Would you consider it wise to give passengers in an airliner the ability to take over in case the pilot makes a mistake? Such a feature is far more likely to cause a disaster than avert one. Once cars get to the point where they can be operated more safely than aircraft (which are already safer than cars are today) then taking control of a car in a crisis will just be getting in the way of the proven driver: the machine.
No, but I would require that airliners have a qualified pilot on board in case the autopilot makes a mistake.
there's a whole bunch of "if-like" things in mathematics... multiplication over GF(2) for one such example.
Haskell can be considered an alternate syntax for System F. In other words, that "programming code" that you see is isomorphic to a "pure mathematical formula" written in a particular variety of lambda calculus. It's just written in a format that is easier for programmers to digest.
I'm fairly pro the "a deal is a deal" view of things, but it's likely that a land line company would be running cables through public land, and the wireless companies route signal through public airspace.
They can, of course, be charged market rate for use of said airspace or land, but part of the price they pay can always be additional legal obligations.
If you want to screw with someone who has a "no cash" policy, put the item on the counter and say "how much do I owe you for that?" before opening your wallet. Take witnesses. Be amused.
Not true - numerous examples exist of civilisations large and small that have outgrown their resource base and crashed horribly. In fact, pretty much EVERY SINGLE CIVILISATION before ours has collapsed horribly. We would be different why?
That wasn't my claim. The post I was replying to claimed that faith in technology to deliver results was "exactly equivalent" to faith in religion. My point was that science has delivered more often than god (any flavour), not that it's always got it right.
Inevitably, some Slashdotter will claim that yet-to-be discovered technology will always provide a fix for the problem. Believing that yet-to-be discovered technology will be discovered (and will be the salvation) is exactly equivalent to believing the numerous claims of religion. Often, the same Slashdotter who is atheist does not hestitate to believe in yet-to-be discovered technology. A hypocrite, a fool, or both?
The difference is that those people who believe that technology will allow the human race to overcome its limits have been proven right multiple times over the historical record. Those people who believe that $deity will come down and make everything right for us have less of a track record of successes.
Which raises a question - how do you check these things?
Generally, you don't. You do enough due diligence to cover your ass legally, and include an indemnity clause in the contract with the third-party so that they have to repay any costs incurred by license violations in their code.
Why legislate ourselves back to the days of broadcast advertising and a stateless web?
Though I disagree with the idea that legislation is the solution, I have to say that I found the "days of broadcast advertising and a stateless web" far less annoying. All you needed then was something to turn off animated.gifs and the web became a tolerable, usable, content-rich environment.
If this really is genetic, wouldn't that be an argument for the death penalty as a method of selecting against that gene? Seems to me that giving such a light sentence is counterproductive here, if in fact it is genetic.
Wouldn't the smartest response to his genetic defense be "Ok, we'll let you out early, but we get to chop your dick off first. Deal?"
That's correct -- all of those are insufficient to show causality. That's why all of the scientific theories you refer to were confirmed by substantially more thorough experimentation than you suggest.
As I understand it, causality is impossible to prove. (c.f. Hume et al)
There is significant precedent in copyright law that lists of facts or data cannot be copyrighted.
You're assuming that the schedule is a list of facts, as opposed to a work of fantasy. My experience with public transport in the US is that it's generally the latter.
Learn about Binary Search Trees, Red Black Trees, Bubble Sort, Quick Sort, Heaps, etc. Depends entirely on what you plan to be doing when leaving school. These
algorithms are seldom used when programming things like business apps. In fact I don't think I can ever recall implementing a search algorithm as you mention
after school.
This is why my future employability as a hardware guy is guaranteed. Thankyou.
Those drivers are all for Savage: it says "Supported Savage Cards" at the top.
You're correct, there were AGP Virge cards. The native API for these cards was called "S3D" not "MeTaL" and was a different (and older) codebase.
UT99 would have definitely blown goats on any of the Virge series.
I know of no law, anywhere, that says that I can't legally obtain a copy of a copyrighted work then modify said copy as I see fit as long as it stays in my possession. If you do, please enlighten us all. Please be as specific as possible.
This is no more illegal than purchasing a copy of a book, writing notes in the margins, and crossing out sections you disagree with.
The issue is similar to that of mod chips for game consoles: contributory infringement.
Contributory infringement applies where there is an (actual or potential) infringement to connect it to. If an ISP offered an Adblock-filtered web as a service to its customers and the Adblock makers recommended it for this purpose then maybe you'd have a point. But they don't. All filtering is performed by the end-user, so no transfer of the copyrighted material takes place.
In a sense, AdBlock is acting as malicious software, because it's altering the site author's message, without their permission.
In what sense? Adblock doesn't modify anything on the server - the content remains unchanged. Once the bits are on my machine, I can do anything I want with them without permission from the author as long as I don't republish the modified version.
Slashdot Mirror
Would you consider it wise to give passengers in an airliner the ability to take over in case the pilot makes a mistake? Such a feature is far more likely to cause a disaster than avert one. Once cars get to the point where they can be operated more safely than aircraft (which are already safer than cars are today) then taking control of a car in a crisis will just be getting in the way of the proven driver: the machine.
No, but I would require that airliners have a qualified pilot on board in case the autopilot makes a mistake.
there's a whole bunch of "if-like" things in mathematics ... multiplication over GF(2) for one such example.
Haskell can be considered an alternate syntax for System F. In other words, that "programming code" that you see is isomorphic to a "pure mathematical formula" written in a particular variety of lambda calculus. It's just written in a format that is easier for programmers to digest.
w/out Javascript and w/out Flash, the web would be a much more useful (and usable) place.
The grizzly is a rebadged Seig X2. Check out what this guy has done with one. Not a toy at all.
$500 for a machine that can cut aluminium and mild steel is neither impossible nor a research project. In fact I have one on my workbench right now.
Seig-X1 micro-mill (used to be available from Harbor Freight, grab it with a 20% off coupon next time they get a batch in) - $350
3 surplus 200oz/in steppers (Alltronics) - $60
surplus 30v PSU (HSC) - $30
3-axis stepper controller (ebay) - $40
Total: $480, leaving some left over for cabling and a cutter.
Cuts steel (0.003 per cut skims) and aluminium (with spray bottle coolant) at 1-2 ipm, delrin at 5-8.
I'm fairly pro the "a deal is a deal" view of things, but it's likely that a land line company would be running cables through public land, and the wireless companies route signal through public airspace.
They can, of course, be charged market rate for use of said airspace or land, but part of the price they pay can always be additional legal obligations.
If you want to screw with someone who has a "no cash" policy, put the item on the counter and say "how much do I owe you for that?" before opening your wallet. Take witnesses. Be amused.
... of course, if you're smart, you own both company A and company B ...
The lords are actually chosen by the Prime Minister.
I believe you mean "purchased from".
Not true - numerous examples exist of civilisations large and small that have outgrown their resource base and crashed horribly. In fact, pretty much EVERY SINGLE CIVILISATION before ours has collapsed horribly. We would be different why?
That wasn't my claim. The post I was replying to claimed that faith in technology to deliver results was "exactly equivalent" to faith in religion. My point was that science has delivered more often than god (any flavour), not that it's always got it right.
Inevitably, some Slashdotter will claim that yet-to-be discovered technology will always provide a fix for the problem. Believing that yet-to-be discovered technology will be discovered (and will be the salvation) is exactly equivalent to believing the numerous claims of religion. Often, the same Slashdotter who is atheist does not hestitate to believe in yet-to-be discovered technology. A hypocrite, a fool, or both?
The difference is that those people who believe that technology will allow the human race to overcome its limits have been proven right multiple times over the historical record. Those people who believe that $deity will come down and make everything right for us have less of a track record of successes.
Which raises a question - how do you check these things?
Generally, you don't. You do enough due diligence to cover your ass legally, and include an indemnity clause in the contract with the third-party so that they have to repay any costs incurred by license violations in their code.
Why legislate ourselves back to the days of broadcast advertising and a stateless web?
Though I disagree with the idea that legislation is the solution, I have to say that I found the "days of broadcast advertising and a stateless web" far less annoying. All you needed then was something to turn off animated .gifs and the web became a tolerable, usable, content-rich environment.
If this really is genetic, wouldn't that be an argument for the death penalty as a method of selecting against that gene? Seems to me that giving such a light sentence is counterproductive here, if in fact it is genetic.
Wouldn't the smartest response to his genetic defense be "Ok, we'll let you out early, but we get to chop your dick off first. Deal?"
That's correct -- all of those are insufficient to show causality. That's why all of the scientific theories you refer to were confirmed by substantially more thorough experimentation than you suggest.
As I understand it, causality is impossible to prove. (c.f. Hume et al)
I wonder if that is why companies like Google give their employees one day (I think it was 1 day) per week to work on whatever they want.
My previous job had a "do what you want one day a week" policy as well: Sunday.
There is significant precedent in copyright law that lists of facts or data cannot be copyrighted.
You're assuming that the schedule is a list of facts, as opposed to a work of fantasy. My experience with public transport in the US is that it's generally the latter.
CUDA's focus on the GPU often means the GPU does more work than an OpenCL program using both GPU and one or two CPU cores.
Do you have evidence for this statement? Code that you can share?
Learn about Binary Search Trees, Red Black Trees, Bubble Sort, Quick Sort, Heaps, etc. Depends entirely on what you plan to be doing when leaving school. These algorithms are seldom used when programming things like business apps. In fact I don't think I can ever recall implementing a search algorithm as you mention after school.
This is why my future employability as a hardware guy is guaranteed. Thankyou.
Those drivers are all for Savage: it says "Supported Savage Cards" at the top. You're correct, there were AGP Virge cards. The native API for these cards was called "S3D" not "MeTaL" and was a different (and older) codebase. UT99 would have definitely blown goats on any of the Virge series.
S3 Virge, not regular Virge. There was a difference. S3 Virge used MeTaL. Regular Virge/VX/DX/Trio3D did not use metal. S3Virge cards did.
Sorry, I think your memory is somewhat faulty there. MeTaL was definitely Savage series only, I know because I helped write it.
The 'MeTaL' acceleration was bullshit.
Given that "MeTaL" was for Savage3D, not Virge, it's not surprising that it didn't do very much for you.
7th guest was pre-rendered.
Copyright law says you don't have that right.
I know of no law, anywhere, that says that I can't legally obtain a copy of a copyrighted work then modify said copy as I see fit as long as it stays in my possession. If you do, please enlighten us all. Please be as specific as possible.
This is no more illegal than purchasing a copy of a book, writing notes in the margins, and crossing out sections you disagree with.
The issue is similar to that of mod chips for game consoles: contributory infringement.
Contributory infringement applies where there is an (actual or potential) infringement to connect it to. If an ISP offered an Adblock-filtered web as a service to its customers and the Adblock makers recommended it for this purpose then maybe you'd have a point. But they don't. All filtering is performed by the end-user, so no transfer of the copyrighted material takes place.
By the way, it's "tailored" not "taylored".
In a sense, AdBlock is acting as malicious software, because it's altering the site author's message, without their permission.
In what sense? Adblock doesn't modify anything on the server - the content remains unchanged. Once the bits are on my machine, I can do anything I want with them without permission from the author as long as I don't republish the modified version.