I was actually talking about buses, sarcastically.In some places in popular culture they are considered a cause of congestion, mostly because of their size and frequent stopping. Although compared to the robot cabs, its far better.
Now the thing is personal automated vehicles, even one per two people would still be a lot of wasted space, if the vehicles were a tiny 3m long the population density over 100m would be only 66 people assuming bumper to bumper. How about if it carried 30 -50 people in a vehicle 15m long, the population density over 100m would be between 200 - 330 people also assuming bumper to bumper. It would cause less congestion.
Of course that would mean that the vehicles would not go exactly to everyone's destination, but on routes that were suited to almost all passengers, you may have to walk. There could be multiple routes to common areas that people went, and passengers could change from route to route as required.
Of course it would not be as comfortable, but a 15 metre vehicle that carries 30-50 people and doesn't need to park anywhere but just drop people off at their destination and continue on its route for others would surely reduce congestion far more.
I can't believe its taken this long to come up with such an idea.
Tomorrow - "Google has recieved over 64,000 Requests to 'Forget'..."
The Next week - "Google has recieved over 270,000 Requests to 'Forget'..."
Eventually - "Google has forgotten everyone"
Maybe I'm strange, but I spend my days managing websites. Which are essentially virtual newspapers / magazines/ posters/ directories/ whatever. So what if it is a online designed 3d room, its just a online facility people pay for.
I feel a strange separation to my work, because I know in 1000 years from now, no one will ever no I was alive or a person. There won't be an antiques roadshow describing how wonderful/shit my work was, my work wont exist it will be simply gone. Ancient potters, blacksmiths, artist, or architects don't have this problem, part of their work can survive. Something physical something real.
I would love to listen to the future documentaries describing how "clever" we are with our "Internet" and "condoms" and our "iPads". But how simple we were for not realising that we should really have a centralised computer attached to our brains, that can simply kill all the sperm in a man's body before we have sex, by analysing our thoughts and electro-shocking our testicles.
I think there must be something wrong with me I have a range of intermediate feelings that the internet just isn't ready for. Currently on the internet you are allowed the following opinion about objects:
MegaLove(create a fan website, yours will be the real fan website)
Like (join a bunch of fan websites)
Hate
Meh(also known as n00b)
My brain works sideways and I just can't pick an option.
I get the same problem when surveyed about how often I do things:
Always
Often
Sometimes
Rarely
Never
My brain always goes, well sometimes I do it often, like for a week, and then I'll stop doing it for a month. And if you look at the whole of my life I practically never do it , considering it takes not much time to do, and for a third of my life im sleeping. But for the time when I am doing it I Always do it
I've never had problems playing anything in itunes and I run it on Windows. I don't particularly like itunes, but I don't hate it. I'm entrenched into using itunes more or less because that is what I thought I needed for audio books. 2 years later it seems to me far to much effort to change to something else.
My only real complaint with itunes is the one download policy- buy music and you only have one chance to download it. - that seems the worst of it though.
I have read a fair bit of comments saying that itunes is crap. But to me its much like windows vista, yes it has some annoying features, but with some configuring they are all but gone, and with some time you end up used to how it performs.
"Security experts are calling on... ". Zap
Expert Experts are encouraging Security Experts to change their language from "calling on" to "asking". The Expert Experts believe that "calling on" is one way street and "asking" would open a "dialogue". This "dialogue" can help with "discussion" of a "three point plan", allowing possible evolution of the solution to a "two point plan", a "one point plan" or an "item of consideration".
The Expert Experts think that by "calling on" the Security Experts may be ignored. If any Expert is ignored it is often implied they are not Experts which is not a desirable outcome.
You haven't read the article either, have you? I'll bet you've never administered an enterprise scale network, too.
I read the article, And it does't mention Turing machines at all.But was talking about your comment and the comment prior with no relation to the article.
No I haven't administered an enterprise scale network. The networks I have administered have not been that large. However whether I have or have not administered an enterprise scale network has zero weight over whether your argument was logical falicy, in this case a strawman (I looked it up). Which it is your argument about a Turing Machine is a strawman: Straw Man
Arguing against a position which you create specifically to be easy to argue against, rather than the position actually held by those who oppose your point of view.
and further more this:
You haven't read the article either, have you? I'll bet you've never administered an enterprise scale network, too.
is Ad Hominem. You are attacking the person and not the argument.
I only object because your authority, being a sys admin and you've read the article. - perhaps you would like to elaborate why you cant do certain things with a GUI. How can simple plebs like me be expected to learn about this when bastions of knowledge like yourself hold back?
As a side track : would you call the consoles on the "Starship Enterprise" a CLI or GUI?
So he can create any machine out of a single cardboard box. What a Nerd!
Hobbes can pick up chicks, or rather gets picked up by them, if you know what I mean.
I agree
I enjoy having multiple terminal windows open. CLI in GUI is great. It also means you can watch startrek while having a terminal open and doing work (by work I mean watching startrek until shit hits the fan).
To me a CLI is essentially a programming tool that compiles your code and runs it straight away. much like the python can. You have Resources and functions you can run, Its essentially iterative programming at its simplest, which I think is an essential skill these days, all kids should know how to program a computer (at least understand the fundamentals of programming). -- However I can't deny that clicking something is far quicker than typing it.
Are there any Operating Systems with no underlying CLI. iOS maybe?
was that a straw man or a red herring, I can't remember, - the point "Everything can be done in a GUI. I don't see why not. We just haven't made that happen yet." is still valid even if a Turing machine isn't an efficient way of doing computing.
And if you are implying that an unmade solution(Putting everything into a GUI) its not the best way, I would say that it's too early to tell. - or that perhaps we should put more time into the idea.
The problem with uncertainty principle jokes: the funnier the joke the more uncertain you are of the actual composition, and if you do end up finding the composition of the joke you can't tell how funny it is. Furthermore, what the hell do you do with a dead cat?..
Yet most of these comments are basically against a companies idea to make searching faster. The main complaints seems to be:
Search engines are meant to be simple and fast. This isn't simple.
I love my enter button, currenlty it spells E....R the middle letters are wasted away. Google is reducing the amount of times i use that button
What if i get a preview of Goatse, or child porn, or Broccoli (Not Broccoli)
The first complaint seems to be an argument about what made search engines good when 56K modems were all the rage. Simple meant fast loading times. Now though i don't think that this argument should be the rule of internet we have bigger and better bandwidths, why shouldn't search results be as rich as possible to save you time?
The second complaint is redundant because you can change your preferences to still need to use your loved enter button. I know what you are going to say though " i don't want to change my preferences" To which i say, "You are meant to be a nerd. Changing preferences to suit obscure purposes is what nerds do. Nerd up."
The third complaint is dumb because getting a thumb of broccoli is better than getting a full size page. Its like you've forgotten google has an image search which can produce the same broccoli results, without having to click a preview icon.
It all sounds like no-one wants any progress, things are great now. I used to think the same thing when i was forced to switch from the arrow keys to WSAD when playing games. I was wrong. I'm not saying this is right, but my guess is this won't kill google, In 5 years when google adds another feature to its search, you'll all complain about this as the good old days.
Animals can bite, and Animals can kick - Don't tell me they can't say no...
Children can bite, and Children can kick - Hell they can also say no. So is it OK to have sexual relations with a consenting child?No a child is not smart enough to make that decision.
A child of the age of 5 we would probably think of as smarter than a smart dog, or a horse. Does that make them smart enough to consent to sex? No they aren't developed physically yet there sex organs aren't ready.
How about a child of the age of 13 is that child old enough to consent to sex(see Richie Rich)? No. why not? all the criteria i have seen here in this discussion to decied whether you are allowed to have sex says go for it
There is an element to the problem that I'm missing. I'm not sure what it is, but we can't say that aware consent is enough to allow sexual relations between any two beings.
The vegans I know hate that they are happy and animals aren't, and because they can't make the animals happy in any significant way, they punish* themselves so they can feel more happy. I find my brain isn't cleaver enough to process that kind of thought to be happy. I just do things I like to be happy its far simpler
*punish - they don't eat animal products somehow honey is OK to eat. They know bacon and other products taste good, they've eaten it before their enlightenment. They also keep bitching about how expensive it is to be a vegan.
It's hypocrisy no matter how you try and twist and turn it.
In my mind its only hipocrisy if you discard motive, and purpose.
We all complain that Hens are in cages, but never stop to think that without humans that hen would not be alive at all. Further more if chickens(Or any other animal for that matter) were the dominant species on this planet they wouldn't think at all about treating other animals worse or even sending them all to extinction.
The normal counter argument is: we can be better; What by fucking them? two steps forward, six steps back.:P
Slashdot Mirror
I was actually talking about buses, sarcastically.In some places in popular culture they are considered a cause of congestion, mostly because of their size and frequent stopping. Although compared to the robot cabs, its far better.
Now the thing is personal automated vehicles, even one per two people would still be a lot of wasted space, if the vehicles were a tiny 3m long the population density over 100m would be only 66 people assuming bumper to bumper. How about if it carried 30 -50 people in a vehicle 15m long, the population density over 100m would be between 200 - 330 people also assuming bumper to bumper. It would cause less congestion.
Of course that would mean that the vehicles would not go exactly to everyone's destination, but on routes that were suited to almost all passengers, you may have to walk. There could be multiple routes to common areas that people went, and passengers could change from route to route as required.
Of course it would not be as comfortable, but a 15 metre vehicle that carries 30-50 people and doesn't need to park anywhere but just drop people off at their destination and continue on its route for others would surely reduce congestion far more.
I can't believe its taken this long to come up with such an idea.
Tomorrow - "Google has recieved over 64,000 Requests to 'Forget'..."
The Next week - "Google has recieved over 270,000 Requests to 'Forget'..."
Eventually - "Google has forgotten everyone"
Maybe I'm strange, but I spend my days managing websites. Which are essentially virtual newspapers / magazines/ posters/ directories/ whatever. So what if it is a online designed 3d room, its just a online facility people pay for.
I feel a strange separation to my work, because I know in 1000 years from now, no one will ever no I was alive or a person. There won't be an antiques roadshow describing how wonderful/shit my work was, my work wont exist it will be simply gone. Ancient potters, blacksmiths, artist, or architects don't have this problem, part of their work can survive. Something physical something real.
I would love to listen to the future documentaries describing how "clever" we are with our "Internet" and "condoms" and our "iPads". But how simple we were for not realising that we should really have a centralised computer attached to our brains, that can simply kill all the sperm in a man's body before we have sex, by analysing our thoughts and electro-shocking our testicles.
I'm kinda sad that I wont see the future.
I agree with your shortened version
My brain works sideways and I just can't pick an option.
I get the same problem when surveyed about how often I do things:
My brain always goes, well sometimes I do it often, like for a week, and then I'll stop doing it for a month. And if you look at the whole of my life I practically never do it , considering it takes not much time to do, and for a third of my life im sleeping. But for the time when I am doing it I Always do it
No its not. But aren't those transition lenses magic.
I'd like it a lot better if after every update I didn't have to replace all of its shortcuts. Frankly I find that just confusing.
I've never had problems playing anything in itunes and I run it on Windows. I don't particularly like itunes, but I don't hate it. I'm entrenched into using itunes more or less because that is what I thought I needed for audio books. 2 years later it seems to me far to much effort to change to something else. My only real complaint with itunes is the one download policy- buy music and you only have one chance to download it. - that seems the worst of it though. I have read a fair bit of comments saying that itunes is crap. But to me its much like windows vista, yes it has some annoying features, but with some configuring they are all but gone, and with some time you end up used to how it performs.
"Security experts are calling on... ". Zap
Expert Experts are encouraging Security Experts to change their language from "calling on" to "asking". The Expert Experts believe that "calling on" is one way street and "asking" would open a "dialogue". This "dialogue" can help with "discussion" of a "three point plan", allowing possible evolution of the solution to a "two point plan", a "one point plan" or an "item of consideration".
The Expert Experts think that by "calling on" the Security Experts may be ignored. If any Expert is ignored it is often implied they are not Experts which is not a desirable outcome.
YEEEEEAAAAAAAHH!
You haven't read the article either, have you? I'll bet you've never administered an enterprise scale network, too.
I read the article, And it does't mention Turing machines at all.But was talking about your comment and the comment prior with no relation to the article.
No I haven't administered an enterprise scale network. The networks I have administered have not been that large. However whether I have or have not administered an enterprise scale network has zero weight over whether your argument was logical falicy, in this case a strawman (I looked it up). Which it is your argument about a Turing Machine is a strawman:
Straw Man Arguing against a position which you create specifically to be easy to argue against, rather than the position actually held by those who oppose your point of view.
and further more this:
You haven't read the article either, have you? I'll bet you've never administered an enterprise scale network, too.
is Ad Hominem. You are attacking the person and not the argument.
I only object because your authority, being a sys admin and you've read the article. - perhaps you would like to elaborate why you cant do certain things with a GUI. How can simple plebs like me be expected to learn about this when bastions of knowledge like yourself hold back?
As a side track : would you call the consoles on the "Starship Enterprise" a CLI or GUI?
I must say Calvin's best discovery is his thought experiment on the equation 5+6
He examins the problem by taking two planets of size 5 and 6 and colliding them. The collision obliterates planet 5, leaving only 6. Therefore 5+6 = 6
But the thing is Tigers don't need math.
So he can create any machine out of a single cardboard box. What a Nerd! Hobbes can pick up chicks, or rather gets picked up by them, if you know what I mean.
I vote for calvin and hobbes - more specifically hobbes. His ideas when playing calvin ball are excellent.
I agree I enjoy having multiple terminal windows open. CLI in GUI is great. It also means you can watch startrek while having a terminal open and doing work (by work I mean watching startrek until shit hits the fan). To me a CLI is essentially a programming tool that compiles your code and runs it straight away. much like the python can. You have Resources and functions you can run, Its essentially iterative programming at its simplest, which I think is an essential skill these days, all kids should know how to program a computer (at least understand the fundamentals of programming). -- However I can't deny that clicking something is far quicker than typing it. Are there any Operating Systems with no underlying CLI. iOS maybe?
was that a straw man or a red herring, I can't remember, - the point "Everything can be done in a GUI. I don't see why not. We just haven't made that happen yet." is still valid even if a Turing machine isn't an efficient way of doing computing. And if you are implying that an unmade solution(Putting everything into a GUI) its not the best way, I would say that it's too early to tell. - or that perhaps we should put more time into the idea.
The problem with uncertainty principle jokes: the funnier the joke the more uncertain you are of the actual composition, and if you do end up finding the composition of the joke you can't tell how funny it is. Furthermore, what the hell do you do with a dead cat?..
Slashdot is meant to be news for nerds.
Yet most of these comments are basically against a companies idea to make searching faster. The main complaints seems to be:
The first complaint seems to be an argument about what made search engines good when 56K modems were all the rage. Simple meant fast loading times. Now though i don't think that this argument should be the rule of internet we have bigger and better bandwidths, why shouldn't search results be as rich as possible to save you time?
The second complaint is redundant because you can change your preferences to still need to use your loved enter button. I know what you are going to say though " i don't want to change my preferences" To which i say, "You are meant to be a nerd. Changing preferences to suit obscure purposes is what nerds do. Nerd up."
The third complaint is dumb because getting a thumb of broccoli is better than getting a full size page. Its like you've forgotten google has an image search which can produce the same broccoli results, without having to click a preview icon.
It all sounds like no-one wants any progress, things are great now. I used to think the same thing when i was forced to switch from the arrow keys to WSAD when playing games. I was wrong. I'm not saying this is right, but my guess is this won't kill google, In 5 years when google adds another feature to its search, you'll all complain about this as the good old days.
Now all we have to do is create a robot heart.
also Apple stops making ugly device.
Animals can bite, and Animals can kick - Don't tell me they can't say no...
Children can bite, and Children can kick - Hell they can also say no. So is it OK to have sexual relations with a consenting child?No a child is not smart enough to make that decision.
A child of the age of 5 we would probably think of as smarter than a smart dog, or a horse. Does that make them smart enough to consent to sex? No they aren't developed physically yet there sex organs aren't ready.
How about a child of the age of 13 is that child old enough to consent to sex(see Richie Rich)? No. why not? all the criteria i have seen here in this discussion to decied whether you are allowed to have sex says go for it
There is an element to the problem that I'm missing. I'm not sure what it is, but we can't say that aware consent is enough to allow sexual relations between any two beings.
The vegans I know hate that they are happy and animals aren't, and because they can't make the animals happy in any significant way, they punish* themselves so they can feel more happy. I find my brain isn't cleaver enough to process that kind of thought to be happy. I just do things I like to be happy its far simpler
*punish - they don't eat animal products somehow honey is OK to eat. They know bacon and other products taste good, they've eaten it before their enlightenment. They also keep bitching about how expensive it is to be a vegan.
It's hypocrisy no matter how you try and twist and turn it.
In my mind its only hipocrisy if you discard motive, and purpose.
We all complain that Hens are in cages, but never stop to think that without humans that hen would not be alive at all. Further more if chickens(Or any other animal for that matter) were the dominant species on this planet they wouldn't think at all about treating other animals worse or even sending them all to extinction.
The normal counter argument is: we can be better; What by fucking them? two steps forward, six steps back. :P