The USB connector is on the memory portion of the device. The memory portion of the device plugs into the battery portion via the now vacant USB connector. So, the USB connector is not available when the device is attached to the battery. I think they do use the +5V USB, only it's used to access the memory (why it's plugged into the battery.)
You're right though, rechargability would've been cool.
Okay, here's my wild speculation to add to the bunch: These fireballs remarkably coincide with a space shuttle launch. I think they were caused by either debris or other "stuff" originating from the craft.
Ranking is a common problem
on
Mr Anti-Google
·
· Score: 2
Whenever you try to include a feedback mechanism into an affinity model (or AI) you run into the problem where the returned ranking itself influences the choice.
Basically, higher ranked items (items that appear first in the list) have a tendancy to be picked simply because they are first. In return, the picked item will be ranked higher the next time around not because it was more relavant but because it was closer to the top the first time it was listed.
To get around this feedback caused by the system itself, I've seen systems introduce a small amount of randomness to the results. In statistical terms, this would correspond to an uncertainty or error factor in the relavancy rating. This number might also correspond psychologically to the probability that someone will choose the higher of two items solely by listing order.
It is commonly believed that we are the reason for the extinction of mammoths (assuming you own-up to the actions of your ancestors, of course.)
The the question is: Do the actions of Neanderthals constitue an act of nature? If not, how far back in our evolutionary path to we have to go to find a "natural" man? If so, at what point did man become "unnatural?"
Already noted are the searching algorithms that exist for quantum computing. This would enable extremely fast database queries.
I think the difficulty you are having in imagining uses for this technology is sort of a chicken-and-the-egg problem. All of modern computing is based off of hardware that is fundamentally different than this technology. Programming languages and VM's are (to a great extent) mere extentions and abstractions of the hardware. With quantum computing, completely new languages and algorithms need to be invented.
That's interesting - thanks for clarifying that for me.
I think the reason the story stuck in my mind was that it made sense (the reason for sponsoring the competition, ie. too many dialects of Assembly for too many processors.) What confuses me now is: If they already had high-level languages in common use, why not enhance them rather than start from scratch?
There is at least one documented case of a legal document being copyrighted.
A while ago there was a story here about a guy who needed to know certain building codes for his house. When he went to city hall he wasn't able to photocopy the documents because they were copyrighted by the engineering firm that created them.
Because quite a few years ago when all source code was Assembly, the US sponsored a Compile-off between high-level languages. The idea was that they'd adopt a single language and build compilers for it suitable for the thousands of different processors we use in all of the various systems around the world.
So Ada won, even though it was developed by a French consulting firm. Even now we maintain an Ada compiler for every single CPU type in existence. In fact, this is why Oracle's PL/SQL code looks so much like Ada. When Oracle was looking to make a PL for their database, a few gov't guys said: "Hey, why don't you make it like Ada. We'll buy it and our programmers won't have a high learning curve to tackle."
For once I would like to see a discussion about JK's features that didn't degrade into personal attacks against him. Lately most of the insults include well thought out counter-arguments, but those arguments would be just as valid without the insults.
It's been a while since my freshman chem class, but I think it's actually the rotational wavelength of water that microwave ovens are tuned to, rather than vibrational (or translational.)
I don't know what type of bond exists between various metal atoms in solid form, but it seems like (along your lines of reasoning) a wavelength should be able to be found that corresponds to that bond, resulting in even greater efficiency in melting.
I recently read an excellent book on privacy protection by J. J. Luna (sparked by an earlier thread on privacy here.) Evidently he's set up a website to promote the book (http://www.howtobeinvisible.com/). I highly recommend this book to anyone who's concerned about their privacy.
That goal will never be achieved because a large advantage of Echalon is its secrecy. Other countries are forced to speculate about what communications are overheard and develop their own cryptography. Even if Echalon were a little Apple IIe sitting in a basement somewhere, everyone assumes America knows what's going on and that's power in itself.
I'm sure the information has been cached and archived in plenty of different places around the net. I wonder if the judge will be issuing a more generic ruling in the future about linking to any site that contains that information.
Anybody ever play those "everybody's a wiz" MUD's? It was similar, in that you designed your own little piece of the land, link it into the main land, and people could wander around and check it out.
The judge seems to imply that he would allow other names such as "Linux Windows" or "Mac Windows". Not that any/. reader would stoop to installing something so named....
It would take a case as huge as this, involving a customer and money as huge as this, to take to court the question of whether or not software can be "returned."
I, for one, would love the ability to return (or even "transfer ownership of") software without taking the whole damn software industry to the Supreme Court.
I can't imagine telling MS they should emulate Apple. Their reaction would undoubtably be something like: "WTF? Apple wouldn't even be around today if we hadn't pulled their butts out of the fire in '96." Yah, MS is the one who put their butts in the fire in the first place, but try telling a bully he should emulate the artsy nerd he just beat up on the playground.
Instead, I think MS would pay attention to the process some other really successful software companies are following:
Release closed-source software
Rake in profits
When profits flatten, create a new stir by releasing the source
That's called "Having your cake and eating it too" and I think a lot of people would think better of MS if they adopted that strategy (as long as they release things other than, say, MS Bob or MSDOS 3.0)
I can't help thinking that they will regret this move. The reason pigeons have been used for so long is because they are reliable. Even though pigeons aren't the swiftest or most secure means, I would rather place my bet on thousands of years of successful survival instinct than on any amount of technology.
They should at least keep them for redundancy. $10k a year? Well worth it.
Actually, a lot of large corporations do this so that their employees' time is spent efficiently. They employ a few cut-n-pasters who create repositories of stories that can be browsed from either their intranet or (at IBM) VMS accounts.
It sounds like this project could bring that service to the masses.
Slashdot Mirror
The USB connector is on the memory portion of the device. The memory portion of the device plugs into the battery portion via the now vacant USB connector. So, the USB connector is not available when the device is attached to the battery. I think they do use the +5V USB, only it's used to access the memory (why it's plugged into the battery.)
You're right though, rechargability would've been cool.
You're right, but having good examples to learn from will speed any developer's learning curve.
Okay, here's my wild speculation to add to the bunch: These fireballs remarkably coincide with a space shuttle launch. I think they were caused by either debris or other "stuff" originating from the craft.
Whenever you try to include a feedback mechanism into an affinity model (or AI) you run into the problem where the returned ranking itself influences the choice.
Basically, higher ranked items (items that appear first in the list) have a tendancy to be picked simply because they are first. In return, the picked item will be ranked higher the next time around not because it was more relavant but because it was closer to the top the first time it was listed.
To get around this feedback caused by the system itself, I've seen systems introduce a small amount of randomness to the results. In statistical terms, this would correspond to an uncertainty or error factor in the relavancy rating. This number might also correspond psychologically to the probability that someone will choose the higher of two items solely by listing order.
It is commonly believed that we are the reason for the extinction of mammoths (assuming you own-up to the actions of your ancestors, of course.)
The the question is: Do the actions of Neanderthals constitue an act of nature? If not, how far back in our evolutionary path to we have to go to find a "natural" man? If so, at what point did man become "unnatural?"
Already noted are the searching algorithms that exist for quantum computing. This would enable extremely fast database queries.
I think the difficulty you are having in imagining uses for this technology is sort of a chicken-and-the-egg problem. All of modern computing is based off of hardware that is fundamentally different than this technology. Programming languages and VM's are (to a great extent) mere extentions and abstractions of the hardware. With quantum computing, completely new languages and algorithms need to be invented.
That's interesting - thanks for clarifying that for me.
I think the reason the story stuck in my mind was that it made sense (the reason for sponsoring the competition, ie. too many dialects of Assembly for too many processors.) What confuses me now is: If they already had high-level languages in common use, why not enhance them rather than start from scratch?
There is at least one documented case of a legal document being copyrighted.
A while ago there was a story here about a guy who needed to know certain building codes for his house. When he went to city hall he wasn't able to photocopy the documents because they were copyrighted by the engineering firm that created them.
Can't help but wonder if the present generation of "faster, better, cheaper" probes will ever live this long though.
We just have to send them away from Earth at speeds closer and closer to the speed of light!
Why Ada?
Because quite a few years ago when all source code was Assembly, the US sponsored a Compile-off between high-level languages. The idea was that they'd adopt a single language and build compilers for it suitable for the thousands of different processors we use in all of the various systems around the world.
So Ada won, even though it was developed by a French consulting firm. Even now we maintain an Ada compiler for every single CPU type in existence. In fact, this is why Oracle's PL/SQL code looks so much like Ada. When Oracle was looking to make a PL for their database, a few gov't guys said: "Hey, why don't you make it like Ada. We'll buy it and our programmers won't have a high learning curve to tackle."
I certainly hope they (er, uh, we the taxpayers) properly pay the licensing fee per Meg. viewed....
For once I would like to see a discussion about JK's features that didn't degrade into personal attacks against him. Lately most of the insults include well thought out counter-arguments, but those arguments would be just as valid without the insults.
It's been a while since my freshman chem class, but I think it's actually the rotational wavelength of water that microwave ovens are tuned to, rather than vibrational (or translational.)
I don't know what type of bond exists between various metal atoms in solid form, but it seems like (along your lines of reasoning) a wavelength should be able to be found that corresponds to that bond, resulting in even greater efficiency in melting.
Excellent thought-provoker. Thanks for the post!
I recently read an excellent book on privacy protection by J. J. Luna (sparked by an earlier thread on privacy here.) Evidently he's set up a website to promote the book (http://www.howtobeinvisible.com/). I highly recommend this book to anyone who's concerned about their privacy.
That goal will never be achieved because a large advantage of Echalon is its secrecy. Other countries are forced to speculate about what communications are overheard and develop their own cryptography. Even if Echalon were a little Apple IIe sitting in a basement somewhere, everyone assumes America knows what's going on and that's power in itself.
Joe Celko's SQL for Smarties
This thing covers all the basics, theory, and advanced topics I have ever asked of it. It will really take your SQL to a whole new level.
I'm sure the information has been cached and archived in plenty of different places around the net. I wonder if the judge will be issuing a more generic ruling in the future about linking to any site that contains that information.
Then linking to Google will be illegal.
Anybody ever play those "everybody's a wiz" MUD's? It was similar, in that you designed your own little piece of the land, link it into the main land, and people could wander around and check it out.
:)
MUD's begat EverQuest, MOO's begat BrendanLand
All those sneaky broadband users are a bunch of content theives! Someone should really put a stop to this.
The judge seems to imply that he would allow other names such as "Linux Windows" or "Mac Windows". Not that any /. reader would stoop to installing something so named....
It would take a case as huge as this, involving a customer and money as huge as this, to take to court the question of whether or not software can be "returned."
I, for one, would love the ability to return (or even "transfer ownership of") software without taking the whole damn software industry to the Supreme Court.
"We heard a lot of concern about that point from competitors in the industry but very little from our users," he said.
But of course. When was the last time MS listened to their users about anything?
Instead, I think MS would pay attention to the process some other really successful software companies are following:
- Release closed-source software
- Rake in profits
- When profits flatten, create a new stir by releasing the source
That's called "Having your cake and eating it too" and I think a lot of people would think better of MS if they adopted that strategy (as long as they release things other than, say, MS Bob or MSDOS 3.0)I can't help thinking that they will regret this move. The reason pigeons have been used for so long is because they are reliable. Even though pigeons aren't the swiftest or most secure means, I would rather place my bet on thousands of years of successful survival instinct than on any amount of technology.
They should at least keep them for redundancy. $10k a year? Well worth it.
Actually, a lot of large corporations do this so that their employees' time is spent efficiently. They employ a few cut-n-pasters who create repositories of stories that can be browsed from either their intranet or (at IBM) VMS accounts.
It sounds like this project could bring that service to the masses.