An Italian viewing American pizza would probably have the same reaction as an American hipster going over your CD collection (seriously, any CD collection).
Except that CDs taste better and are more crunchy than American pizzas.
Gravity can be formulated as a gauge theory, like the other forces in Standard Model. It's just a different mathematical representation of General Relativity, and it also captures the gravity-as-curvature idea quite neatly. You don't see it that often because the math gets a little tricky, unless you use something like Geometric Algebra, which made it easy enough for Master's courses.
What's with all this KDE shit? We all know GNOME is the real package to go with. Only losers use KDE.
Yes, I'm kidding, but now you know exactly why we don't have Linux on the desktop. Linux Ignorance sat around for the better part of a fucking decade bitching back and forth over which desktop package to go with.
Desktop schmesktop. I want to use an application, not stare at some fscking icons, menus or panels all day. Fluxbox with no panel and a dozen virtual screens gives me just that. I basically have one v-screen for each task, for 100% focus. Out of sight, out of mind. The point of a computer is that it can handle much more information than me -- I'd just get lost in all that, instead I'll just do one thing at a time, and do it well.
Of course, that's just, like, my opinion, man. If someone wants to recreate the Windows experience on Linux, by all means, just do it. That's the whole idea of open source, use your computer the way you want. (Why "PC" means "Windows" in common parlance is beyond me -- Linux and other open OSes make computers much more personal.)
As for binary compatibility, just by assuming x86-64 (or just x86?) you're breaking a whole lot of opensource/unix tradition. The portable way of installing software involves./configure and make, and it doesn't care about architecture. Unfortunately, most distros break this by not including basic stuff like compilers by default. The distros themselves are pandering to the Windows way of binary assumptions.
Linux on the desktop won't have much hope unless people get the whole idea of open source. With the typical binary distro, it's not much better than Windows or OS X. The kernel won't matter that much when the user experience is crippled to that Fisher-Price level where you're allowed to do these certain things, and not be the master of your own machine.
I was half joking... I don't think the term "mining" has anything to do with Mr. Malmi, it's just a nice coincidence.
Also, people still talk about "mining", even though it's really about verification / running the network. It's just a nice, compact term, though it can be a little misleading.
that assumes that the total real wealth (like mass and energy) of the Earth is constant
Which is also an entirely wrong assumption:)
The Earth gains energy from the Sun, and thus mass. It also loses mass via radiation. I'm not sure which direction the net is moving in, but there is no way its constant.
It's wrong in the sense of "not exactly right", but for these purposes I'd say the mass is practically constant. We're talking over the lifetime of society, not the Solar system. (As a physicist, one thing you learn is the power of approximation -- don't waste too much time on measurements that won't really affect the end result.)
First of all, let's consider the classical (non-relativistic) mass of Earth. I understand it's increasing due to meteorites etc., basically the same process that made Earth in the first place, but much slower nowadays. I think you can see it's not contributing much to world economy.
Of course, my main error was in saying that mass would have much to do with economy in the first place. Energy is of course much more important; the flow of low-entropy radiation from the Sun, and the roughly equal higher-entropy radiation into space. This flow isn't changing very much over the lifetime of a society, either.
Also bear in mind the exponential nature of the so-called economic growth, i.e. doubling every N years. Now if the surface area of Earth (which is what limits both the radiation flux and things like agriculture) were to double every N years, then we could have real economic growth at the same rate. This is why we can basically ignore the _relatively_ small changes in mass and radiation above, as they are dwarfed by any exponential growth over time.
Of course, we keep improving technology to get more usable energy/food from this limited surface area per year. But the physics does exhibit some hard limits.
Well, I'm going to design a currency that assumes that the total real wealth (like mass and energy) of the Earth is constant, thus implying that exponential economic growth is impossible.
Bitcoin "mining" stopped when Satoshi's second-in-command moved on to other projects. His last name is Finnish for "ore".
Nowadays, we call it "verifying transactions" as it should have been from the very beginning. It's not about being a greedy gold-digger, it's about maintaining a network to provide a service, and it's a job like any other, with a reasonable pay.
This. Exactly what I think about altcoins, the outsourced R&D division of Bitcoin Inc... in an ideal world. The hard truth is that it takes a hard fork for any real change in the Bitcoin network, and it's hard to see a consensus coming up with all the alternatives.
The real (crypto)?anarchist utopia is about different co-existing currencies, may the best coin win, at least for their 15 blocks of fame. Exchanges are a bottleneck for now, as well as old-money investors who get stuck on certain coins. The REAL future is with Boolberry.. for now:-j
OTOH, the network effect ensures a place for Bitcoin for a good while. It's still the gold standard against which other cryptocurrencies are measured. It may well remain as a reserve/reference currency, as more agile coins take the stage for daily commerce and feel the buzz of technological development.
Bitcoin is like the central cardioid in Mandelbrot Set, spreading love for the hairy fringe of the new mathematical frontier.
If you make it too comfortable to be sedentary for long periods of time, you'll need to find ways to balance yourself with appropriate exercise. Too much comfort (or too much of anything) can be bad. It's all about the balance.
Just get a stand-up desk and be done with it. I'm not saying it will completely replace the need for all exercise, but it goes a long way. It'll also help you take real breaks from the computer.
This would be great if it happened at once for all mankind. It's the gradual transition that's hard, as some people will still be thinking in terms of protestant work ethic, capitalism etc.
My usual argument is that society is like an engine whose fuel efficiency is improving all the time. As a scientist/engineer I think better fuel efficiency is great. People could work less hours for the same gain, if only the system would allow it -- traditionally, you're either fully employed as a respectable member of the society, or unemployed scum. Basic income could be used to smooth things out, but IMHO it would be much better to divide work itself more evenly.
Slashdot Mirror
You bet she does.
My vacuum cleaner has official Windows XP and Windows 7 stickers.
Wait, this didn't quite work out - it could be 604800 seconds, for example...
I've seen a gas station "go up" in seconds.
An Italian viewing American pizza would probably have the same reaction as an American hipster going over your CD collection (seriously, any CD collection).
Except that CDs taste better and are more crunchy than American pizzas.
Its not like kollege where yu write a program
Nope, it's the business world where we don't care about spelling. You need not be able to spell "int main", if you just want to "make mani".
Gravity can be formulated as a gauge theory, like the other forces in Standard Model. It's just a different mathematical representation of General Relativity, and it also captures the gravity-as-curvature idea quite neatly. You don't see it that often because the math gets a little tricky, unless you use something like Geometric Algebra, which made it easy enough for Master's courses.
What's with all this KDE shit? We all know GNOME is the real package to go with. Only losers use KDE.
Yes, I'm kidding, but now you know exactly why we don't have Linux on the desktop. Linux Ignorance sat around for the better part of a fucking decade bitching back and forth over which desktop package to go with.
Desktop schmesktop. I want to use an application, not stare at some fscking icons, menus or panels all day. Fluxbox with no panel and a dozen virtual screens gives me just that. I basically have one v-screen for each task, for 100% focus. Out of sight, out of mind. The point of a computer is that it can handle much more information than me -- I'd just get lost in all that, instead I'll just do one thing at a time, and do it well.
Of course, that's just, like, my opinion, man. If someone wants to recreate the Windows experience on Linux, by all means, just do it. That's the whole idea of open source, use your computer the way you want. (Why "PC" means "Windows" in common parlance is beyond me -- Linux and other open OSes make computers much more personal.)
As for binary compatibility, just by assuming x86-64 (or just x86?) you're breaking a whole lot of opensource/unix tradition. The portable way of installing software involves ./configure and make, and it doesn't care about architecture. Unfortunately, most distros break this by not including basic stuff like compilers by default. The distros themselves are pandering to the Windows way of binary assumptions.
Linux on the desktop won't have much hope unless people get the whole idea of open source. With the typical binary distro, it's not much better than Windows or OS X. The kernel won't matter that much when the user experience is crippled to that Fisher-Price level where you're allowed to do these certain things, and not be the master of your own machine.
My desktop computer at home is running Linux for more than a decade now.
--
factor 966971: 966971
My year of the Linux desktop was 1999. Besides, my UID is _twice_ a prime, so obviously my testicles are larger.
Chairs or it didn't happen.
The sorts of people who buy (and know how to install) SSDs and GPUs tend to be the sorts of people who can differentiate the two.
Thus proving you really need your calculus to do compsci.
...I always drove about 5 MPH faster than the prevailing traffic speed.
Does this include the systematic error of all speedometers that show a few % more than the actual speed?
It's totally subjective, but it felt a lot safer to be determining my own path through traffic than merely fitting into the herd.
Erm, sorry, my bad. You know everything, O wise master. *baaa*
Well, I was referring to mettwurst, which we spell with "meet" here in Finland. So I agree it would need some fixing, but not exactly "meat".
I was half joking... I don't think the term "mining" has anything to do with Mr. Malmi, it's just a nice coincidence.
Also, people still talk about "mining", even though it's really about verification / running the network. It's just a nice, compact term, though it can be a little misleading.
Germany -- where the best meet wurst.
that assumes that the total real wealth (like mass and energy) of the Earth is constant
Which is also an entirely wrong assumption :)
The Earth gains energy from the Sun, and thus mass. It also loses mass via radiation. I'm not sure which direction the net is moving in, but there is no way its constant.
It's wrong in the sense of "not exactly right", but for these purposes I'd say the mass is practically constant. We're talking over the lifetime of society, not the Solar system. (As a physicist, one thing you learn is the power of approximation -- don't waste too much time on measurements that won't really affect the end result.)
First of all, let's consider the classical (non-relativistic) mass of Earth. I understand it's increasing due to meteorites etc., basically the same process that made Earth in the first place, but much slower nowadays. I think you can see it's not contributing much to world economy.
Of course, my main error was in saying that mass would have much to do with economy in the first place. Energy is of course much more important; the flow of low-entropy radiation from the Sun, and the roughly equal higher-entropy radiation into space. This flow isn't changing very much over the lifetime of a society, either.
Also bear in mind the exponential nature of the so-called economic growth, i.e. doubling every N years. Now if the surface area of Earth (which is what limits both the radiation flux and things like agriculture) were to double every N years, then we could have real economic growth at the same rate. This is why we can basically ignore the _relatively_ small changes in mass and radiation above, as they are dwarfed by any exponential growth over time.
Of course, we keep improving technology to get more usable energy/food from this limited surface area per year. But the physics does exhibit some hard limits.
Well, I'm going to design a currency that assumes that the total real wealth (like mass and energy) of the Earth is constant, thus implying that exponential economic growth is impossible.
Bitcoin "mining" stopped when Satoshi's second-in-command moved on to other projects. His last name is Finnish for "ore".
Nowadays, we call it "verifying transactions" as it should have been from the very beginning. It's not about being a greedy gold-digger, it's about maintaining a network to provide a service, and it's a job like any other, with a reasonable pay.
This. Exactly what I think about altcoins, the outsourced R&D division of Bitcoin Inc... in an ideal world. The hard truth is that it takes a hard fork for any real change in the Bitcoin network, and it's hard to see a consensus coming up with all the alternatives.
The real (crypto)?anarchist utopia is about different co-existing currencies, may the best coin win, at least for their 15 blocks of fame. Exchanges are a bottleneck for now, as well as old-money investors who get stuck on certain coins. The REAL future is with Boolberry.. for now :-j
OTOH, the network effect ensures a place for Bitcoin for a good while. It's still the gold standard against which other cryptocurrencies are measured. It may well remain as a reserve/reference currency, as more agile coins take the stage for daily commerce and feel the buzz of technological development.
Bitcoin is like the central cardioid in Mandelbrot Set, spreading love for the hairy fringe of the new mathematical frontier.
I am teknohog. I only "pump and dump" women.
I guess it depends on your definition of "hog".
Please name a currency that you find credible.
This. Here, 100 Mbps VDSL2 has been a reality for a few years, but only for the lucky buildings that have fiber to the basement.
If you make it too comfortable to be sedentary for long periods of time, you'll need to find ways to balance yourself with appropriate exercise. Too much comfort (or too much of anything) can be bad. It's all about the balance.
Just get a stand-up desk and be done with it. I'm not saying it will completely replace the need for all exercise, but it goes a long way. It'll also help you take real breaks from the computer.
This would be great if it happened at once for all mankind. It's the gradual transition that's hard, as some people will still be thinking in terms of protestant work ethic, capitalism etc.
My usual argument is that society is like an engine whose fuel efficiency is improving all the time. As a scientist/engineer I think better fuel efficiency is great. People could work less hours for the same gain, if only the system would allow it -- traditionally, you're either fully employed as a respectable member of the society, or unemployed scum. Basic income could be used to smooth things out, but IMHO it would be much better to divide work itself more evenly.