Isn't it kind of easy to shoot down blimps? Can't anything a blimp does be better done with a satellite or a loitering drone?
I don't think they are easy to shoot down. Remember that when you poke a hole in a large area, the gas only escapes so quickly. I remember reading somewhere that back in WWII, it was not easy to shoot down blimps. Sure, you could shoot them, but all you would end up with is just a blimp with a bunch of holes that flew home safely. citation unavailable.
As an anecdote, I had a Nokia phone that was drenched in soda. It was useless. I then flushed it out with distilled water, dried it out, and it worked perfectly. Not sure what that means, but that's what happened.
We may not be able to build a chip that it's self perfectly mimicks the human brain. But we can very likely build a chip that can process the software necessary to simulate the brain.
I wonder if that is true. I think one of the problems with the brain was that it was not intelligently designed. It took a lot longer to make it, but the result is really cool. When we try to make a brain, we make underlying assumptions, which may or may not be true. Because of that, we may not truly be successful in making an artificial brain with current software paradigms. For example, the biological brain does have "zones," where different things occur (anger, happiness, logical thought, memory, etc.). Mostly separated, but there is a lot of overlap here (when some person get sad, they get hungry, but this can be over ridden by pain/medication/thought/negative feedback/etc). In intelligently designed systems, there is intentional lack of overlap since there is a need to isolate these processes. How much to allow overlap and how much to not is the question. Hard to figure out in an artificially designed system.
I'm going to start a business selling licenses to things that I don't own. It will be a covenant from me that if I do ever become the owner of said property, I won't sue you for not paying me. It's important to be BabyDuckHat compliant.
Sorry. I already own a patent for that. Pay up, buddy. Brought to you by Rattaroaz compliance authorities.
I have to disagree. Not on principle, but on implementation. Students should ALWAYS be encouraged to collaborate, as that is real world. This is not a 21st century phenomena, but has been true as long as there has been formal education. The question is HOW to encourage critical thinking, and less rote memorization. Any good answers to this, while, at the same time, being able to judge who is better than whom?
You are confusing technical with legal. And you are confusing philosophy with philosophers. Linus, and you are talking about technical obstacles, while RMS is talking about legal issues. Example: it is technically hard to build a long bridge. You need a "you can't have everything tradeoff." If it's illegal to build the bridge to begin with, you need to ask "why can't I legally build it? Why are the laws that way?" (philosophy) Legal laws (as opposed to natural laws) are based upon a given philosophy. Sometimes freedom. Sometimes service to the despot. That's what I mean by philosophy. Be careful about discounting the importance of opinions, because you have them too, and others should not be too quick to discount them either.
I gently disagree. Maybe we are just arguing semantics though. Freedom is not choice. Choice is a result of freedom, and there really is no such thing as "freedom of choice." Freedom, in American terms, is a result of "God granted" rights. (I am an atheist, but I still understand the point). The rights being, among others, life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness. Those rights are responsibilities that the individual has to protect and live by. Therefore, you are NOT free to sell your vote (in America). That is lack of choice, but you cannot give up your responsibility, and that responsiblity is liberty/freedom. You always have choice, and you always have ability to take action. You CAN physically sell your vote, but that is not consistent with the concept of freedom. Therefore, freedom is the result of having your rights protected. Choice is simply what you want to do. When freedom exists, you certainly have more choices, but ultimately, freedom is a responsiblity, not a choice.
Making fun of someone else's philosophy through personal attacks is not new, and I don't agree that it is particularly insightful either. And making sacrifices to freedom for the sake of convenience is certainly understandable, but it doesn't seem to be a very powerful argument against an opposing philosophy, nor does that seem particularly insightful either. I respect your position, and I make similar sacrifices to my freedom every day, but to me, I find that more of a problem and a personal dilemma, rather than a strength.
The final deathblow to out of touch assholes like Diller is the sheer lack of understanding of their target market.
Agree completely. Their target market is Congress, and lobbying them to make a free internet illegal. I know they are trying already, since that's the only way to make his dreams come true.
If Microsoft had disclosed that they released the code to avoid a violation then the anti-Microsoft crowd would have proclaimed that Microsoft was only releasing the code because they had to, not because they wanted to.
No matter the course of action Microsoft could have taken, they still would have been criticized.
In other words, when you do something begrudgingly, you don't really get credit for being a good guy. That seems right. If you think a corporation doing something just to avoid a lawsuit -- and marketing it as a proactively good thing like Sam Ramji was doing -- is right, then we must live on different planets.
Oracle and MySQL are two different markets, anyway.
It always bothers me when people make this comment, because it assumes things always will be that way. Oracle and mysql are different markets, but does it always have to be? Well, now that oracle owns mysql, yes. But if it wasn't so, mysql could have evolved into an oracle competitor with time. And that is so with a lot of products and markets. They are in two different markets now, and oracle might not kill it off, but we know that oracle is unlikely to develop it to rival their proprietary product, whereas before, any outcome of mysql's future would have been possilbe.
Or the BMI is being used without any context, and I'm not sure if that is ever a good idea. If anyone looks at The Rock, looks at his BMI, and calls him fat, I think the problem is with that person, and their lack of insight, not the BMI. BMI is simply a tool to be used in correct context. That does not make it useless, just useless out of context . . . just like everything else.
That's funny. I would have liked to have played against you on the system. I would be the guy constantly losing, and blaming my ineptness on the controller . . . seriously though, they sucked:P
Anyway, the 5200 flopped, not least (I heard) because the joysticks were horrible.
Don't even get me started here. The joystick itself was bizarrely unresponsive. The buttons on the side were so difficult to push, it was painful after less than 5 minutes playing in the store. I think I was 10 years old at the time, but I remember how shocked I was by this controller. Today, I'm always surprised when shoddy designs get passed through QA, into an end product. I don't know why, but after all these years, I still am. Go figure.
Slashdot Mirror
On the plus side, since "no pain, no gain," they will be calorie free meat. You just have to fight them more to get it.
"Just recently?" That's been a standard example in introductory statistics classes for many decades.
I think the he meant in geologic time.
Isn't it kind of easy to shoot down blimps? Can't anything a blimp does be better done with a satellite or a loitering drone?
I don't think they are easy to shoot down. Remember that when you poke a hole in a large area, the gas only escapes so quickly. I remember reading somewhere that back in WWII, it was not easy to shoot down blimps. Sure, you could shoot them, but all you would end up with is just a blimp with a bunch of holes that flew home safely. citation unavailable.
You hippies need to live in the real world occasionally.
No, YOU need to live in the real world. I, for one, will welcome our new zombie overlords.
It can also detect the spirochetes that cause syphillis, Treponema palladium.
Yes, but maybe you should just see the doctor instead of waiting for the mouse to come to market.
no, but botox can
As an anecdote, I had a Nokia phone that was drenched in soda. It was useless. I then flushed it out with distilled water, dried it out, and it worked perfectly. Not sure what that means, but that's what happened.
We may not be able to build a chip that it's self perfectly mimicks the human brain. But we can very likely build a chip that can process the software necessary to simulate the brain.
I wonder if that is true. I think one of the problems with the brain was that it was not intelligently designed. It took a lot longer to make it, but the result is really cool. When we try to make a brain, we make underlying assumptions, which may or may not be true. Because of that, we may not truly be successful in making an artificial brain with current software paradigms. For example, the biological brain does have "zones," where different things occur (anger, happiness, logical thought, memory, etc.). Mostly separated, but there is a lot of overlap here (when some person get sad, they get hungry, but this can be over ridden by pain/medication/thought/negative feedback/etc). In intelligently designed systems, there is intentional lack of overlap since there is a need to isolate these processes. How much to allow overlap and how much to not is the question. Hard to figure out in an artificially designed system.
I'm going to start a business selling licenses to things that I don't own. It will be a covenant from me that if I do ever become the owner of said property, I won't sue you for not paying me. It's important to be BabyDuckHat compliant.
Sorry. I already own a patent for that. Pay up, buddy. Brought to you by Rattaroaz compliance authorities.
I have to disagree. Not on principle, but on implementation. Students should ALWAYS be encouraged to collaborate, as that is real world. This is not a 21st century phenomena, but has been true as long as there has been formal education. The question is HOW to encourage critical thinking, and less rote memorization. Any good answers to this, while, at the same time, being able to judge who is better than whom?
What if a bug is discovered in the boot code?
Recommend buy a new computer. The bug would be a feature, not a bug at all.
You are confusing technical with legal. And you are confusing philosophy with philosophers. Linus, and you are talking about technical obstacles, while RMS is talking about legal issues. Example: it is technically hard to build a long bridge. You need a "you can't have everything tradeoff." If it's illegal to build the bridge to begin with, you need to ask "why can't I legally build it? Why are the laws that way?" (philosophy) Legal laws (as opposed to natural laws) are based upon a given philosophy. Sometimes freedom. Sometimes service to the despot. That's what I mean by philosophy. Be careful about discounting the importance of opinions, because you have them too, and others should not be too quick to discount them either.
The man is a visionary.
I don't think that means what you think it means.
I gently disagree. Maybe we are just arguing semantics though. Freedom is not choice. Choice is a result of freedom, and there really is no such thing as "freedom of choice." Freedom, in American terms, is a result of "God granted" rights. (I am an atheist, but I still understand the point). The rights being, among others, life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness. Those rights are responsibilities that the individual has to protect and live by. Therefore, you are NOT free to sell your vote (in America). That is lack of choice, but you cannot give up your responsibility, and that responsiblity is liberty/freedom. You always have choice, and you always have ability to take action. You CAN physically sell your vote, but that is not consistent with the concept of freedom. Therefore, freedom is the result of having your rights protected. Choice is simply what you want to do. When freedom exists, you certainly have more choices, but ultimately, freedom is a responsiblity, not a choice.
Making fun of someone else's philosophy through personal attacks is not new, and I don't agree that it is particularly insightful either. And making sacrifices to freedom for the sake of convenience is certainly understandable, but it doesn't seem to be a very powerful argument against an opposing philosophy, nor does that seem particularly insightful either. I respect your position, and I make similar sacrifices to my freedom every day, but to me, I find that more of a problem and a personal dilemma, rather than a strength.
The final deathblow to out of touch assholes like Diller is the sheer lack of understanding of their target market.
Agree completely. Their target market is Congress, and lobbying them to make a free internet illegal. I know they are trying already, since that's the only way to make his dreams come true.
If Microsoft had disclosed that they released the code to avoid a violation then the anti-Microsoft crowd would have proclaimed that Microsoft was only releasing the code because they had to, not because they wanted to. No matter the course of action Microsoft could have taken, they still would have been criticized.
In other words, when you do something begrudgingly, you don't really get credit for being a good guy. That seems right. If you think a corporation doing something just to avoid a lawsuit -- and marketing it as a proactively good thing like Sam Ramji was doing -- is right, then we must live on different planets.
Oracle and MySQL are two different markets, anyway.
It always bothers me when people make this comment, because it assumes things always will be that way. Oracle and mysql are different markets, but does it always have to be? Well, now that oracle owns mysql, yes. But if it wasn't so, mysql could have evolved into an oracle competitor with time. And that is so with a lot of products and markets. They are in two different markets now, and oracle might not kill it off, but we know that oracle is unlikely to develop it to rival their proprietary product, whereas before, any outcome of mysql's future would have been possilbe.
It is truly the end of a era. At one time, SUN was the epitome of enterprise class hardware. Now it will be reduced to Larry's little toy.
To quote netcraft: SUN is dying.
SUN is dead.
Thanks, Larry.
Well I, for one, welcome our new Oracle overlords!
the Rorshach ink blots. Oops, it seems I have exposed them to the public, I guess the whole debate is moot now.
AHHHH!!! My eyes! The goggles. They do nothing!
Or the BMI is being used without any context, and I'm not sure if that is ever a good idea. If anyone looks at The Rock, looks at his BMI, and calls him fat, I think the problem is with that person, and their lack of insight, not the BMI. BMI is simply a tool to be used in correct context. That does not make it useless, just useless out of context . . . just like everything else.
That's funny. I would have liked to have played against you on the system. I would be the guy constantly losing, and blaming my ineptness on the controller . . . seriously though, they sucked :P
Anyway, the 5200 flopped, not least (I heard) because the joysticks were horrible.
Don't even get me started here. The joystick itself was bizarrely unresponsive. The buttons on the side were so difficult to push, it was painful after less than 5 minutes playing in the store. I think I was 10 years old at the time, but I remember how shocked I was by this controller. Today, I'm always surprised when shoddy designs get passed through QA, into an end product. I don't know why, but after all these years, I still am. Go figure.
How long before we get nano probes to explore Uranus? Really, REALLY sorry. Just had to ask.
Nitrogen came from comets, and methane came from Uranus.