There's reasonable evidence that homo erectus could control fire. The main difference between Neanderthals and Cro-Magnon seems to have been that Cro-Magnon's lived in larger groups, so there were more sources to exchange ideas between
If I had to pick one thing, I'd pick language. And the problems with the FOX P2 gene https://www.google.com/search?... show that it is genetically mediated. (Well, of course that was obvious. But only after you notice that it's obvious. There are lots of examples of people trying to teach grammar to chimps.)
Maybe. OTOH, arms races seem an awfully good candidate. (Not that the "great filter" has to be one particular thing...it could be a combination that reduces the likelihood of survival. In which case one should also include pollution and resource depletion.)
The problem with UBI, depending on implementation, is that if 25% of jobs become redundant, that other 75% will be upset if they have to pay for those 25%.
A real UBI should be granted to ALL citizens, or at least all adult citizens. If you earn more, it should not be undercut. The problem here is that lots of things, say housing, will suddenly experiences price rises. So just about nobody benefits, except those in restricted provider positions. How this should be solved is questionable. Wealth concentrations enable things like SpaceX, but they also enable lots of socially destructive things, like land speculation. (I'm less worried about those who spend it foolishly than about those who use to to extend control.)
There actually *IS* evidence of Russian meddling in US elections. I haven't heard of much evidence WRT it being extensive or successful, but it might have been.
P.S.: There's also evidence of the US meddling in various foreign elections and other policies. Surprise!
No. This is a first result. If it's found interesting enough (sounds like it should be) *THEN* controlled studies will be done. I don't know that a blind study could be ethically done, however, as even if it doesn't cause Alzheimer's gum disease is a disease, and likely to make you lose your teeth.
OTOH, maybe they'll just do studies where they neutralize the toxin, and if that prevents or cures Alzheimer's that that will probably suffice.
The problem with calling it senile dementia is that it's not a recent development. It's not like Reagan, who was personable and vile, but lost his marbles during his term in office. Trump doesn't ever seem to have had any marbles to lose. He's been undependable and unreliable (as well as bigoted) as far back as is recorded. I suspect his grade school teachers would say he's improved "a little bit".
Well, in the case of Copernicus he was so "surprised" at the resistance to his results that he arranged to have the published after he was safely dead.
Well (I didn't read the article either), another poster said that they returned the raw data on sequence, an the difference was in the interpretation. But my comment remains correct. Less relevant to the article than to the post I was replying to, however. And, as someone else reported, non-standard chimeras can be created when something goes wrong during development. His example was a case of fraternal twins that merged into one body, but that's not the only possibility. E.g., maternal cells can be incorporated into the fetus. And, I suppose, externally fertilized eggs could become chimeras before implantation through sloppy lab techniques.
A small percentage of mutational changes is expected during development. DNA copying is not perfect, and has a non-zero uncorrected error rate (to repeat myself).
Well, women are all chimeras, but each cell should be the same as every other except for which X chromosomes are switched off, which appears random and is where the chimera comes from. And why all three color cats are female. https://www.google.com/search?...
It *is* true that blood tests of women who have been pregnant can pick up small amounts of the DNA of the fetus...but that's *SMALL* amounts. And that's blood tests, where the last time I read these tests used either spit or a biopsy from inside the cheek. (That was awhile ago, however, so check before you believe.)
There's also a small amount of expected mutation during development, so identical twins aren't really exactly the same. Somewhat well over 99% however.
But the proper name for that kind of camera is the one you originally used: Stereo Camera. It has a subset of the capabilities of a real 3-D camera. Granted, you can massage the data produced by a stereo camera to get a large part of the data collected by a real 3-D camera, but since it discards the phase of the wave you lose many of the capabilities. (And I'm sorry, but I can't be more explicit, because I'm no expert in the field, but some people in Hollywood were quite excited about the real 3-D cameras. Haven't heard much since then, though, so I suspect that the computational costs make motion pictures unreasonable.)
If you want to share code with the Python community, it will not be graciously received unless you follow the spaces rule, but if you want to write for your own use, or the use of your group, then many variations are acceptable. I, personally, always begin lines with tabs for indentation. If I want to share the code I run it through a conversion routine. But I prefer a 3 space indentation size, except when the nesting starts getting to deep, at which point I shift to a 2 space indentation. This is a lot easier if the indentation is actually done with tabs. And tabs can easily be converted into a 4 space indentation if the code is going to be shared.
I think you're still talking about paired 2-D cameras. The ones I'm talking about only use one lens (or none) and don't focus an image. They select raw wave forms and compute the 3-D object that the waves originate from. You can think of it as a dynamically simulated surface or lenses, though it's more like a reverse hologram computation. At the time I encountered the description of the device I don't think you could have gotten one for $100,000.
OTOH, eventually this should be a cheap way to capture images, since the light handling hardware is extremely simple. What's expensive is the computation. I suspect a se of specialized chips could really cut down the speed, and speed up the "frame rate" at very low cost in high enough volumes.
"Orwell cars" is a good first try, but it doesn't have the reflex reaction that you get from "Glassholes". You need something tied into the reflex aversion to fecal material..or something equally reflexive.
(Also, unfortunately, those within the car are shielded from the reaction of those outside the car. So the term might need to be even more powerful. Something that would cause those who used the car to despise themselves for the action.)
What you should have said is 3-D processing, through multiple 2-D cameras. They're talking about more than two cameras, and fixed camera locations, but mobile passenger positions.
P.S.: There *are* 3-D cameras that could be used. They used (last I read about them) internal mirrors and beam splitters to pick up the details of the wave forms received. They were too expensive for reasonable use. Multiple 2-D cameras are a lot cheaper.
Most people have either become resigned to systemd, or switched to something that doesn't use it. So one would expect the threads to decrease. I also haven't heard anyone say they liked it recently. (And I still don't. But I haven't switched yet because doing so would be a major inconvenience. But when I set up my next system, I probably will avoid systems that use systemd. So far I haven't seen *ANY* benefits, and I've experienced, and continue experiencing, many small irritations. I'm definitely considering devuan, but I'm even considering Unix. Unix would be a problem during transition, because my current partition formats are incompatible, so I'd have to set up an new series of backups in a format that both systems could handle for the intermediate period....so devuan has the inside track. Or Slackware. Or something that I haven't noticed yet. Or perhaps some version of Unix will become able to read/write ext4 partitions. Lots of possibilities, no real decision, but the fact that I haven't been saying bad things about systemd recently sure doesn't mean that I like it.
There were many intermediate exploits. But they were relatively easy to fix, and fixed relatively quickly. As the software groups have gotten larger, this has become less and less true.
The complaints about "SJW drones", "codes of conduct", etc. aren't totally without merit, but their validity has more to do with the fact that they only become relevant in larger projects. But larger projects *need* more oversight and administration. (Also, larger projects tend to exclude the kind of people most likely to complain about such oversight...and anyone excluded is likely to feel unhappy.)
While that enhanced the security, that wasn't the basis of it. Simple reliable design that could be reasonably debugged was the basis. Also code that large numbers of people could read and understand. (No, not everybody. And I never bothered to learn to. But large numbers.) This, of course, requires that the code be relatively simple. Which means modular, with limited externalities.
Systemd is a massive failure in ever one of these respects, and I suspect intentionally so. I don't mean I'm certain. It could just be a worship of centralized power finds a different design of software more pleasing. Or there could be some other reason.
Who were the vendors? The last time I searched (a couple of months ago) I decided to not buy a laptop. After reading your reply I decided to search again. So...
(I don't think I want to buy a Lenovo, as there have been many bad reports on their quality, admittedly the one's I'm thinking of are a few years old.) I just went to the Linux Certified site, and all their laptops were Intel, to ZAReason and all their laptops were Intel, to System76, and the laptops I was interested in were Intel (checking each laptop involved going to a sub-page, so I didn't check all of them).
FWIW, I don't trust Amazon for anything that's sold by a third party, as I've paid for things that never showed up. (That *was* a few years ago, but I've heard nothing that indicates to me that they've changed their "we don't stand behind 3rd party orders" policy, and if I did I wouldn't start trusting them with something expensive.)
Slashdot Mirror
There's reasonable evidence that homo erectus could control fire. The main difference between Neanderthals and Cro-Magnon seems to have been that Cro-Magnon's lived in larger groups, so there were more sources to exchange ideas between
If I had to pick one thing, I'd pick language. And the problems with the FOX P2 gene https://www.google.com/search?... show that it is genetically mediated. (Well, of course that was obvious. But only after you notice that it's obvious. There are lots of examples of people trying to teach grammar to chimps.)
Maybe. OTOH, arms races seem an awfully good candidate. (Not that the "great filter" has to be one particular thing...it could be a combination that reduces the likelihood of survival. In which case one should also include pollution and resource depletion.)
The problem with UBI, depending on implementation, is that if 25% of jobs become redundant, that other 75% will be upset if they have to pay for those 25%.
A real UBI should be granted to ALL citizens, or at least all adult citizens. If you earn more, it should not be undercut. The problem here is that lots of things, say housing, will suddenly experiences price rises. So just about nobody benefits, except those in restricted provider positions. How this should be solved is questionable. Wealth concentrations enable things like SpaceX, but they also enable lots of socially destructive things, like land speculation. (I'm less worried about those who spend it foolishly than about those who use to to extend control.)
There actually *IS* evidence of Russian meddling in US elections. I haven't heard of much evidence WRT it being extensive or successful, but it might have been.
P.S.: There's also evidence of the US meddling in various foreign elections and other policies. Surprise!
OTOH, getting rid of gingivitis is itself desirable. So there's minimal downside.
No. This is a first result. If it's found interesting enough (sounds like it should be) *THEN* controlled studies will be done. I don't know that a blind study could be ethically done, however, as even if it doesn't cause Alzheimer's gum disease is a disease, and likely to make you lose your teeth.
OTOH, maybe they'll just do studies where they neutralize the toxin, and if that prevents or cures Alzheimer's that that will probably suffice.
The problem with calling it senile dementia is that it's not a recent development. It's not like Reagan, who was personable and vile, but lost his marbles during his term in office. Trump doesn't ever seem to have had any marbles to lose. He's been undependable and unreliable (as well as bigoted) as far back as is recorded. I suspect his grade school teachers would say he's improved "a little bit".
On Korea...
It might be a "good cop/bad cop" kind of negotiation. The problem is I don't think the "bad cop" is acting.
Well, in the case of Copernicus he was so "surprised" at the resistance to his results that he arranged to have the published after he was safely dead.
Well (I didn't read the article either), another poster said that they returned the raw data on sequence, an the difference was in the interpretation. But my comment remains correct. Less relevant to the article than to the post I was replying to, however. And, as someone else reported, non-standard chimeras can be created when something goes wrong during development. His example was a case of fraternal twins that merged into one body, but that's not the only possibility. E.g., maternal cells can be incorporated into the fetus. And, I suppose, externally fertilized eggs could become chimeras before implantation through sloppy lab techniques.
So did you take Bob Wilson's "Illuminatus!" as a history?
A small percentage of mutational changes is expected during development. DNA copying is not perfect, and has a non-zero uncorrected error rate (to repeat myself).
But the difference should be a LOT less than 1%.
Well, women are all chimeras, but each cell should be the same as every other except for which X chromosomes are switched off, which appears random and is where the chimera comes from. And why all three color cats are female. https://www.google.com/search?...
It *is* true that blood tests of women who have been pregnant can pick up small amounts of the DNA of the fetus...but that's *SMALL* amounts. And that's blood tests, where the last time I read these tests used either spit or a biopsy from inside the cheek. (That was awhile ago, however, so check before you believe.)
There's also a small amount of expected mutation during development, so identical twins aren't really exactly the same. Somewhat well over 99% however.
But the proper name for that kind of camera is the one you originally used: Stereo Camera. It has a subset of the capabilities of a real 3-D camera. Granted, you can massage the data produced by a stereo camera to get a large part of the data collected by a real 3-D camera, but since it discards the phase of the wave you lose many of the capabilities. (And I'm sorry, but I can't be more explicit, because I'm no expert in the field, but some people in Hollywood were quite excited about the real 3-D cameras. Haven't heard much since then, though, so I suspect that the computational costs make motion pictures unreasonable.)
If you want to share code with the Python community, it will not be graciously received unless you follow the spaces rule, but if you want to write for your own use, or the use of your group, then many variations are acceptable. I, personally, always begin lines with tabs for indentation. If I want to share the code I run it through a conversion routine. But I prefer a 3 space indentation size, except when the nesting starts getting to deep, at which point I shift to a 2 space indentation. This is a lot easier if the indentation is actually done with tabs. And tabs can easily be converted into a 4 space indentation if the code is going to be shared.
I think you're still talking about paired 2-D cameras. The ones I'm talking about only use one lens (or none) and don't focus an image. They select raw wave forms and compute the 3-D object that the waves originate from. You can think of it as a dynamically simulated surface or lenses, though it's more like a reverse hologram computation. At the time I encountered the description of the device I don't think you could have gotten one for $100,000.
OTOH, eventually this should be a cheap way to capture images, since the light handling hardware is extremely simple. What's expensive is the computation. I suspect a se of specialized chips could really cut down the speed, and speed up the "frame rate" at very low cost in high enough volumes.
"Orwell cars" is a good first try, but it doesn't have the reflex reaction that you get from "Glassholes". You need something tied into the reflex aversion to fecal material..or something equally reflexive.
(Also, unfortunately, those within the car are shielded from the reaction of those outside the car. So the term might need to be even more powerful. Something that would cause those who used the car to despise themselves for the action.)
unh,,, To *claim* to disable the sensors.
What you should have said is 3-D processing, through multiple 2-D cameras. They're talking about more than two cameras, and fixed camera locations, but mobile passenger positions.
P.S.: There *are* 3-D cameras that could be used. They used (last I read about them) internal mirrors and beam splitters to pick up the details of the wave forms received. They were too expensive for reasonable use. Multiple 2-D cameras are a lot cheaper.
Most people have either become resigned to systemd, or switched to something that doesn't use it. So one would expect the threads to decrease. I also haven't heard anyone say they liked it recently. (And I still don't. But I haven't switched yet because doing so would be a major inconvenience. But when I set up my next system, I probably will avoid systems that use systemd. So far I haven't seen *ANY* benefits, and I've experienced, and continue experiencing, many small irritations. I'm definitely considering devuan, but I'm even considering Unix. Unix would be a problem during transition, because my current partition formats are incompatible, so I'd have to set up an new series of backups in a format that both systems could handle for the intermediate period....so devuan has the inside track. Or Slackware. Or something that I haven't noticed yet. Or perhaps some version of Unix will become able to read/write ext4 partitions. Lots of possibilities, no real decision, but the fact that I haven't been saying bad things about systemd recently sure doesn't mean that I like it.
There were many intermediate exploits. But they were relatively easy to fix, and fixed relatively quickly. As the software groups have gotten larger, this has become less and less true.
The complaints about "SJW drones", "codes of conduct", etc. aren't totally without merit, but their validity has more to do with the fact that they only become relevant in larger projects. But larger projects *need* more oversight and administration. (Also, larger projects tend to exclude the kind of people most likely to complain about such oversight...and anyone excluded is likely to feel unhappy.)
While that enhanced the security, that wasn't the basis of it. Simple reliable design that could be reasonably debugged was the basis. Also code that large numbers of people could read and understand. (No, not everybody. And I never bothered to learn to. But large numbers.) This, of course, requires that the code be relatively simple. Which means modular, with limited externalities.
Systemd is a massive failure in ever one of these respects, and I suspect intentionally so. I don't mean I'm certain. It could just be a worship of centralized power finds a different design of software more pleasing. Or there could be some other reason.
That "only annoying thing" is a deal-breaker for me, as I will not agree to the MS EULA....and also don't want to give them any money.
Who were the vendors? The last time I searched (a couple of months ago) I decided to not buy a laptop. After reading your reply I decided to search again. So ...
(I don't think I want to buy a Lenovo, as there have been many bad reports on their quality, admittedly the one's I'm thinking of are a few years old.) I just went to the Linux Certified site, and all their laptops were Intel, to ZAReason and all their laptops were Intel, to System76, and the laptops I was interested in were Intel (checking each laptop involved going to a sub-page, so I didn't check all of them).
FWIW, I don't trust Amazon for anything that's sold by a third party, as I've paid for things that never showed up. (That *was* a few years ago, but I've heard nothing that indicates to me that they've changed their "we don't stand behind 3rd party orders" policy, and if I did I wouldn't start trusting them with something expensive.)
Search for AMD based Linux laptops and tell me what you think of the selection.