I'm really not sure what some of these predictions could actually mean. Two in particular stand out
AI doctors are retrodicted for 2001 and are placed singificantly before the development of AI pets. This seems to imply the functions of doctors (diagnosis, prescription and beaucratic juggling) are less complex than the functions of pets (barking, defecating in inappropriate places).
I'm futher confused by the possibility of AI priests hearing confession. This implies that a computer will have what it takes to perform sacremental functions. Since, women lack the ability to perform these functions, the author of the list seems to be assuming that certain interesting devices outside the ordninary realm of AI are on the immediate horizon.
So imagine for a moment some sort of open source training suite. It contains purposely obfuscated code intend as educational exercises for whomever is being trained. Now can this be open sourced?
It seems to me that the answer is clear. This obfuscated code isn't really obfuscated since it carries out its function (education) in a clear manner.
I'm really interested in pursuing robotics as a hobby, and I'd like to start before my son is at an age where I'd be a useless partner (he just turned 4, so I have time.)
Mindstorm seems like an interesting product but I'm wondering how it compares to more hands-on (dare I say, DYI) approaches like the one outlined in Mobile Robots (Jones et. al.)?
Anyone out there have some grounds for comparison?
The standard sorts of arguments concerning the reality of time in the philosophy journals usually reference the work of McTaggart, a turn of the last century scottish philosopher.
Of course, some of these ideas go back to the pre-Socratics, but McTaggarts contrast between tensed and untensed theories of time has had a major influence among philosophers and philosopher-physicists (here I would suggest looking up some of Abner Shimony's work collected in his _Towards a Naturalistic World View_
This book also makes a nice companion to an earlier book of Ceruzzi's title _Reckoners_, while the new book gives a nice picture of the organizations which developed computers as business tools, while _Reckoners_ provides profiles of the people who worked on some of the early projects. The most interesting chapter about Konrad Zuse constructing his computer in his parent's living room out of cast off telephone parts and used movie film.
I lost an awful lot to a serious RPG as a high school (but they gave it all back in college whe I played with a coed group). I also took part in the CCG trend in recent, though it defintely was not the same.
I really miss both the depth of those games and the bouts of wild improvisation (rules were really only suggestions and no victory condition meant that the beauty of play was the only draw.) But these things took so much preparation that life has made there continuation impossible. I really think that this is the fundamental difference between mid to late 80's games and what people seem to be playing today.
Oh, that and "Bard's Tale" while fun, was not even close to real game, while Quake offers a credible alternative.
Illuminati was a satisfying play and the freer-form RPG's destroyed my high school GPA, but there has never been a rush like Car Wars, the simplicity and focus of the rules were incredible.
In this case "natural law" means ethical arguments with no reference to any sort of divine revelation . Its a sort of "empirical" or "real world" form of argument often favoured by defenders of Catholic doctrince because, at least in theory, the arguments are developed in a way that should be acceptable to any reasonable person, as opposed to a believer. So, the definition of natural law doesn't provide much of a foothold in attacking these sorts of doctrines, the real fight has to take the arguments on one at a time (which is often were the real fun begins anyway.)
Slashdot Mirror
I'm really not sure what some of these predictions could actually mean. Two in particular stand out
AI doctors are retrodicted for 2001 and are placed singificantly before the development of AI pets. This seems to imply the functions of doctors (diagnosis, prescription and beaucratic juggling) are less complex than the functions of pets (barking, defecating in inappropriate places).
I'm futher confused by the possibility of AI priests hearing confession. This implies that a computer will have what it takes to perform sacremental functions. Since, women lack the ability to perform these functions, the author of the list seems to be assuming that certain interesting devices outside the ordninary realm of AI are on the immediate horizon.
--Paul
So imagine for a moment some sort of open source training suite. It contains purposely obfuscated code intend as educational exercises for whomever is being trained. Now can this be open sourced?
It seems to me that the answer is clear. This obfuscated code isn't really obfuscated since it carries out its function (education) in a clear manner.
But, can we still call it open source?
I'm really interested in pursuing robotics as a hobby, and I'd like to start before my son is at an age where I'd be a useless partner (he just turned 4, so I have time.)
Mindstorm seems like an interesting product but I'm wondering how it compares to more hands-on (dare I say, DYI) approaches like the one outlined in Mobile Robots (Jones et. al.)?
Anyone out there have some grounds for comparison?
--Paul
The standard sorts of arguments concerning the reality of time in the philosophy journals usually reference the work of McTaggart, a turn of the last century scottish philosopher.
Of course, some of these ideas go back to the pre-Socratics, but McTaggarts contrast between tensed and untensed theories of time has had a major influence among philosophers and philosopher-physicists (here I would suggest looking up some of Abner Shimony's work collected in his _Towards a Naturalistic World View_
--Paul
This book also makes a nice companion to an earlier book of Ceruzzi's title _Reckoners_, while the new book gives a nice picture of the organizations which developed computers as business tools, while _Reckoners_ provides profiles of the people who worked on some of the early projects. The most interesting chapter about Konrad Zuse constructing his computer in his parent's living room out of cast off telephone parts and used movie film.
I lost an awful lot to a serious RPG as a high school (but they gave it all back in college whe I played with a coed group). I also took part in the CCG trend in recent, though it defintely was not the same.
I really miss both the depth of those games and the bouts of wild improvisation (rules were really only suggestions and no victory condition meant that the beauty of play was the only draw.) But these things took so much preparation that life has made there continuation impossible. I really think that this is the fundamental difference between mid to late 80's games and what people seem to be playing today.
Oh, that and "Bard's Tale" while fun, was not even close to real game, while Quake offers a credible alternative.
Paul
Illuminati was a satisfying play and the freer-form RPG's destroyed my high school GPA, but there has never been a rush like Car Wars, the simplicity and focus of the rules were incredible.
yeah, that's where it was it.
In this case "natural law" means ethical arguments with no reference to any sort of divine revelation . Its a sort of "empirical" or "real world" form of argument often favoured by defenders of Catholic doctrince because, at least in theory, the arguments are developed in a way that should be acceptable to any reasonable person, as opposed to a believer. So, the definition of natural law doesn't provide much of a foothold in attacking these sorts of doctrines, the real fight has to take the arguments on one at a time (which is often were the real fun begins anyway.)
--Paul