I'm not entirely sure about that - it's not my field of knowledge:-) but iirc, brains are said to go at about a thousand hertz because that's about the maximum speed at which brain cells can output signals.
Our brain works at about a thousand hertz. But you can't really compare brains and cpu's, brains are very parallel.
And even then, even if you get a zillion-terahertz CPU, it still can't think. It's the software that should do the "thinking". Just as larger brains != more intelligence, faster processors != (more) intelligence.
Would it be simpler to tie it right into our lobe than to use something primitive like a keyboard and mouse? Obviously the technology to do so isn't here, yet
Actually, there is, this has been invented quite some time ago. But you could only get 2chars/minute the last time I heard about it:-)
So an infinite life board can be used as a turing machine.
That's great, but it's a bit hard to implement, let alone compute. This guy has made one that fits on a finite board, and that's still a nice improvement:-)
Turing machines have no memory, they use the tape as a memory. So the tape is the memory. Although I'm sure someone has made one that does have some extra memory, a stack or something.
Iridium, mir, all the same. They go, they stay, they go, they stay, they go, they stay, they go, they stay, they go, they stay, they go, they stay, they go, they stay, they go, they stay, they go, they stay, they go, they stay, they go, they stay, they go, they stay, they go, they stay, they go, they stay, they go, they stay, they go, they stay, they go, they stay, they go, etc etc etc etc etc. Can someone use them for target practicing now or so?
Whatever electronic way to vote you come up with, always make a real time paper copy at the place the votes get recorded, with some matrix printer with chain paper. It doesn't only look cool, it is also readable without electricity.
As noted in another post, you can make your own gravity by spinning things around. If you do it at the right speed you will have exactly the same amount of gravity as you have here on earth. So it's no problem at all.
But if you would live in such a cylinder, you could go to the middle and have zero-gravity fun! (fill in your form of "fun" there;-)
MS doesn't want 3d party software to be compatible
on
Microsoft Cracked
·
· Score: 1
In the MSNBC story:
"Other possible motives include economic espionage, though experts said only a rogue company might knowingly buy stolen software, using it either to improve its own products or make those products more compatible with Microsoft's best-selling operating systems."
So, they admit you can make your software more compatible if you have the source code of Windows? What are they hiding in it?
From the page: This time we don't really think there's anything wrong with our equipment, instead we think the spacecraft is pointing in the wrong direction. As the Earth orbits around the sun, Pioneer 10 needs to be told to reposition its high-gain transmitting antenna so that its signals reach the place where the Earth is today, and not where it was six months ago.
So, if it failed to reposition itself, is there a chance that its signal will be picked up again within a year from now, when the earth moves back into the path of the signals?
but I would never think of playing a game on a laptop computer, as the LCD screens are generally bad, and the video chipsets worse for gaming. I'm typing this on a laptop. It is my main computer, although I have a good desktop computer here. The laptop's screen is fast enough to play any action game you want without problems (I tried, for example, quake, rollcage, star wars e1 racer, and they all work great), and the video chipset, although not the best one available, is good enough (D3D works, etc). Above all, when you use the screen's native resolution, the image is extremely sharp, which is very good when you are doing some work on it for an extended period. If you don't use the native resolution but a smaller one, you either get a black field around the screen, or you can have the image stretched (by hardware). In some occasions this makes the game look even better (no more sharp edges), but it's bad for working. I have seen some laptops that had extremely bad and ugly screens, but that's certanly not the case for every laptop.
Am I correct when I read that you are comparing the 100 watts of a complete chip to the 50 picowatts of one single molecular transistor? In that case, it doesn't make sense:-) To compare fairly you have to multiply it with 25 million or so (dunno exactly how many transistors fit on current chips)
A nonviolent person with a rifle in his hand is not going to hurt you.
But what does that person have a rifle for anyway then?
A violent individual will make it his goal to hurt you with all available weapons
True. Maybe you, maybe someone else. Violence is stupid.
It is mindset, not weaponry, which makes someone a danger to society. If it were to be proven that violent video games increase the likelihood of acquiring a violent mindset (which I rather doubt, however) it would be perfectly reasonable to ban them... while keeping the.22 rifles available.
*if* it were proven, that would be a good reason to take care with those games. But banning won't help. People would get the games anyway, and negative publicity and such would just help them. Just look at the Carmageddon example. (yup, I played it too, and I liked it. But I dont go around getting into cars and driving like a lunatic, killing everyone in sight in real life, while I did in Carmageddon) I think those people who get violent because of the example of computer games, TV, books (yup, those too, read a few of Stephen King, or some police stories on how to commit murder or something) are unstable anyway. And someone unstable can do less damage without a rifle around. It might not be the weapon that kills people, as is said sometimes, but it does help.
As if that would help anything. If someone *wants* to get a game, he'll get it anyway. You can just have someone else buy it for you (you buy it for me, i'll give you a copy). Or better, persuade someone else to buy it and copy it yourself;-) That way, wouldn't this encourage illegal copying? If you can't buy it, and you can copy it from someone, that's an easy choice.
Also, the article states that they only want "store's more than 2,000 outlets nationwide" to prevent children from buying these games. So, you can't buy it at the large stores. But the smaller ones will sell it. Then what's the use? Transferring sales from the large stores to the small ones? Doesn't make sense. It just seems like a half-hearted attempt to make the people that like those kind of ratings think nice about them. They don't really seem to care about selling games to minors.
"We don't know yet how we will address, much less solve, the enormous problems of shielding these components from vibration and radiation, programming, communication, etc.," Smith said. "Even after the first assembler is developed, it will require years, perhaps decades, of lab testing before a commercial product could reach the shelves."
So, don't get too excited about it. It could as well take 25 years before they get this to work, if ever. There have been more "groundbreaking things" like this, and most of them never make it. If they do make it it would be very cool of course.
Wow. Billions of dollars coming streaming down into our atmosphere.
Wait a second there. It's quite a waste, sure. But not in that way. Where do you think those dollars went? Prolly quite a few corps got richer. But this project also gave a lot of people a lot of work, earning them money for themselves and their family. I don't know really much about this project, but with this amount of money they'll prolly did some research on some things too. That research won't come down with the satellites. I often see people assume that when money is spent, it is gone. This might be true for yourself, but not for the thing as a whole. Billons of dollars were lost by some people/compagny's, but also earned by others. And many people get to see a nice, free firework, too (they do take them down when they fly over the dark side of the earth, I hope?:-) So, it's not all that bad. But it's still a pity.
Re:Integration of Keyboard, Mouse, and Voice Recon
on
The Computer of 2010
·
· Score: 2
"Delete all games that I have not played in the last 5 months and then defragment my hard drive."
and all other examples in the parent post aren't really about voice recognition. Sure, you can use voice recognition to get this sentence in the computer, but then it will be just that: a sentence, nothing more. What you really need to make this work is to have the computer understand what the meaning of those sentences is, and that, imho, is way more difficult. Then you can use these kind of commands. And whether you use voice recognition or not is trivial. I'd be just as happy to type such commands in a box somewhere.
Slashdot Mirror
I bet it will survive until next year.
rolu
I'm not entirely sure about that - it's not my field of knowledge :-) but iirc, brains are said to go at about a thousand hertz because that's about the maximum speed at which brain cells can output signals.
Our brain works at about a thousand hertz. But you can't really compare brains and cpu's, brains are very parallel.
And even then, even if you get a zillion-terahertz CPU, it still can't think. It's the software that should do the "thinking". Just as larger brains != more intelligence, faster processors != (more) intelligence.
Would it be simpler to tie it right into our lobe than to use something primitive like a keyboard and mouse? Obviously the technology to do so isn't here, yet
Actually, there is, this has been invented quite some time ago. But you could only get 2chars/minute the last time I heard about it :-)
Do it yourself, be around when needed. Take your own responsiblility, software just can't do that now.
So, it's a solution again? And what problems come with it, then?
That's great, but it's a bit hard to implement, let alone compute. This guy has made one that fits on a finite board, and that's still a nice improvement :-)
Turing machines have no memory, they use the tape as a memory. So the tape is the memory. Although I'm sure someone has made one that does have some extra memory, a stack or something.
Iridium, mir, all the same. They go, they stay, they go, they stay, they go, they stay, they go, they stay, they go, they stay, they go, they stay, they go, they stay, they go, they stay, they go, they stay, they go, they stay, they go, they stay, they go, they stay, they go, they stay, they go, they stay, they go, they stay, they go, they stay, they go, they stay, they go, etc etc etc etc etc. Can someone use them for target practicing now or so?
Didn't I hear something like this before, about some Seti card...?
Why top level domains anyway? They serve no purpose as they are abused all the time. Just throw them out.
The same law that prevents you from putting the mp3's on the server in the first place? :-)
Whatever electronic way to vote you come up with, always make a real time paper copy at the place the votes get recorded, with some matrix printer with chain paper. It doesn't only look cool, it is also readable without electricity.
Shoot again, of course.
As noted in another post, you can make your own gravity by spinning things around. If you do it at the right speed you will have exactly the same amount of gravity as you have here on earth. So it's no problem at all.
But if you would live in such a cylinder, you could go to the middle and have zero-gravity fun! (fill in your form of "fun" there ;-)
"Other possible motives include economic espionage, though experts said only a rogue company might knowingly buy stolen software, using it either to improve its own products or make those products more compatible with Microsoft's best-selling operating systems."
So, they admit you can make your software more compatible if you have the source code of Windows? What are they hiding in it?
So, if it failed to reposition itself, is there a chance that its signal will be picked up again within a year from now, when the earth moves back into the path of the signals?
but I would never think of playing a game on a laptop computer, as the LCD screens are generally bad, and the video chipsets worse for gaming.
I'm typing this on a laptop. It is my main computer, although I have a good desktop computer here. The laptop's screen is fast enough to play any action game you want without problems (I tried, for example, quake, rollcage, star wars e1 racer, and they all work great), and the video chipset, although not the best one available, is good enough (D3D works, etc). Above all, when you use the screen's native resolution, the image is extremely sharp, which is very good when you are doing some work on it for an extended period. If you don't use the native resolution but a smaller one, you either get a black field around the screen, or you can have the image stretched (by hardware). In some occasions this makes the game look even better (no more sharp edges), but it's bad for working. I have seen some laptops that had extremely bad and ugly screens, but that's certanly not the case for every laptop.
Am I correct when I read that you are comparing the 100 watts of a complete chip to the 50 picowatts of one single molecular transistor? In that case, it doesn't make sense :-) To compare fairly you have to multiply it with 25 million or so (dunno exactly how many transistors fit on current chips)
You could move the heat away into a bucket of water and make coffee or tea with it, on a safe distance from your computer.
But what does that person have a rifle for anyway then?
A violent individual will make it his goal to hurt you with all available weapons
True. Maybe you, maybe someone else. Violence is stupid.
It is mindset, not weaponry, which makes someone a danger to society. If it were to be proven that violent video games increase the likelihood of acquiring a violent mindset (which I rather doubt, however) it would be perfectly reasonable to ban them... while keeping the .22 rifles available.
*if* it were proven, that would be a good reason to take care with those games. But banning won't help. People would get the games anyway, and negative publicity and such would just help them. Just look at the Carmageddon example. (yup, I played it too, and I liked it. But I dont go around getting into cars and driving like a lunatic, killing everyone in sight in real life, while I did in Carmageddon) I think those people who get violent because of the example of computer games, TV, books (yup, those too, read a few of Stephen King, or some police stories on how to commit murder or something) are unstable anyway. And someone unstable can do less damage without a rifle around. It might not be the weapon that kills people, as is said sometimes, but it does help.
Also, the article states that they only want "store's more than 2,000 outlets nationwide" to prevent children from buying these games. So, you can't buy it at the large stores. But the smaller ones will sell it. Then what's the use? Transferring sales from the large stores to the small ones? Doesn't make sense. It just seems like a half-hearted attempt to make the people that like those kind of ratings think nice about them. They don't really seem to care about selling games to minors.
So, don't get too excited about it. It could as well take 25 years before they get this to work, if ever. There have been more "groundbreaking things" like this, and most of them never make it. If they do make it it would be very cool of course.
Wait a second there. It's quite a waste, sure. But not in that way. Where do you think those dollars went? Prolly quite a few corps got richer. But this project also gave a lot of people a lot of work, earning them money for themselves and their family. I don't know really much about this project, but with this amount of money they'll prolly did some research on some things too. That research won't come down with the satellites. I often see people assume that when money is spent, it is gone. This might be true for yourself, but not for the thing as a whole. Billons of dollars were lost by some people/compagny's, but also earned by others. And many people get to see a nice, free firework, too (they do take them down when they fly over the dark side of the earth, I hope? :-) So, it's not all that bad. But it's still a pity.
"Delete all games that I have not played in the last 5 months and then defragment my hard drive." and all other examples in the parent post aren't really about voice recognition. Sure, you can use voice recognition to get this sentence in the computer, but then it will be just that: a sentence, nothing more. What you really need to make this work is to have the computer understand what the meaning of those sentences is, and that, imho, is way more difficult. Then you can use these kind of commands. And whether you use voice recognition or not is trivial. I'd be just as happy to type such commands in a box somewhere.