Probably has great applications for walking robots
on
AI Monkey Robot
·
· Score: 5
The same type of calculation of forces is necessary for the function of a walking robot. Now, with walking, you're dealing with a push instead of a pull, and feet that have to balance instead of arms that have to grip, but the calculations are similar.
But most signifigant is that the robot has to try to grab the next rung, and if it doesn't, it has to figure out what adjustments to make on the fly. Simlarily, if a robotic step went wrong, the robot would have to recognise it, and correct itself before it fell
It's easy to make a proccessor that gets outrageously great speed doing one particular thing. (like graphics engines, for instances). But The proccessor in question probably couldn't do most PC tasks worth beans.
It's interesting to see that companies are beggining to see the potential legal signifigance of electronic documents. At my company (I work at a printer company, not HP), there was recently a pretty strong set of protocols instituted to ensure that competing companies could not get internal information (it's always been there, but we've recently been strongly encouraged to tighten up our practices).
So the question, again, becomes this: when does privacy end and obstruction of justice begin? We balk at governments for seizing peoples' laptops and webservers, yet we have a good laugh as we watch Microsoft scramble to burn all their documents. Is there really a difference?
I remember the day that I first got an IBM PC (coincedentally the last time I *ever* used my ti-99/4a). I remember teaching my grandfather DOS (with little success). I remember being addicted to TradeWars, accessed through a beta of Procomm off said dos machine.
snif! Memories.....
Seriously, though, cool interview. Does the licensing question imply that companies might in the future include statements in their license agreements to keep things as basic as DOS from being rewritten in Open Source? There have been some attempts, but it seems to me that even if Johansen and crew win their legal batttle, all this will accomplish is the creation of a clear and immutable legal format for barring reverse engineering.
This leads us to the natural division of our community rather than some capitalistic ego-driven segregation
I gotta disagree on this one. For those who have access to a computer, the internet, yes, is quite an equalizer. But not everyone has access to a computer. Sure, libraries and schools have computers that are "Open to the public", but this simply does not pan out in reality. The guy sleeping on the street cannot walk into a library and log onto a computer unfettered (of course, the more important fact is, he will not, he's too busy fighting off hypothermia).
Point is, while the internet provides an interesting case study of human communalization, it does not remove the economic barriers. The people who were outcasts yesterday are still outcasts today. If we form communities on the net, it is largely because we are already in communities in real life - most of us are employable, mildly educated, and well fed.
in a typical Linux distribution of 500MB, only about 2 percent belongs to the Linux OS.
Where did they get this stat from? According to this, the linux os is about 10 mb. My understanding has always been that the actual OS fit on a floppy, and *everything* else was add-on software.
By another defintion, I think the minimum space to get the whole thing up and running is about 40 mb. But 10mb? I don't see any possible source for that number.
Of course, the lack of permision required to put cookies on a system works both ways. Let's play a game called "How many computers can you Doubleclickproof in a day?" I'v already gotten all my relatives, the school labs, and every pc Ihave access to at work.
What really sucks is that I tend, at work, to erase everything regarding internet history from my work pc every night as I leave. Now I've got to leave the $#@%! cookie there.
And God said, "Let there be an MP3 playter that actually works, on an OS that actually works, and let it not be plagued by stupid lawsuits brought about by greed megalomaniac entertainment conglomerates."
And God looked upon the MP3 player , and saw that it was good.
Admittedly, My post contained a few innaccuracies (not to mention a dismal lack of HTML - Ack!). However, even you admit that the "friction" that exists at the microscopic level is really an entirely different set of forces.
Also, I think the studies you did were at the micro level, not the nano level. At the micro level, normal friction rules seem to apply (not to mention heat generation, as our frustrated friends at Intel keep discovering).
Admittedly, My post contained a few innaccuracies (not to mention a dismal lack of HTML - Ack!). However, even you admit that the "friction" that exists at the microscopic level is really an entirely different set of forces.
Also, I think the studies you did were at the micro level, not the nano level. At the micro level, normal friction rules seem to apply (not to mention heat generation, as our frustrated friends at Intel keep discovering).
nanotechnology occurs, by definition, at a very small level - so small, in fact that many of the engineering problems of the macroscopic world - thermal dynamics, friction, and internal stresses, to mention a few - disappear. In the world of atoms, every thing is perfectly round (or at least perfectly "whatevershaped"), and the process of adhesion (sticking together) or lubrication (not sticking together) is a function not of shape, but of electromagnetic and chemical properties. We first began to learn this with the development of the microchip - Silicon, a pretty worthless element in the "big" world has properties in the microscopic realm that make it more valuable than gold (or, if you prefer, more valuable than oil). Silicon, not a conductor in it's own right, can be made progressively more conductive (or more resistive) by adding specific impurities (like Boron or Galium, respectively). This isn't worth diddly in the "big" world, but beneath an electron microscope, it allows us to do things that angels barely dared to dream of:) In the same way, we are finding that certain properties that atoms and molecules have opened up engineering possibilties that were only theoretical in the past. Frictionless machines. robots that have a programmed response to a particular chemical. self-replication (robots can't build themselves, but molecules can - often with interesting results):) End of speech.
Slashdot Mirror
The same type of calculation of forces is necessary for the function of a walking robot. Now, with walking, you're dealing with a push instead of a pull, and feet that have to balance instead of arms that have to grip, but the calculations are similar.
But most signifigant is that the robot has to try to grab the next rung, and if it doesn't, it has to figure out what adjustments to make on the fly. Simlarily, if a robotic step went wrong, the robot would have to recognise it, and correct itself before it fell
It's easy to make a proccessor that gets outrageously great speed doing one particular thing. (like graphics engines, for instances). But The proccessor in question probably couldn't do most PC tasks worth beans.
How do you expect your age to influence the charges against you?
I tried to form a website called ANHIS (the Association for Non-Human Intelligent Species. But I got busy, and the whole thing fell through :(
So the question, again, becomes this: when does privacy end and obstruction of justice begin? We balk at governments for seizing peoples' laptops and webservers, yet we have a good laugh as we watch Microsoft scramble to burn all their documents. Is there really a difference?
Just kidding... I think.
When win2k starts working :) (dangit! had a dupe posted as a seperate string)
When Win2k starts working :)
Can't he just give them the wrong key? "Sorry guys, the data must be corrupted. Gimme."
I remember the day that I first got an IBM PC (coincedentally the last time I *ever* used my ti-99/4a). I remember teaching my grandfather DOS (with little success). I remember being addicted to TradeWars, accessed through a beta of Procomm off said dos machine.
snif! Memories.....
Seriously, though, cool interview. Does the licensing question imply that companies might in the future include statements in their license agreements to keep things as basic as DOS from being rewritten in Open Source? There have been some attempts, but it seems to me that even if Johansen and crew win their legal batttle, all this will accomplish is the creation of a clear and immutable legal format for barring reverse engineering.
scary.
I gotta disagree on this one. For those who have access to a computer, the internet, yes, is quite an equalizer. But not everyone has access to a computer. Sure, libraries and schools have computers that are "Open to the public", but this simply does not pan out in reality. The guy sleeping on the street cannot walk into a library and log onto a computer unfettered (of course, the more important fact is, he will not, he's too busy fighting off hypothermia).
Point is, while the internet provides an interesting case study of human communalization, it does not remove the economic barriers. The people who were outcasts yesterday are still outcasts today. If we form communities on the net, it is largely because we are already in communities in real life - most of us are employable, mildly educated, and well fed.
Where did they get this stat from? According to this, the linux os is about 10 mb. My understanding has always been that the actual OS fit on a floppy, and *everything* else was add-on software.
By another defintion, I think the minimum space to get the whole thing up and running is about 40 mb. But 10mb? I don't see any possible source for that number.
Of course, the lack of permision required to put cookies on a system works both ways. Let's play a game called "How many computers can you Doubleclickproof in a day?" I'v already gotten all my relatives, the school labs, and every pc Ihave access to at work.
What really sucks is that I tend, at work, to erase everything regarding internet history from my work pc every night as I leave. Now I've got to leave the $#@%! cookie there.
And God said, "Let there be an MP3 playter that actually works, on an OS that actually works, and let it not be plagued by stupid lawsuits brought about by greed megalomaniac entertainment conglomerates."
And God looked upon the MP3 player , and saw that it was good.
Way to go, programmers!
Admittedly, My post contained a few innaccuracies (not to mention a dismal lack of HTML - Ack!). However, even you admit that the "friction" that exists at the microscopic level is really an entirely different set of forces.
Also, I think the studies you did were at the micro level, not the nano level. At the micro level, normal friction rules seem to apply (not to mention heat generation, as our frustrated friends at Intel keep discovering).
Admittedly, My post contained a few innaccuracies (not to mention a dismal lack of HTML - Ack!). However, even you admit that the "friction" that exists at the microscopic level is really an entirely different set of forces.
Also, I think the studies you did were at the micro level, not the nano level. At the micro level, normal friction rules seem to apply (not to mention heat generation, as our frustrated friends at Intel keep discovering).
nanotechnology occurs, by definition, at a very small level - so small, in fact that many of the engineering problems of the macroscopic world - thermal dynamics, friction, and internal stresses, to mention a few - disappear. In the world of atoms, every thing is perfectly round (or at least perfectly "whatevershaped"), and the process of adhesion (sticking together) or lubrication (not sticking together) is a function not of shape, but of electromagnetic and chemical properties. We first began to learn this with the development of the microchip - Silicon, a pretty worthless element in the "big" world has properties in the microscopic realm that make it more valuable than gold (or, if you prefer, more valuable than oil). Silicon, not a conductor in it's own right, can be made progressively more conductive (or more resistive) by adding specific impurities (like Boron or Galium, respectively). This isn't worth diddly in the "big" world, but beneath an electron microscope, it allows us to do things that angels barely dared to dream of :) In the same way, we are finding that certain properties that atoms and molecules have opened up engineering possibilties that were only theoretical in the past. Frictionless machines. robots that have a programmed response to a particular chemical. self-replication (robots can't build themselves, but molecules can - often with interesting results) :) End of speech.