So if I change my mind and decide to drive there - it's 20 miles from home - I'm screwing myself?;)
Yup! You just jinxed yourself into getting delayed in traffic a number of hours, and that guy you always hated at high school who makes sub-par games is going to land the contract you should have gotten if only you hadn't changed plans:(
You totally misread my post (And I am wondering if it is on purpose now.)
XP sp1 to XP sp2 is comparable to 10.4.1 to 10.4.2 Both are free upgrades.
OS X only uses one major and minor number, no point releases at all. The '10' in the version does not refer to the version. It is the product. The version in this case is 4.1 or 4.2 to 5.0 and such. 3 to 4 to 5 are MAJOR OS upgrades, just like XP to Vista to Win7. Both of which you have to pay for.
You compare major upgrades like 10.4 to 10.5 yet refused to make the exact same comparison in windows which would be XP to Vista. You then to continue and say you didn't have to pay to upgrade XP. That is false. If you want a newer MS OS, you must PAY for Vista, it is not free. (or pirate it obvs)
I never said you didn't have to pay to upgrade from 10.3 to 10.4 to 10.5 (i did say every other release is free, and that was a detail worth skipping)
You DO have to pay to upgrade XP to something current, just like you have to pay to upgrade 10.3 to something current.
The fact you are willing to stay on a version of windows 4 releases old, but not willing to stay on an OS X version 3 releases old, is proof you don't have to upgrade since you have not upgraded XP. (pay was never mentioned) You only claim you updated XP for free, which is the same on OS X. You can upgrade 10.4 to any 10.4.blah release for free.
I was going to say there is no ignorance here other than your own, but as your ignorance was corrected (by more than just me) and you still refuse to believe it means it is not ignorance but either stupidity or trolling.
I've had you on my friends list for some time, and while you do troll from time to time, I actually read your parent post as not a troll just incorrect, thus trying to inform you of the facts of the matter. If you want to just go around insulting me and making personal attacks for that, then I won't bother in the future.
If a brain is basically a network, then there comes a size where it's no longer efficient as a whole. And are 2 brains better than 1?
Infinite exponential growth is bullshit. There is *always* a real physical limit.
Speaking of optimal efficient brains, smaller can be better, and exponential growth hitting physical limits, I thought you mind enjoy the following reading material:
While some would say this is fiction (As is true for most all theoretical research, but especially so here), I've still found this paper a very interesting and entertaining read.
Quoted abstract to give you an idea:
Predictable improvements in lithographic methods foretell continued increases in computer processing power. Economic growth and engineering evolution continue to increase the size of objects which can be manufactured and power that can be controlled by humans. Neuroscience is gradually dissecting the components and functions of the structures in the brain. Advances in computer science and programming methodologies are increasingly able to emulate aspects of human intelligence. Continued progress in these areas leads to a convergence which results in megascale superintelligent thought machines. These machines, referred to as Matrioshka Brains, consume the entire power output of stars (~10^26 W), consume all of the useful construction material of a solar system (~10^26 kg), have thought capacities limited by the physics of the universe and are essentially immortal.
A common practice encountered in literature discussing the search for extraterrestrial life is the perspective of assuming and applying human characteristics and interests to alien species. Authors limit themselves by assuming the technologies available to aliens are substantially similar or only somewhat greater than those we currently possess. These mistakes bias their conclusions, preventing us from recognizing signs of alien intelligence when we see it. They also misdirect our efforts in searching for such intelligence. We should start with the laws on which our particular universe operates and the limits they impose on us. Projections should be made to determine the rate at which intelligent civilizations, such as ours, approach the limits imposed by these laws. Using these time horizons, laws and limits, we may be better able to construct an image of what alien intelligence may be like and how we ourselves may evolve.
Can you prove to me that the lowest form of information in the brain is the bit? Are neurons only 'on or off'? Is it just discharge or not discharge?
Well, I can't prove that the lowest form of information in the brain is NOT a bit. All I can do is point you to papers and/or quotes made by people smarter than I whom specialize in neuroscience whom say the brain is very analog and not binary.
However, I can prove that using many many bits and the processing elements we currently have, we can simulate analog designs down to basically any level of resolution that the analog design relies on for its lowest form of information storage.
That isn't exactly the question though...
The issue is that, while my above statement is true, the facts of the matter are that it requires many more bits to store the same analog data as one axon of analog storage would provide.
Worst case situation; The Planck Length is 1.616252(81)×10^-35 meters. Thus, raise that to the power of 3, and you have the total number of planck units within a 1 meter cubed block of universe. Multiply that by how many potential states each 'point' can maintain, and you have the number of states to track. Do the base 2 math and you can get how many bits would be required to represent that data.
Just because the number is mind bogglingly large, and that we don't currently have any method to store or process that, does not mean it's impossible just difficult, and I will admit right now it is beyond our abilities.
So if your silicon neuron is 1000 times larger than the real thing, that just means 3 lb x 1000 is 1.5 tons, and 1100 cubic cm x 1000 = 1100000 cubic cm of volume. There are already structures of this size even down here on Earth, so by the laws of physics it is possible.
The only questions are how we go about controlling and managing enough bits to store enough possible states that the resolution of your binary system is equal to the resolution of the analog system you are simulating, not equal to size or weight or part count. And of course how long it will take humanity to reach the point we will be capable of that feat.
While I too share the same childish dream of wishing this will be within my lifetime, the realist side of me isn't exactly holding my breath as odds are it is still quite some time from now.
I won't make a guess as to when, as too many variables are involved and too many assumptions would need to be made. But I do think that at our current level of advancement in neuroscience and material sciences, with no major out-of-left-field leaps forward with breakthroughs, progress is going painfully slow... Too slow I suspect for it to come about in my life time.
However many years we need to wait, I just wish I knew how many zeros are at the end of the number:P
Also Apple has the annoyance of the "apple tax" where you have to spend ~$100 every year to upgrade from 10.4 to 10.5 to 10.6 and so on. This is why my G4 Mac hasn't been updated with the latest sotware - I can't afford it.
In contrast I bought Windows XP in 2002 and haven't need to spend a dime on OS upgrades since then. Simply put - it's cheaper.
I don't get that line of reasoning. How do you not see how the two things you describe are the same?
First, you are wrong on the cost of osx updates, but lets leave that aside as a detail that isn't important. The meat of your point is that apple charges for updates and its bad, and microsoft charges for updates but its good because you choose not to upgrade.
You don't have to pay for 10.4 or 10.5 or 10.6 as upgrades to your 10.3 any more than you need to pay for 2003, vista, and windows 7 as upgrades to XP.
You admit to making the choice not to upgrade XP though all the expensive upgrade options (More than $100 for win2003, more than $200 for vista, and while the price is unstable still, more than $100 for windows 2007) Yet you are making the same choice not to upgrade your old macos.
Considering you are happy not paying MS for newer versions of windows, but not happy you need to pay to upgrade macos, it really does sound like you value macos way more than windows, so osx updates should be worth more to you. (Now being able to, or wanting to, pay for that value is another issue all together) Don't get me wrong, the choice to spend money on a new OS to upgrade with is yours to make. I'm not saying you are right or wrong. Only you can know if it is right or wrong for you.
Now, comparing apples to apples (excuse the pun), you don't pay for minor version upgrades with either OS. You can go from XP to XP sp1 to sp2 and sp3 for free. Just like you can go from 10.4 to 10.4.1 to 10.4.2 to 10.4.whatever for free.
Any commercial OS will have a 'tax' for upgrades, as long as you consider separate products to be upgrades. So simply put, you are wrong, it is not cheaper. $0 is not less or greater than $0 (When you choose to not upgrade, equally) and $300 (3x $100 upgrades) is definately less than $600 (3x $200 upgrades, which is actually a low price, as vista and win7 are more than $200 each for retail. That number is harder to factor since you actually can buy it more than one place with different pricing. Still, it took XP years to pass 'out of life' before you could buy an XP license for under $100, so my point still stands)
To use the same flawed car analogy, you are saying Ford sucks because you have to buy gas to keep using it, but Chevy does not suck because you choose not to refill its gas tank much and just stay at home more, thus Chevy is cheaper.
It is unlikely that a "bloated codebase" would chew through the battery like nobody's business on one x86 machine and suddenly become perfectly benign on a practically identical x86 machine.
Well, you are technically right.
If you format your Dell or HP (that came with Windows) and put a fresh clean install, and then just simply don't load any power management drivers. You will see your HP and Dell get equally crappy battery performance as the macbook with a windows install.
The problem is clearly in lack of driver support.
HP and Dell and all the likes provide power management drivers without any help from Microsoft outside of what Apple could also get. They are all developed 'in-house' (IE not at Microsoft)
As much as I love my macbook and as much as I used to like Apple, this is clearly a function lacking in the drivers for the hardware, which in this case were made by Apple.
In my example above, if you load the HP driver on your HP windows install (or dell for a dell) then suddenly battery performance goes way up. If there was a functional driver for macbook hardware, it would use the same APIs and work as well. This is clearly where the breakdown is.
On one hand, I can see why Apple isn't interested in providing good Windows drivers for their hardware. On the other hand, that is still crappy of them to do:{
There's nothing particularly special on the RFID chip. A parking facility card and a passport generate the same amount of interesting information. A unique ID. Whew! you got me there. There's a particularly obsessive set of slashdotters that watch too much television and come to believe something can be done with this information. The hurdles are so many the odds of winning the lottery are better than doing something useful with the unique ID.
I was not aware that my name was a unique ID. Actually I'm fairly sure it isn't, as my grandfather has the same name. That name would identify multiple people.
My home address is also not a unique ID. Well, OK it is right at the moment, but it isn't a guarantee. I could have anyone else living with me (or me living with someone else) and suddenly that one home address IDs multiple people.
My social security number? You got me there, that is unique.
Then there's the entire OTHER HALF of the RFID string, which is a unique ID per chip. This ID is the one you are thinking is the only ID that exists, but it is only half or less.
The RFID tags I have been evaluating for a task at work, haev a 128 bit unique ID (from the factory), and 2kb of reprogrammable memory that is also broadcast after the unique ID.
Passports store your name, address, SSN, and other info in this area. They also used to store your picture image in there too, but I think that might have been changed. I'm sure the larger writable memory tags cost a bit more than the 256 bit versions...
It's sorta like how your ATM card does have a unique ID, but also has the ID which is the key to your bank accounts. Despite that key being unique too, like your unique credit card number, I can't see you wanting to broadcast that out over radio to anyone within a couple yards.
Thanks! More evidence the article speaks the truth.
It's one thing to insert ads and sponsored links, but quite another to have sponsored links mixed with search results, and quite another yet (what bing is doing) to be keyed to return false results aimed at sending your business to microsoft and then having the code watch for spikes in the false search terms and put them back to normal when people start looking into it.
The first verifiers proved they are doing the first part (faking query replies), the later verifiers (like yourself) prove the second part, that spikes in search results can adjust the results for future searches.
Bing, just a new face on the same old worthlessness.
Now we just need as many people as we can get, whom have a domain name which is trademarked, to press charges against comcast under this law for your own domain.
`(i) an award of statutory damages in the amount of--
`(I) not less than $1,000 or more than $100,000 per trademark per identifier, as the court considers just; or
`(II) if the court finds that the registration or use of the registered trademark as an identifier was willful, not less than $3,000 or more than $300,000 per trademark per identifier, as the court considers just; and
`(ii) full costs and reasonable attorney's fees.
Chances are since the main purpose of this change is for ad revenue, and not a willful infringement, only line (I) will apply. Additionally, you probably can't get the 'bad faith' additions applied, unless you can somehow prove the ads served on their 'page not found' fake-page happen to be ads for your competition.
But a minimum of $1000 plus attorney fee's is pretty decent if you have nothing better to do...
The blanket on my bed (don't know what it's made of) emits sparks, especially when the air is dry (like winter when I use it). I wonder what other radiation/photons it emits besides visible light?
The blanket, just like everything else made of matter and involving energy reactions, will mainly emit high frequency radiation such as this, and low frequency radiation known as infrared (or in laymen terms, 'heat')
Does sticky tape cause cancer?
In the sense that everything made of matter emits radiation, yes.
Though at the rate of decay, you would need to be exposed for a couple tens of thousands or millions of years to get a dose roughly 1% of a chest x-ray. Odds are your cells will stop functioning due to other causes long before that happens.
The question is, how will you react when you learn the keycaps on your keyboard emit radiation when your fingers strike them, and probably equal or more so than sticky tape!
/me wants to see your reaction when you learn what our Sun has been doing all this time:D
The easiest and simplest use for augmented reality would be to label the real world...
This is where we are at right now. You are correct in that there is a ways to go, but the foundation (of software) is catching up, and the hardware isn't far behind (mainly a cost issue now)
Apologies for the iPhone specific link, but there are multiple examples of apps that use the display/camera to do exactly that. Label the real world, and share your labels with your friends.
Look people, tragedies happen all the time. For every poor kid beaten to death in China at a "gaming addiction recovery camp", there's thousands more dying of starvation and illnesses in other parts of the world.
This isn't news. This is China. Do you expect differently?
So basically what you are saying is, you support and are for government murdering at will?
What a sick bastard you are!
I find it even more sickening that under your logic, if someone came and repeatedly raped your wife sister and mother, you would be OK with this, since it happens everyday.
The only upside is, at least you are OK with someone killing you, since killings happen every day.
And what does that have to do with the kidney? Are you also suggesting that kidneys are "no longer needed"?
Whew, thank science! Nothing is quite as annoying as having to stop for a bathroom break in the middle of a coding or gaming season. I am relived to see we no longer need kidneys!:D
What we know are generalities. We know the Earth revolves around the sun and the moon revolves around the Earth via a mechanism called "gravity." Our knowledge of specifics is incomplete, to unstate the matter. We don't know what "gravity" actually is.
A good computer analogy for our level of understanding gravity.
Knowing the inputs a person makes to a program, we can, with pretty damn close to 100% (But not quite 100% in all cases) predict exactly what the output of the program will be.
However, we do not have the source code to see how the program Actually functions. We basically 'black box' reverse engineered it. Not only do we not know how the software works, but we don't understand the hardware it is running on, nor why the entire system and program exist in the first place to be able to make output that we can predict.
What scientists on TV? I suspect that if there were more scientists on TV we wouldn't be having half of the anti-intellectualism fueled debates that rage these days.
No u!!1
*cough*
Sorry, I meant to say, Brian Cox seems to have done quite a few documentaries on BBC and Horizon. At least pertaining to theoretical physics.
But yes, while there have been some other big scientists that have had appearances in documentaries, that is about the extent of real science on TV. The only other thing I can think of is Myth Busters, and that is sad. Not that it is a bad show or anything, just that it actually seems to fall in the list of real science at all because nothing else even comes to mind...
Would you be "disturbed" if someone went to jail for modifying odometers on automobiles?
Extremely, since modifying an odometer is not a crime. Trying to defraud someone by lying and claiming it is true when you know it isn't is a crime. The odometer being wrong is not. You modifying it is not. So yes. Being put in jail for doing something that is not a crime, would disturb me.
In fact, the DMV has a specific form to fill out if your odometer is off and by how much and how you determined that. One common case is changing out the odometer with a 2nd hand part. Another common case is driving for more than a couple weeks on different sized tires than the current odometer is calibrated for. Another common reason is changing an engine. Miles is only tracked PER ENGINE, not per car. You are not required to sell your odometer with the engine.
In fact, if you never plan to sell the car, you can almost ignore all of those laws. They only come into play when you hand off ownership and inform them of the total millage on the engine. Never sell it, it never matters.
Both are examples of modifiying hardware in an effort to cheat someone, and both are against the law.
In this case, I will admit that is most likely true. But it is so far from a given that the way you state it is always true sickens me.
My 3 xbox are modded. Not a single pirated game on them either. I use it for xbox media center and watching video files on my TV.
Since you are clearly arguing that a mod has no other intent than defrauding game programmers, you are trying to claim the fact I pirate no games, is the very and only reason game developers are going out of business. I guess you share the blame with me, since you purchased some eggs at the store thus defrauding the game companies (Eggs and TV have the same lack of relevance to game companies here)
You don't want to go to jail? Don't break criminal laws.
You seem to be under the impression that going to jail has anything to do with breaking laws. lawls!
Modifying hardware for compatibility reasons is LEGAL. The DMCA you haven't read specifically says so.
Now, while the crime that he did (copying games) is no doubt the Only charge that will stick here, the fact remains is that is the only crime he comitted. When the cops claim he broke one minor law, and did all this other crap that isn't illegal, then one tends to disregard everything they are accusing him of.
And especially don't make a full-time business out of breaking the law..
Tell that to Sony, or Nintendo, or the banks, or car manufacturers, or pretty much most of the top 100 companies in this country. Breaking the law is factored in under 'expenses'. Your advice would have prevented them from becoming worth billions, and would be extremely poor advice today. They would laugh at you.
The 10 years is simply the maximum sentence. If he has no prior convictions, he will likely be sentenced to something substantially less.
But his crime was on a computer. The magic words 'on a computer' with the rest of the ignorant FUD means he will get slammed with a max sentence.
And you might want to talk to the thousands of people sitting in jail for months still waiting for their trial, or the few people that shared a CD or two and now are in debt for multiple millions of dollars. They would disagree, and anyone who's actually paying attention would say their 100% track record of using the max penalty by default has held true.
The Nuremberg defendants were charged with crimes against humanity - and, and among the specific changes, the crime of institutionalized murder on an industrial scale. That is why the defense of "just following orders" does not work. They were the ones giving the orders.
Your apologies to Godwin are fraudulent.
Technically you are the only one so far to trigger Godwin, not the GP.
The topic at hand is the excuse given, not the crime the excuse was made to get out of.
The kid was struck crossing a busy, unlit road at night, by a car coming around a blind corner. Sounds like tragic accident to me. If anybody is to blame it's the kid's parents for letting him out at night on a bike, without proper safety instruction.
Which just proves the point being made.
It is a tragic accident. The car driver is not at fault.
However if this was any other car driver (read: not a cop), they would be in jail for vehicular manslaughter right now, and under a civil lawsuit from the parents which would win hands down.
Only the fact it was a police officer doing the damage is why the law's applied more fair, although inconsistent.
The xbox moder who committed no crime at all (Even the DMCA allows for this) gets up to 10 years in prison, yet if a corporation or member of government did the exact same thing, crime or not, nothing worse than a tiny fine in-line with parking ticket amounts, if that.
A person does an act, life in jail, life slavery, and total loss of freedom. A company or government does the same act, and worst case is a fine that is not even a tiny fraction of 1% of their profits, and most times its 'business as usual' which somehow makes it all OK.
This is what is bullshit and needs to end.
If the people that made and enforce the laws actually had to live under them, they would change overnight.
The Google Search Appliance (GSA) provides fast, relevant search for your website or intranet. An on-premise, easy-to-deploy solution, the GSA provides your organization with high relevancy right out of the box, can be customized to meet your specific needs, and scales easily as your content grows.
Not exactly as sexy compared to an xserve, but it is a sold product none the less.
Slashdot Mirror
So if I change my mind and decide to drive there - it's 20 miles from home - I'm screwing myself? ;)
Yup! You just jinxed yourself into getting delayed in traffic a number of hours, and that guy you always hated at high school who makes sub-par games is going to land the contract you should have gotten if only you hadn't changed plans :(
# cat /dev/mem | strings | grep -i llama
Damn, my RAM is full of llamas.
dissy@w02:~$ cat /dev/mem | strings | grep -i llama | wc -l
0
Where might I be able to find some llamas compatible with my speed of memory plz?
I feel left out
You totally misread my post (And I am wondering if it is on purpose now.)
XP sp1 to XP sp2 is comparable to 10.4.1 to 10.4.2
Both are free upgrades.
OS X only uses one major and minor number, no point releases at all.
The '10' in the version does not refer to the version. It is the product. The version in this case is 4.1 or 4.2 to 5.0 and such.
3 to 4 to 5 are MAJOR OS upgrades, just like XP to Vista to Win7. Both of which you have to pay for.
You compare major upgrades like 10.4 to 10.5 yet refused to make the exact same comparison in windows which would be XP to Vista.
You then to continue and say you didn't have to pay to upgrade XP. That is false. If you want a newer MS OS, you must PAY for Vista, it is not free. (or pirate it obvs)
I never said you didn't have to pay to upgrade from 10.3 to 10.4 to 10.5 (i did say every other release is free, and that was a detail worth skipping)
You DO have to pay to upgrade XP to something current, just like you have to pay to upgrade 10.3 to something current.
The fact you are willing to stay on a version of windows 4 releases old, but not willing to stay on an OS X version 3 releases old, is proof you don't have to upgrade since you have not upgraded XP. (pay was never mentioned)
You only claim you updated XP for free, which is the same on OS X. You can upgrade 10.4 to any 10.4.blah release for free.
I was going to say there is no ignorance here other than your own, but as your ignorance was corrected (by more than just me) and you still refuse to believe it means it is not ignorance but either stupidity or trolling.
I've had you on my friends list for some time, and while you do troll from time to time, I actually read your parent post as not a troll just incorrect, thus trying to inform you of the facts of the matter.
If you want to just go around insulting me and making personal attacks for that, then I won't bother in the future.
Perhaps there is an "optimum" brain....
If a brain is basically a network, then there comes a size where it's no longer efficient as a whole. And are 2 brains better than 1?
Infinite exponential growth is bullshit. There is *always* a real physical limit.
Speaking of optimal efficient brains, smaller can be better, and exponential growth hitting physical limits,
I thought you mind enjoy the following reading material:
http://www.aeiveos.com:8080/~bradbury/MatrioshkaBrains/MatrioshkaBrainsPaper.html
While some would say this is fiction (As is true for most all theoretical research, but especially so here), I've still found this paper a very interesting and entertaining read.
Quoted abstract to give you an idea:
Predictable improvements in lithographic methods foretell continued increases in computer processing power. Economic growth and engineering evolution continue to increase the size of objects which can be manufactured and power that can be controlled by humans. Neuroscience is gradually dissecting the components and functions of the structures in the brain. Advances in computer science and programming methodologies are increasingly able to emulate aspects of human intelligence. Continued progress in these areas leads to a convergence which results in megascale superintelligent thought machines. These machines, referred to as Matrioshka Brains, consume the entire power output of stars (~10^26 W), consume all of the useful construction material of a solar system (~10^26 kg), have thought capacities limited by the physics of the universe and are essentially immortal.
A common practice encountered in literature discussing the search for extraterrestrial life is the perspective of assuming and applying human characteristics and interests to alien species. Authors limit themselves by assuming the technologies available to aliens are substantially similar or only somewhat greater than those we currently possess. These mistakes bias their conclusions, preventing us from recognizing signs of alien intelligence when we see it. They also misdirect our efforts in searching for such intelligence. We should start with the laws on which our particular universe operates and the limits they impose on us. Projections should be made to determine the rate at which intelligent civilizations, such as ours, approach the limits imposed by these laws. Using these time horizons, laws and limits, we may be better able to construct an image of what alien intelligence may be like and how we ourselves may evolve.
Enjoy
I'll still need the brain chip to remind me where the hell I put that damn thing.
I would hope you put your brain chip in your brain!
Can you prove to me that the lowest form of information in the brain is the bit? Are neurons only 'on or off'? Is it just discharge or not discharge?
Well, I can't prove that the lowest form of information in the brain is NOT a bit. All I can do is point you to papers and/or quotes made by people smarter than I whom specialize in neuroscience whom say the brain is very analog and not binary.
However, I can prove that using many many bits and the processing elements we currently have, we can simulate analog designs down to basically any level of resolution that the analog design relies on for its lowest form of information storage.
That isn't exactly the question though...
The issue is that, while my above statement is true, the facts of the matter are that it requires many more bits to store the same analog data as one axon of analog storage would provide.
Worst case situation; The Planck Length is 1.616252(81)×10^-35 meters.
Thus, raise that to the power of 3, and you have the total number of planck units within a 1 meter cubed block of universe.
Multiply that by how many potential states each 'point' can maintain, and you have the number of states to track.
Do the base 2 math and you can get how many bits would be required to represent that data.
Just because the number is mind bogglingly large, and that we don't currently have any method to store or process that, does not mean it's impossible just difficult, and I will admit right now it is beyond our abilities.
So if your silicon neuron is 1000 times larger than the real thing, that just means 3 lb x 1000 is 1.5 tons, and 1100 cubic cm x 1000 = 1100000 cubic cm of volume.
There are already structures of this size even down here on Earth, so by the laws of physics it is possible.
The only questions are how we go about controlling and managing enough bits to store enough possible states that the resolution of your binary system is equal to the resolution of the analog system you are simulating, not equal to size or weight or part count. And of course how long it will take humanity to reach the point we will be capable of that feat.
While I too share the same childish dream of wishing this will be within my lifetime, the realist side of me isn't exactly holding my breath as odds are it is still quite some time from now.
I won't make a guess as to when, as too many variables are involved and too many assumptions would need to be made.
But I do think that at our current level of advancement in neuroscience and material sciences, with no major out-of-left-field leaps forward with breakthroughs, progress is going painfully slow... Too slow I suspect for it to come about in my life time.
However many years we need to wait, I just wish I knew how many zeros are at the end of the number :P
Also Apple has the annoyance of the "apple tax" where you have to spend ~$100 every year to upgrade from 10.4 to 10.5 to 10.6 and so on. This is why my G4 Mac hasn't been updated with the latest sotware - I can't afford it.
In contrast I bought Windows XP in 2002 and haven't need to spend a dime on OS upgrades since then. Simply put - it's cheaper.
I don't get that line of reasoning. How do you not see how the two things you describe are the same?
First, you are wrong on the cost of osx updates, but lets leave that aside as a detail that isn't important. The meat of your point is that apple charges for updates and its bad, and microsoft charges for updates but its good because you choose not to upgrade.
You don't have to pay for 10.4 or 10.5 or 10.6 as upgrades to your 10.3 any more than you need to pay for 2003, vista, and windows 7 as upgrades to XP.
You admit to making the choice not to upgrade XP though all the expensive upgrade options (More than $100 for win2003, more than $200 for vista, and while the price is unstable still, more than $100 for windows 2007)
Yet you are making the same choice not to upgrade your old macos.
Considering you are happy not paying MS for newer versions of windows, but not happy you need to pay to upgrade macos, it really does sound like you value macos way more than windows, so osx updates should be worth more to you.
(Now being able to, or wanting to, pay for that value is another issue all together)
Don't get me wrong, the choice to spend money on a new OS to upgrade with is yours to make. I'm not saying you are right or wrong. Only you can know if it is right or wrong for you.
Now, comparing apples to apples (excuse the pun), you don't pay for minor version upgrades with either OS.
You can go from XP to XP sp1 to sp2 and sp3 for free.
Just like you can go from 10.4 to 10.4.1 to 10.4.2 to 10.4.whatever for free.
Any commercial OS will have a 'tax' for upgrades, as long as you consider separate products to be upgrades.
So simply put, you are wrong, it is not cheaper. $0 is not less or greater than $0 (When you choose to not upgrade, equally) and $300 (3x $100 upgrades) is definately less than $600 (3x $200 upgrades, which is actually a low price, as vista and win7 are more than $200 each for retail. That number is harder to factor since you actually can buy it more than one place with different pricing. Still, it took XP years to pass 'out of life' before you could buy an XP license for under $100, so my point still stands)
To use the same flawed car analogy, you are saying Ford sucks because you have to buy gas to keep using it, but Chevy does not suck because you choose not to refill its gas tank much and just stay at home more, thus Chevy is cheaper.
It is unlikely that a "bloated codebase" would chew through the battery like nobody's business on one x86 machine and suddenly become perfectly benign on a practically identical x86 machine.
Well, you are technically right.
If you format your Dell or HP (that came with Windows) and put a fresh clean install, and then just simply don't load any power management drivers. You will see your HP and Dell get equally crappy battery performance as the macbook with a windows install.
The problem is clearly in lack of driver support.
HP and Dell and all the likes provide power management drivers without any help from Microsoft outside of what Apple could also get. They are all developed 'in-house' (IE not at Microsoft)
As much as I love my macbook and as much as I used to like Apple, this is clearly a function lacking in the drivers for the hardware, which in this case were made by Apple.
In my example above, if you load the HP driver on your HP windows install (or dell for a dell) then suddenly battery performance goes way up. If there was a functional driver for macbook hardware, it would use the same APIs and work as well. This is clearly where the breakdown is.
On one hand, I can see why Apple isn't interested in providing good Windows drivers for their hardware. On the other hand, that is still crappy of them to do :{
There's nothing particularly special on the RFID chip. A parking facility card and a passport generate the same amount of interesting information. A unique ID. Whew! you got me there. There's a particularly obsessive set of slashdotters that watch too much television and come to believe something can be done with this information. The hurdles are so many the odds of winning the lottery are better than doing something useful with the unique ID.
I was not aware that my name was a unique ID. Actually I'm fairly sure it isn't, as my grandfather has the same name. That name would identify multiple people.
My home address is also not a unique ID. Well, OK it is right at the moment, but it isn't a guarantee. I could have anyone else living with me (or me living with someone else) and suddenly that one home address IDs multiple people.
My social security number? You got me there, that is unique.
Then there's the entire OTHER HALF of the RFID string, which is a unique ID per chip.
This ID is the one you are thinking is the only ID that exists, but it is only half or less.
The RFID tags I have been evaluating for a task at work, haev a 128 bit unique ID (from the factory), and 2kb of reprogrammable memory that is also broadcast after the unique ID.
Passports store your name, address, SSN, and other info in this area.
They also used to store your picture image in there too, but I think that might have been changed. I'm sure the larger writable memory tags cost a bit more than the 256 bit versions...
It's sorta like how your ATM card does have a unique ID, but also has the ID which is the key to your bank accounts. Despite that key being unique too, like your unique credit card number, I can't see you wanting to broadcast that out over radio to anyone within a couple yards.
Thanks! More evidence the article speaks the truth.
It's one thing to insert ads and sponsored links, but quite another to have sponsored links mixed with search results, and quite another yet (what bing is doing) to be keyed to return false results aimed at sending your business to microsoft and then having the code watch for spikes in the false search terms and put them back to normal when people start looking into it.
The first verifiers proved they are doing the first part (faking query replies),
the later verifiers (like yourself) prove the second part, that spikes in search results can adjust the results for future searches.
Bing, just a new face on the same old worthlessness.
lol
I must be getting old or something. I've already forgotten that choice Seinfeld moment
Somebody submit a "soup" application, and have Apple reject it.
If you don't mind me asking.. "Soup" application?
I tried googling but I can't tell which (if any) are for this context.
No new legislation is needed. Just get the courts involved.
Exactly. This act is already illegal. It is called typo-squatting.
http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/query/z?c106:S.1255.IS:=
Specifically, see section 3, (2)(a), and probably (2)(b) as well.
Now we just need as many people as we can get, whom have a domain name which is trademarked, to press charges against comcast under this law for your own domain.
`(i) an award of statutory damages in the amount of--
`(I) not less than $1,000 or more than $100,000 per trademark per identifier, as the court considers just; or
`(II) if the court finds that the registration or use of the registered trademark as an identifier was willful, not less than $3,000 or more than $300,000 per trademark per identifier, as the court considers just; and
`(ii) full costs and reasonable attorney's fees.
Chances are since the main purpose of this change is for ad revenue, and not a willful infringement, only line (I) will apply.
Additionally, you probably can't get the 'bad faith' additions applied, unless you can somehow prove the ads served on their 'page not found' fake-page happen to be ads for your competition.
But a minimum of $1000 plus attorney fee's is pretty decent if you have nothing better to do...
The blanket on my bed (don't know what it's made of) emits sparks, especially when the air is dry (like winter when I use it). I wonder what other radiation/photons it emits besides visible light?
The blanket, just like everything else made of matter and involving energy reactions, will mainly emit high frequency radiation such as this, and low frequency radiation known as infrared (or in laymen terms, 'heat')
Does sticky tape cause cancer?
In the sense that everything made of matter emits radiation, yes.
Though at the rate of decay, you would need to be exposed for a couple tens of thousands or millions of years to get a dose roughly 1% of a chest x-ray. Odds are your cells will stop functioning due to other causes long before that happens.
The question is, how will you react when you learn the keycaps on your keyboard emit radiation when your fingers strike them, and probably equal or more so than sticky tape!
I can appreciate the gee-whiz nature of it but I can't quite figure out what value it has outside of the sciencey aspect of it.
At this stage of the game, the only value is the knowledge itself that this effect exists.
No other value what so ever at the moment.
The easiest and simplest use for augmented reality would be to label the real world ...
This is where we are at right now. You are correct in that there is a ways to go, but the foundation (of software) is catching up, and the hardware isn't far behind (mainly a cost issue now)
http://www.ismashphone.com/2009/07/innovative-examples-of-augmented-reality-on-the-iphone.html
Apologies for the iPhone specific link, but there are multiple examples of apps that use the display/camera to do exactly that. Label the real world, and share your labels with your friends.
Really exciting stuff!
Look people, tragedies happen all the time. For every poor kid beaten to death in China at a "gaming addiction recovery camp", there's thousands more dying of starvation and illnesses in other parts of the world.
This isn't news. This is China. Do you expect differently?
So basically what you are saying is, you support and are for government murdering at will?
What a sick bastard you are!
I find it even more sickening that under your logic, if someone came and repeatedly raped your wife sister and mother, you would be OK with this, since it happens everyday.
The only upside is, at least you are OK with someone killing you, since killings happen every day.
PS, you sick bastard
You know... lawful evil is not all that much better than chaotic evil =)
But I would bet that being either one is much better than being beaten to a bloody pulp due to your sexual orientation...
And what does that have to do with the kidney? Are you also suggesting that kidneys are "no longer needed"?
Whew, thank science! Nothing is quite as annoying as having to stop for a bathroom break in the middle of a coding or gaming season. I am relived to see we no longer need kidneys! :D
Is there anything science can't do?
What we know are generalities. We know the Earth revolves around the sun and the moon revolves around the Earth via a mechanism called "gravity." Our knowledge of specifics is incomplete, to unstate the matter. We don't know what "gravity" actually is.
A good computer analogy for our level of understanding gravity.
Knowing the inputs a person makes to a program, we can, with pretty damn close to 100% (But not quite 100% in all cases) predict exactly what the output of the program will be.
However, we do not have the source code to see how the program Actually functions. We basically 'black box' reverse engineered it.
Not only do we not know how the software works, but we don't understand the hardware it is running on, nor why the entire system and program exist in the first place to be able to make output that we can predict.
What scientists on TV? I suspect that if there were more scientists on TV we wouldn't be having half of the anti-intellectualism fueled debates that rage these days.
No u!!1
*cough*
Sorry, I meant to say, Brian Cox seems to have done quite a few documentaries on BBC and Horizon. At least pertaining to theoretical physics.
But yes, while there have been some other big scientists that have had appearances in documentaries, that is about the extent of real science on TV.
The only other thing I can think of is Myth Busters, and that is sad. Not that it is a bad show or anything, just that it actually seems to fall in the list of real science at all because nothing else even comes to mind...
Would you be "disturbed" if someone went to jail for modifying odometers on automobiles?
Extremely, since modifying an odometer is not a crime. Trying to defraud someone by lying and claiming it is true when you know it isn't is a crime. The odometer being wrong is not. You modifying it is not.
So yes. Being put in jail for doing something that is not a crime, would disturb me.
In fact, the DMV has a specific form to fill out if your odometer is off and by how much and how you determined that.
One common case is changing out the odometer with a 2nd hand part. Another common case is driving for more than a couple weeks on different sized tires than the current odometer is calibrated for.
Another common reason is changing an engine. Miles is only tracked PER ENGINE, not per car. You are not required to sell your odometer with the engine.
In fact, if you never plan to sell the car, you can almost ignore all of those laws. They only come into play when you hand off ownership and inform them of the total millage on the engine.
Never sell it, it never matters.
Both are examples of modifiying hardware in an effort to cheat someone, and both are against the law.
In this case, I will admit that is most likely true. But it is so far from a given that the way you state it is always true sickens me.
My 3 xbox are modded. Not a single pirated game on them either. I use it for xbox media center and watching video files on my TV.
Since you are clearly arguing that a mod has no other intent than defrauding game programmers, you are trying to claim the fact I pirate no games, is the very and only reason game developers are going out of business.
I guess you share the blame with me, since you purchased some eggs at the store thus defrauding the game companies (Eggs and TV have the same lack of relevance to game companies here)
You don't want to go to jail? Don't break criminal laws.
You seem to be under the impression that going to jail has anything to do with breaking laws.
lawls!
Modifying hardware for compatibility reasons is LEGAL. The DMCA you haven't read specifically says so.
Now, while the crime that he did (copying games) is no doubt the Only charge that will stick here, the fact remains is that is the only crime he comitted. When the cops claim he broke one minor law, and did all this other crap that isn't illegal, then one tends to disregard everything they are accusing him of.
And especially don't make a full-time business out of breaking the law..
Tell that to Sony, or Nintendo, or the banks, or car manufacturers, or pretty much most of the top 100 companies in this country.
Breaking the law is factored in under 'expenses'.
Your advice would have prevented them from becoming worth billions, and would be extremely poor advice today. They would laugh at you.
The 10 years is simply the maximum sentence.
If he has no prior convictions, he will likely be sentenced to something substantially less.
But his crime was on a computer.
The magic words 'on a computer' with the rest of the ignorant FUD means he will get slammed with a max sentence.
And you might want to talk to the thousands of people sitting in jail for months still waiting for their trial, or the few people that shared a CD or two and now are in debt for multiple millions of dollars. They would disagree, and anyone who's actually paying attention would say their 100% track record of using the max penalty by default has held true.
The Nuremberg defendants were charged with crimes against humanity - and, and among the specific changes, the crime of institutionalized murder on an industrial scale. That is why the defense of "just following orders" does not work. They were the ones giving the orders.
Your apologies to Godwin are fraudulent.
Technically you are the only one so far to trigger Godwin, not the GP.
The topic at hand is the excuse given, not the crime the excuse was made to get out of.
The kid was struck crossing a busy, unlit road at night, by a car coming around a blind corner. Sounds like tragic accident to me. If anybody is to blame it's the kid's parents for letting him out at night on a bike, without proper safety instruction.
Which just proves the point being made.
It is a tragic accident. The car driver is not at fault.
However if this was any other car driver (read: not a cop), they would be in jail for vehicular manslaughter right now, and under a civil lawsuit from the parents which would win hands down.
Only the fact it was a police officer doing the damage is why the law's applied more fair, although inconsistent.
The xbox moder who committed no crime at all (Even the DMCA allows for this) gets up to 10 years in prison, yet if a corporation or member of government did the exact same thing, crime or not, nothing worse than a tiny fine in-line with parking ticket amounts, if that.
A person does an act, life in jail, life slavery, and total loss of freedom.
A company or government does the same act, and worst case is a fine that is not even a tiny fraction of 1% of their profits, and most times its 'business as usual' which somehow makes it all OK.
This is what is bullshit and needs to end.
If the people that made and enforce the laws actually had to live under them, they would change overnight.
How can you compare xserver(a sold product) to googles server farms that are completely in house
It isn't too hard. One just needs to realize that googles server farms are not completely in house and are also a sold product.
http://www.google.com/enterprise/search/gsa.html
The Google Search Appliance (GSA) provides fast, relevant search for your website or intranet. An on-premise, easy-to-deploy solution, the GSA provides your organization with high relevancy right out of the box, can be customized to meet your specific needs, and scales easily as your content grows.
Not exactly as sexy compared to an xserve, but it is a sold product none the less.
Google Appliance Pict
Xserve Pict