wrong. That includes this entire post.
As an attacking AC you don't deserve an answer, but I'll give you one. My daughter hasn't had to to a paper on AGW, but she had an interesting little thing happen to her master's thesis. She was using data by previous students, and some of it didn't look quite right. It's not that it didn't match her desired conclusions, it's that certain proportions didn't match what she knew as normal. So she went into the archives, pulled a sample of the original materials, and took the data herself. Whoever had taken the data on the original samples hadn't done it right, and hadn't checked themselves. She had to re-take the data on all of the samples, and ended up changing her conclusions to fit what she found from the data.
AGW is a complex thing - there will be no one conclusive experiment that confirms or blows the whole thing. You nibble around at the pieces, confirming or denying, and real scientists accept real, confirmable conclusions. AGW is also a theory, and real scientists accepts that the theory will need modification to fit the facts.
4) You can be happy that the selfless companies making their hard-earned meager revenue selling hydrocarbons are here to protect us from those overpaid, greedy climate scientists.
(Father of a PhD student in the sciences, so I have a pretty good idea of how overpaid and greedy they are. If you don't recognize that as sarcasm, you have a problem. You also need to better understand just how hostile the US is to the sciences, or at least home growing scientists.)
"Yes, udev on non-systemd systems is in our eyes a dead end, in case you haven't noticed it yet. I am looking forward to the day when we can drop that support entirely."
Is it possible to be udev-free with current kernels? Gentoo did fork eudev a while back, but at the moment it appears that Gentoo is solidly into the systemd camp, so I don't know what the fate of eudev will be. Static/dev was a pain, too.
By the way, it took me about a week to work up the proper package.mask file, but I'm running OK without systemd now.
What's annoying is that I kind of like what systemd is doing, I just really dislike the way it's packaged, and the way they're forcing it down everyone's throats.
Gentoo is currently pushing over to systemd. About a month ago they set stable keywords for gnome-3.8 and systemd, so that pretty much everyone who uses any gnome software, not just the gnome desktop, got pushed to systemd as well.
There is not any official word, but that was what happened. It's still possible to run an OpenRC system, but it takes a fair amount of work. The forums still have systemd migration problems, a month later.
There was an item on the Gentoo Bugzilla for upstart, but that was recently reclassified as "won't work on", with the reasoning, "because now we have systemd."
There's still Slackware. I haven't moved yet, but I'm thinking...
In "Earth" David Brin tried to come up with 3 culturally neutral definitions for sanity. One was the ability to be satiated - to say you have enough of something, and stop. Another was the ability to evaluate how things are going, and change your plans and actions based upon events and results. I forget the third. I once went back and located it again, trying to remember it. I forgot it, again.
Because MythTV is on the job, you don't have to watch the show NOW, when it's scheduled. Because MythTV lets you put gobs of hard drive there for recordings, you don't even have to watch it this week. At some point, you realize that you don't really have to watch it at all.
As long as the computer is doing something useful besides MythTV, the only "wasted" cost is the tuner and the dedicated hard drive space.
Plus some time you might actually WANT to watch that TV show or movie - "Day of the Doctor", anyone?
Slashdot Mirror
Oh wow! Shades of: //STEP01 EXEC PGM=IEFBR14
Also proof that a program that does absolutely nothing can indeed have bugs. Look up the history some time. (It's on Wikipedia.)
I don't think you can really know where to start start before the Kalens of July.
There's a "Robinette Broadhead" joke in here somewhere, and I just can't make it come out. Where's Gelle-Klara when we need her?
Speed is relative, so is velocity. Rosetta is going to rendesvous with the comet, and go into orbit around it. At that point the speed and velocity will both be quite slow. I'm guessing that the biggest problem for the lander will be not bouncing off or floating away - there's next to no gravity.
I would like the same outcome as you... I like the lifestyle of ST:NG, and would like to live in The Culture, though most of them are a bit hedonistic for my taste.
I just think that TPTB enjoy being TPTB, and aren't about to surrender their positions of privilege willingly. It will have to be by force, subterfuge, or obsolescence. Oh, and TPTB also own more guns, more information technology, and the means of production. That doesn't say it's impossible, just very difficult.
> I am fairly sure we're going to be looking at two very different classes of machine: One, the AI, isn't going to be "owned" by
> anyone other than itself, just as you aren't owned by anyone. It may, or may not, have some obligations, but ownership of an
> intelligent being... probably not going to happen again. I hope.
All through history we've had people doing their best to own others, as many and as thoroughly as possible. Sometimes there is out-and-out slavery, perhaps more often economic slavery, and there are other, more subtle forms of ownership. All too often these ownership-obsessed people are also in powerful places. (no surprise there) If we so commonly treat ourselves that way, there's not a snowball's chance of recognizing A.I. rights until Skynet smacks us upside the head.
But the robots will be owned by someone who does want payments.
Years ago "they" talked about how in the future machines would do the work, and our problem would be figuring out how to handle our leisure time. What appears to have happened is that the machines do the work, the machine owners capture the revenue, and all of that "free time" essentially translates to lack of income.
I'm under the impression that with KMS the display-side of X no longer needs root, but that there's something about input handling that still does. As you say, non-KMS drivers would still need root.
I would expect that privilege separation could be used here, a small root stub to do the root-only things, and the rest of the server running with dropped privileges. In that situation, could the server even run as "nobody"? After all, content comes through the socket.
Come on, this is Klingon - they should execute him.
No, there's no Chinese Edward Snowden.
Before the whole NSA thing blew open, we were worried about the Chinese government working with Chinese companies to make sure their backdoors were inserted in all of the networked equipment they sold to us.
Just because the NSA fiasco currently overshadows that doesn't mean that the Chinese haven't been and aren't still doing it.
The second-worst thing about the NSA fiasco is that it has taken everyone's eyes off of the other balls.
Doesn't sound to me like he's hiding it, because the kids know when he's peeking. Hiding would be if he were doing so undetectably, then "just happening" to walk in the room when they're doing something they shouldn't, and catching them without their knowing how he just happened to come in, right then.
I'm not sure exactly what you're saying, but for sake of convenience I'll give my working definitions of a few terms :
"Hypothesis" is a "neat idea," generally with the intent to refine into a theory. "String Theory" seems to never really be testable against the real world, but I guess it's shorter to pronounce than "String Hypothesis." Still I suspect that the thing string theorists would most enjoy is a testable prediction, so they really could experiment.
"Theory" is a proposal or proposed model, along with at least a means for testing its balidity and accuracy. More commonly, theories have already been tested and refined/revised through that testing. Many theories are "practically fact," called theories because boundaries are always open and there's always room for improvement. Special Relativity would be a good example.
"conclusion" with a small "c" is what one makes based on experimental data, strengthening, modifying, or refining a theory.
"Conclusion" with a large "C" is the landing spot after a leap, often precarious. I would generally put "Intelligent Design" in this category, rather than "Theory", especially since I've never heard its proponents propose a practical, repeatable test.
Finally, "Doubt" is a necessary part of science. If you think you've got the answers all sewn up, you're very likely wrong. That includes this entire post.
As an attacking AC you don't deserve an answer, but I'll give you one. My daughter hasn't had to to a paper on AGW, but she had an interesting little thing happen to her master's thesis. She was using data by previous students, and some of it didn't look quite right. It's not that it didn't match her desired conclusions, it's that certain proportions didn't match what she knew as normal. So she went into the archives, pulled a sample of the original materials, and took the data herself. Whoever had taken the data on the original samples hadn't done it right, and hadn't checked themselves. She had to re-take the data on all of the samples, and ended up changing her conclusions to fit what she found from the data.
AGW is a complex thing - there will be no one conclusive experiment that confirms or blows the whole thing. You nibble around at the pieces, confirming or denying, and real scientists accept real, confirmable conclusions. AGW is also a theory, and real scientists accepts that the theory will need modification to fit the facts.
4) You can be happy that the selfless companies making their hard-earned meager revenue selling hydrocarbons are here to protect us from those overpaid, greedy climate scientists.
(Father of a PhD student in the sciences, so I have a pretty good idea of how overpaid and greedy they are. If you don't recognize that as sarcasm, you have a problem. You also need to better understand just how hostile the US is to the sciences, or at least home growing scientists.)
http://lists.freedesktop.org/archives/systemd-devel/2012-August/006066.html
"Yes, udev on non-systemd systems is in our eyes a dead end, in case you haven't noticed it yet. I am looking forward to the day when we can drop that support entirely."
Is it possible to be udev-free with current kernels? Gentoo did fork eudev a while back, but at the moment it appears that Gentoo is solidly into the systemd camp, so I don't know what the fate of eudev will be. Static /dev was a pain, too.
By the way, it took me about a week to work up the proper package.mask file, but I'm running OK without systemd now.
What's annoying is that I kind of like what systemd is doing, I just really dislike the way it's packaged, and the way they're forcing it down everyone's throats.
Gentoo is currently pushing over to systemd. About a month ago they set stable keywords for gnome-3.8 and systemd, so that pretty much everyone who uses any gnome software, not just the gnome desktop, got pushed to systemd as well.
There is not any official word, but that was what happened. It's still possible to run an OpenRC system, but it takes a fair amount of work. The forums still have systemd migration problems, a month later.
There was an item on the Gentoo Bugzilla for upstart, but that was recently reclassified as "won't work on", with the reasoning, "because now we have systemd."
There's still Slackware. I haven't moved yet, but I'm thinking...
It was kind of fun to see Linus' reaction when the systemd developers attempted to push binary logging into the kernel.
Maybe some kernel developers are pushing systemd, not all.
It's not that far off - in only 20 years we'll have fusion power.
Just as it's been for the past 30 years or so.
Funny, of course, but do you have any comment about Brin's definitions?
How about how they relate to the real world.
I wonder how people in different parts of the world would see this?
Blasted flip-flopper!
(Sarcasm alert)
In "Earth" David Brin tried to come up with 3 culturally neutral definitions for sanity. One was the ability to be satiated - to say you have enough of something, and stop. Another was the ability to evaluate how things are going, and change your plans and actions based upon events and results. I forget the third. I once went back and located it again, trying to remember it. I forgot it, again.
I never claimed my logic was impeccable. Sometimes crutches can be handy, and this seems to be one of those, to me.
I've found that MythTV helps me watch less TV.
Because MythTV is on the job, you don't have to watch the show NOW, when it's scheduled. Because MythTV lets you put gobs of hard drive there for recordings, you don't even have to watch it this week. At some point, you realize that you don't really have to watch it at all.
As long as the computer is doing something useful besides MythTV, the only "wasted" cost is the tuner and the dedicated hard drive space.
Plus some time you might actually WANT to watch that TV show or movie - "Day of the Doctor", anyone?
> I'm pretty sure this worked out for Spartacus...
Not really - it seemed to backfire on everyone who said it.
I also heard it called Comma-toy and Commode-door, at the time.