i'll second this - they teach middle school kids with alice these days, so art majors should be able to handle it. BUT, one downside is that while alice is good for "storytelling", AFAIK enabling interactivity in the virtual worlds isn't something its creators concentrated on too much. though i might be completely wrong. am i? anyone?
he uses a colorful, albeit fictional, example to illustrate a point. perhaps that's not in very good style, but i don't think it undermines what i see as a very carefully constructed and thoroughly explored argument.
Never underestimate the bandwidth of a station wagon full of tapes hurtling down the highway. —Tanenbaum, Andrew S. (1996). Computer Networks. New Jersey: Prentice-Hall. pp. 83. ISBN 0-13-349945-6.
quite so - and the cool thing about this is that it's likely to result in a whole bunch of improvements in materials and such, that should bleed through to commercial applications. i hope.
see, this is why we need time travel technology! imagine being able to do a rigorous scientific experiment of the effects of playing video games for just one subject! of course, the results wouldn't be generalizable to other people, but there are many kinds of studies that are impossible today, that would be child's play with TT. for example, smoking - it's completely unethical (those damn IRB folks...) to conduct a study where you get a bunch of kids, assign them to two groups, and make one group smoke for the next 40 years to see what the true effects of tobacco are. introduce time travel, and bam! we could have a definitive answer in 5 seconds.
that works fine, assuming your country of citizenship is actually a, ahem, country, not a protection racket run by people who'd sell their own mama for a smoke. not all of us can say that, though...
too much information on the internets! my fragile, horribly narrow world view is being damaged! quick, shelter me, opportunists!
i'm pretty depressed after reading this story. i'll have to go have a smoke before i can get back to work....
but they're not trying to shit in their own back yard, they're trying to shit in other people's back yards. the problem is that everyone is shitting in every one else's back yard, hence all back yards are filling up with shit.
well yeah, but if fuckloads of people on fuckloads of planets were shooting fuckloads of bullets into the sky, the chances of one of them getting to that planet might not be so tiny... with less profanity, what i'm saying is "multiplying a small number by a large number can lead to a medium number".
yep. tactile stimulation + development of spacial reasoning, and probably some other things i'm forgetting, is stuff your kid can't really get with computers. very valuable stuff. ok, essential stuff.
the idea of robot swarms has been around for a while. how to control them has been an area of research for a while, and still is. though all that work is still kind of theoretical, because the hardware doesn't exist yet (or at least isn't sufficiently cheap yet), so testing is a bitch.
the typical application that is cited for robot swarms is disaster response, afaik. there is no real application yet, because the technology isn't here yet. (isn't that a weird word, 'yet'? it doesn't even look like a word, does it? yet... hm.)
well, to be honest, i have absolutely no idea - this is really new, and if it takes off, it'll be a while until it becomes clear what the possibilities and limitations of this technology are. many people have pointed out that it's just an analog computer, but it's not the same - first of all, it's on a microchip, hence much more power. that alone makes things different...
Slashdot Mirror
yeah, i know, and so does wikipedia. now if you know exactly by how much it predates that quote...
i'll second this - they teach middle school kids with alice these days, so art majors should be able to handle it. BUT, one downside is that while alice is good for "storytelling", AFAIK enabling interactivity in the virtual worlds isn't something its creators concentrated on too much. though i might be completely wrong. am i? anyone?
he uses a colorful, albeit fictional, example to illustrate a point. perhaps that's not in very good style, but i don't think it undermines what i see as a very carefully constructed and thoroughly explored argument.
i love the alt text on the image - "aaa"
Never underestimate the bandwidth of a station wagon full of tapes hurtling down the highway. —Tanenbaum, Andrew S. (1996). Computer Networks. New Jersey: Prentice-Hall. pp. 83. ISBN 0-13-349945-6.
quite so - and the cool thing about this is that it's likely to result in a whole bunch of improvements in materials and such, that should bleed through to commercial applications. i hope.
see, this is why we need time travel technology! imagine being able to do a rigorous scientific experiment of the effects of playing video games for just one subject! of course, the results wouldn't be generalizable to other people, but there are many kinds of studies that are impossible today, that would be child's play with TT. for example, smoking - it's completely unethical (those damn IRB folks...) to conduct a study where you get a bunch of kids, assign them to two groups, and make one group smoke for the next 40 years to see what the true effects of tobacco are. introduce time travel, and bam! we could have a definitive answer in 5 seconds.
douglas adams reference, nice
that works fine, assuming your country of citizenship is actually a, ahem, country, not a protection racket run by people who'd sell their own mama for a smoke. not all of us can say that, though...
too much information on the internets! my fragile, horribly narrow world view is being damaged! quick, shelter me, opportunists!
i'm pretty depressed after reading this story. i'll have to go have a smoke before i can get back to work....
huh?
but they're not trying to shit in their own back yard, they're trying to shit in other people's back yards. the problem is that everyone is shitting in every one else's back yard, hence all back yards are filling up with shit.
well yeah, we're talking about bullets shot from hypothetical guns capable of escaping a planet's and star's orbit.
well yeah, but if fuckloads of people on fuckloads of planets were shooting fuckloads of bullets into the sky, the chances of one of them getting to that planet might not be so tiny... with less profanity, what i'm saying is "multiplying a small number by a large number can lead to a medium number".
what alternatives? no, seriously?
packet switching is always going to have higher latency than circuit switching... pretty much inevitable. so no, it's not just you.
a quick google search later:
http://www.aircat.net/Aerial/Equipment.html
http://www.lkngymnastics.com/policies.cfm
(pages are long, a quick ctrl+f for "caution" will get you to the relevant part)
yep. tactile stimulation + development of spacial reasoning, and probably some other things i'm forgetting, is stuff your kid can't really get with computers. very valuable stuff. ok, essential stuff.
I don't get it.
the idea of robot swarms has been around for a while. how to control them has been an area of research for a while, and still is. though all that work is still kind of theoretical, because the hardware doesn't exist yet (or at least isn't sufficiently cheap yet), so testing is a bitch.
the typical application that is cited for robot swarms is disaster response, afaik. there is no real application yet, because the technology isn't here yet. (isn't that a weird word, 'yet'? it doesn't even look like a word, does it? yet... hm.)
They just don't fit.
You must acquit!
what you describe has already been done, and ignore the people saying it's impossible. see http://www.cs.cmu.edu/~srinivas/
well, to be honest, i have absolutely no idea - this is really new, and if it takes off, it'll be a while until it becomes clear what the possibilities and limitations of this technology are. many people have pointed out that it's just an analog computer, but it's not the same - first of all, it's on a microchip, hence much more power. that alone makes things different...
holy mother f*** s***! as a machine learning person, this is so exciting it got me tingly all over.