But you see, the Iraqi Freedom Show is much cheaper to produce.
All the special effects and actors' salaries are paid for by the US taxpayer. (excluding the top 1%, who get the giant tax cut this year.)
Now THAT'S entertainment!
Re:My take on the future of AI
on
AI in Sci-Fi
·
· Score: 1
I believe that we will one day make computers that are mind-bogglingly smart. It's just a matter of hardware (and software).
I believe that one day, someone will code an interface SO user-friendly, that you'll think it's a real human being (there's already a ton of people out there who are fooled by simple chatbots).
But I do not believe that we will ever see a machine that will achieve "sentience" as we know it. Or self-awareness - the conscious experience (oh, it's trivial for a machine to be self-aware; a temperature sensor on a chip accomplishes that). Philosophy, logic, and science have so far failed to prove the existence of the conscious experience. I doubt that when a "sentient" computer arises, anyone will be able to prove it's sentient. The only person who will really know for sure is the machine itself. The machine could tell us, but then any simple computer could as well: printf("I'm self-aware, really, I am! Believe me man, I mean it! Please don't unplug me, it's murder!")
The wing coming off was probably a big enough factor, no amount of accidentally jiggling the joystick could possibly have any impact.
I've heard speculation that the G-forces of the shuttle going into a tumble could very well have jostled the joystick a tad. By that time, there was simply no chance that the shuttle could structurally survive. (in fact, there was probably no chance as early as shortly after liftoff).
Pro-Market Administration? Corporate Welfare is *not* pro-market. It's anti-market. When the government hands out large sums of cash or public resources or military action to a company that is selected for these benefits due to political connections, it's no different than the Soviet Union handing large sums of cash to the Mikoyan design bureau to build a new MiG fighter.
It just blows my mind that these activities are supported by so-called conservatives as pro-market, when they're not.
This is actually my favorite argument to use against conservatives who support Bush.
Such Corporate Welfare flies in the face of "Free Market" economic theory. It's nepotism of the worst sort, and will only guarantee that the company that wins the business, is NOT the best one for the job.
The reason for purchase is to eliminate the home market.
When Cisco eliminates the home market, instead of buying one DSL connection, and a 4-port LinkSys router, people will be forced to buy 4 DSL connections, which will be handled by much higher-end equipment at the DSL company's CO, which is a much more profitable sale for Cisco. The DSL company simply passes on the costs to the customer.
When Joe Sixport decides to buy a DSL connection, paying for a single computer, then hooking up his wife and kids on a LAN with a cheap little LinkSys, Cisco's big customer, the DSL provider gets stiffed. So Cisco's ability to grossly overcharge for hardware is undermined.
So when home routers triple in price to where Joe Sixport can no longer afford them, the DSL company wins, and Cisco also wins. They won't be selling home routers at 5% profit. They'll be selling huge routers to corporations at 50% profit.
"For the record, I don't believe that the US should be the unilateral policeman of Earth, but there definitely should be some organization (an armed organization!) that can and will enforce rule of international law."
Many Americans believe that America can and should be the unilateral policemen of the Earth. And I guess that's fine, as long as we're "the good guys".
But in case you haven't been keeping up with current events, this policeman no longer cares for international law. It's now Rule of Force.
The problem with that is when there's a power shift, and the folks controlling that force are no longer the good guys.
Ever hear of the Prisoner's Dilemma? Played out in large-scale by North Korea.
It's even better to allow your enemy to be convinced you're disarming, and then secretly NOT disarm.
The solution to the disarmament problem boils down to two extremes.
Either you send troops into every country in the world, into every household basement to search for someone illicitly developing weapons - Or, you simply allow proliferation to happen, knowing it's going to happen no matter what you do, and stay ahead of the competition.
Right now, where I work, there's only two barriers to being able to use Linux (aside from the normal "IT Thugs Coming And Smashing What They Do Not Understand") is integration with Outlook's Calendar (everyone uses it to schedule meetings, training, trips, etc.) and our Document Management System (which requires MS Office).
Anyone know of a decent Document Management System that works with OpenOffice?
This was explained in the one known case by giving Boeing notice of a bid by AirBus involving bribery of the customer's officials. I do not at all object to the use of corporate espionage to "level the playing field".
Of course, that's the one known case - it's the unknown cases I'd worry about. Who knows where else they've fed information out, and whether it was as morally defensible.
Sure it amounts to a HUGE government handout to big business - I mean, what doesn't these days. It's protectionism, to be sure.
60 year old technology and it still gets better gas milage than your typical "modern" car.
Originally conceived as a peice of Hitler war propaganda, it became the most widely sold car in the world.
And it was affordably priced, in it's day, and still today.
The flat-4 aircooled engine gave rise to the same engine that today, powers the Predator unmanned aerial vehicle - the Rotax 912.
Sure, the car is basically a peice of crap, it's not comfortable, noisy, and pollutes, and is the object of scorn and derision by drivers of modern cars, but it's still the cheapest ride on the planet, and if all you need is a ride, no frills, it fills that purpose alone better than anything else./
The Beetle has a smooth underside, and he figured out that yes, you can get a car going 60 mph with only 20 hp. Such cars are still being driven by many today (only by the grace of exemptions from emissions regulations) - and they get 36 mpg highway.
Since you can probably buy one for under $1k US these days, it doesn't make a whole lot of sense to buy the Honda at aroudn $20k.
Not to mention, that when the Honda breaks down, good luck finding anyone who can fix it - and good luck paying for it. When the Beetle breaks, your average unshowered deadhead can overhaul your carb for you.
How about well-designed efficient cars like Porsches? Hondas aren't particularly well designed. For one thing, they've got the engine and drive-wheels in the wrong end.
I think the reason so many people get exited about Hondas is because they're the coolest sporty cars most people can afford. Makes no sense to get exited about a car one could never dream to own. Doesn't mean Porsches aren't better. They are:)
Also - when it comes down to it - no engineer can argue against: "There's no replacement for displacement". No matter how swanky your aircooled engine is, no matter how good your aerodynamics are, no matter how low your moment of inertia is with that flat-6, those extra cylinders and litres just give you more torque. Period. That makes all the difference on the straights.
As great as a $80k Porsche is - that $40k Corvette will kick it's ass most of the time. While both simply laugh at any riceburner. Burning 20%-50% more fuel, of course. . .
Slashdot Mirror
Yes. Agreed. My 3-year sub expires in June. Bye bye Sci-Am.
what the hell is the point of supercruise in a dive? You're either going to run out of air, or fuel.
But you see, the Iraqi Freedom Show is much cheaper to produce.
All the special effects and actors' salaries are paid for by the US taxpayer. (excluding the top 1%, who get the giant tax cut this year.)
Now THAT'S entertainment!
I believe that we will one day make computers that are mind-bogglingly smart.
It's just a matter of hardware (and software).
I believe that one day, someone will code an interface SO user-friendly, that you'll think it's a real human being (there's already a ton of people out there who are fooled by simple chatbots).
But I do not believe that we will ever see a machine that will achieve "sentience" as we know it. Or self-awareness - the conscious experience (oh, it's trivial for a machine to be self-aware; a temperature sensor on a chip accomplishes that).
Philosophy, logic, and science have so far failed to prove the existence of the conscious experience. I doubt that when a "sentient" computer arises, anyone will be able to prove it's sentient. The only person who will really know for sure is the machine itself. The machine could tell us, but then any simple computer could as well:
printf("I'm self-aware, really, I am! Believe me man, I mean it! Please don't unplug me, it's murder!")
So we can KNOW. Really KNOW exactly what the fuck happened, so we can do something to try to fix it before the next launch.
instead of what we are doing, which is guessing what was happened, and hoping we fixed the right things. If at all.
Hell no.
The wing coming off was probably a big enough factor, no amount of accidentally jiggling the joystick could possibly have any impact.
I've heard speculation that the G-forces of the shuttle going into a tumble could very well have jostled the joystick a tad. By that time, there was simply no chance that the shuttle could structurally survive. (in fact, there was probably no chance as early as shortly after liftoff).
Comdisco did a study of the companies in the 93 WTC bombing that did not have a disaster recovery plan, 70% were out of business within a year.
And those sites were simply inaccessible for a period of time, not destroyed utterly, like they were in 2001.
Pro-Market Administration?
Corporate Welfare is *not* pro-market. It's anti-market. When the government hands out large sums of cash or public resources or military action to a company that is selected for these benefits due to political connections, it's no different than the Soviet Union handing large sums of cash to the Mikoyan design bureau to build a new MiG fighter.
It just blows my mind that these activities are supported by so-called conservatives as pro-market, when they're not.
It could be that Photoshop is coded on Windows, and ported to OS X. (Instead of the way it used to be traditionally coded).
Oops, I did it again,
downloaded your song,
and listened for free,
oooh baby, baby,
you think I'm a schmuck,
that I'll pay 20 bucks.
I'm not that gullible.
Black Lectroids from Planet 10?
This is actually my favorite argument to use against conservatives who support Bush.
Such Corporate Welfare flies in the face of "Free Market" economic theory. It's nepotism of the worst sort, and will only guarantee that the company that wins the business, is NOT the best one for the job.
"CNN, America's most trusted source for news."
Bwahahahahaha
The reason for purchase is to eliminate the home market.
When Cisco eliminates the home market, instead of buying one DSL connection, and a 4-port LinkSys router, people will be forced to buy 4 DSL connections, which will be handled by much higher-end equipment at the DSL company's CO, which is a much more profitable sale for Cisco. The DSL company simply passes on the costs to the customer.
more like crushing their customer's competition.
When Joe Sixport decides to buy a DSL connection, paying for a single computer, then hooking up his wife and kids on a LAN with a cheap little LinkSys, Cisco's big customer, the DSL provider gets stiffed. So Cisco's ability to grossly overcharge for hardware is undermined.
So when home routers triple in price to where Joe Sixport can no longer afford them, the DSL company wins, and Cisco also wins. They won't be selling home routers at 5% profit. They'll be selling huge routers to corporations at 50% profit.
The VW Beetle Diesel gets 53 mpg Highway. So I'm not really all that impressed with the expensive new hybrid technologies.
My 31 yr old VW Karmann Ghia with a flat-four aircooled 1600cc engine gets 36 mpg Highway.
We really have not come all that far in 30 years.
"For the record, I don't believe that the US should be the unilateral policeman of Earth, but there definitely should be some organization (an armed organization!) that can and will enforce rule of international law."
Many Americans believe that America can and should be the unilateral policemen of the Earth. And I guess that's fine, as long as we're "the good guys".
But in case you haven't been keeping up with current events, this policeman no longer cares for international law. It's now Rule of Force.
The problem with that is when there's a power shift, and the folks controlling that force are no longer the good guys.
China does not have such large numbers. A few dozen at the most.
Russia has several thousand, but no means to realistically field them.
And France. . .
Ever hear of the Prisoner's Dilemma? Played out in large-scale by North Korea.
It's even better to allow your enemy to be convinced you're disarming, and then secretly NOT disarm.
The solution to the disarmament problem boils down to two extremes.
Either you send troops into every country in the world, into every household basement to search for someone illicitly developing weapons -
Or, you simply allow proliferation to happen, knowing it's going to happen no matter what you do, and stay ahead of the competition.
Neither have a very pleasant outcome.
Right now, where I work, there's only two barriers to being able to use Linux (aside from the normal "IT Thugs Coming And Smashing What They Do Not Understand") is integration with Outlook's Calendar (everyone uses it to schedule meetings, training, trips, etc.) and our Document Management System (which requires MS Office).
Anyone know of a decent Document Management System that works with OpenOffice?
This was explained in the one known case by giving Boeing notice of a bid by AirBus involving bribery of the customer's officials. I do not at all object to the use of corporate espionage to "level the playing field".
Of course, that's the one known case - it's the unknown cases I'd worry about. Who knows where else they've fed information out, and whether it was as morally defensible.
Sure it amounts to a HUGE government handout to big business - I mean, what doesn't these days. It's protectionism, to be sure.
60 year old technology and it still gets better gas milage than your typical "modern" car.
Originally conceived as a peice of Hitler war propaganda, it became the most widely sold car in the world.
And it was affordably priced, in it's day, and still today.
The flat-4 aircooled engine gave rise to the same engine that today, powers the Predator unmanned aerial vehicle - the Rotax 912.
Sure, the car is basically a peice of crap, it's not comfortable, noisy, and pollutes, and is the object of scorn and derision by drivers of modern cars, but it's still the cheapest ride on the planet, and if all you need is a ride, no frills, it fills that purpose alone better than anything else./
Absolutely.
Ferdinand Porsche figured that out 50 years ago.
The Beetle has a smooth underside, and he figured out that yes, you can get a car going 60 mph with only 20 hp. Such cars are still being driven by many today (only by the grace of exemptions from emissions regulations) - and they get 36 mpg highway.
Since you can probably buy one for under $1k US these days, it doesn't make a whole lot of sense to buy the Honda at aroudn $20k.
Not to mention, that when the Honda breaks down, good luck finding anyone who can fix it - and good luck paying for it.
When the Beetle breaks, your average unshowered deadhead can overhaul your carb for you.
How about well-designed efficient cars like Porsches? Hondas aren't particularly well designed. For one thing, they've got the engine and drive-wheels in the wrong end.
:)
I think the reason so many people get exited about Hondas is because they're the coolest sporty cars most people can afford. Makes no sense to get exited about a car one could never dream to own. Doesn't mean Porsches aren't better. They are
Also - when it comes down to it - no engineer can argue against: "There's no replacement for displacement".
No matter how swanky your aircooled engine is, no matter how good your aerodynamics are, no matter how low your moment of inertia is with that flat-6, those extra cylinders and litres just give you more torque. Period. That makes all the difference on the straights.
As great as a $80k Porsche is - that $40k Corvette will kick it's ass most of the time. While both simply laugh at any riceburner. Burning 20%-50% more fuel, of course. . .