And why is "real" good or desireable? As someone uptopic pointed, the production process puts a great deal of effort into making sure the finished product *doesn't* sound "real".
Patents dont encourage innovation. The only make the first person to file it rich.
The US doesn't award patents based on who is first to file. In cases of disputed patents, the patent is awarded to the first person to have invented it.
I am not even sure if Edison really was the inventor of the lightbulb afair a russian was first but did not patent it!
It is universally acknowledged that Edison did not invent the light bulb. What he did was make it practical by devising a filament that lasted more than a few hours before burning out.
The way Asimov wrote it, less advanced robots weren't smart enough to see the subtler "harms". More advanced ones could weigh courses of action to take the one that would inflict the least amount of harm possible. Although deadlock and burnout of the positronic brain could and did happen.
You know nothing about the book. The movie has nothing to do with book. At all. The script was in fact written *before* they decided it was going to be an "adaptation" of I.Robot. Isaac Asimov's grave must've reached 5,000 RPM.
Its not "practically impossible" to find the best solution. It is quite possible. The issue is that finding the optimal solution takes O(2^n), where n is the number of objects to be packed. So, for any large value of n, the calculation will take a prohibitively long time, but it will terminate.
So they're not practical to solve--in other words, practically impossible.
This is in contrast to undecidable problems, which really are "practically impossible" to solve.
That would be a case of *literally* impossible to solve. Which means that they're practically impossible as well, of course.
This is an updated version of the bland old "we had no calculators in our day".
Which, as was pointed out elsewhere in this thread, is an updated version of "we had no writing in our day." Surely we are crippled as a culture now that we no longer nurture the ability to memorize epics thousands of lines long.
I read your post. And he has an excellent point. Tell me how you prevent me and ten friends from putting up "Hello, World" Versions 1 through 20 on Sourceforge to get the credit. I have a large, verifiable team, and I have a release history. Now gimme my money.
Treason against the United States, shall consist only in levying war against them, or in adhering to their enemies, giving them aid and comfort. No person shall be convicted of treason unless on the testimony of two witnesses to the same overt act, or on confession in open court.
Roll it up, stick it under my arm, and carry it to where I need it. Yeah, that sounds pretty handy.
AND touch-sensitive? We have non-projector wall-monitors (some rear-projected, some plasma screens) that we control with a mouse.
Control with a mouse. Not draw with a mouse. I've given whiteboard talks, sketching out what I'm talking about. And I'm here to tell you you CANNOT give a whiteboard talk by trying to sketch with a mouse.
Not one person using it has said, "You know, this is just unacceptable. This has to be flexible and touch-sensitive in order for me to do my job."
Not one person using standard accounting ledgers said, "You know, this is just unacceptable. This has to be able to do arithmetic on its own for me to do my job." Then they got to see computer spreadsheets.
If he had thought he could make money through making prequels or sequels for some of his popular plays, say Young Hamlet or How We Miss Caesar, he would have, and some of them would have been excellent.
He did. And he did. Henry IV Part 2 was basically a tacked-on sequel to wildly popular Henry IV Part 1, where he reversed all the character development of Prince Henry (the future Henry V) to do it all over again. And then he did The Merry Wives of Windsor to bring Falstaff back for yet another encore.
Slashdot Mirror
Whew! For a minute, I thought you wanted to tax me Lucky Charms.
And why is "real" good or desireable? As someone uptopic pointed, the production process puts a great deal of effort into making sure the finished product *doesn't* sound "real".
The US doesn't award patents based on who is first to file. In cases of disputed patents, the patent is awarded to the first person to have invented it.
It is universally acknowledged that Edison did not invent the light bulb. What he did was make it practical by devising a filament that lasted more than a few hours before burning out.
...we can't tell her apart from a computer over a teletype link?
No, wait...
Now I can listen to my Nobuo Uematsu collection!
The way Asimov wrote it, less advanced robots weren't smart enough to see the subtler "harms". More advanced ones could weigh courses of action to take the one that would inflict the least amount of harm possible. Although deadlock and burnout of the positronic brain could and did happen.
You know nothing about the book. The movie has nothing to do with book. At all. The script was in fact written *before* they decided it was going to be an "adaptation" of I.Robot. Isaac Asimov's grave must've reached 5,000 RPM.
"a story"? About HALF the stories specifically talk about emotional harm!
So they're not practical to solve--in other words, practically impossible.
That would be a case of *literally* impossible to solve. Which means that they're practically impossible as well, of course.
I never knew the Moon was born in 1908! I wish my grandmother was still alive--I'd ask her what it was like...
Unintelligent--but still perfectly useful. The very first result returned tells you the answer.
Which, as was pointed out elsewhere in this thread, is an updated version of "we had no writing in our day." Surely we are crippled as a culture now that we no longer nurture the ability to memorize epics thousands of lines long.
...ah, you mean this one?
Who cares what the police did in the nineteenth century?
I read your post. And he has an excellent point. Tell me how you prevent me and ten friends from putting up "Hello, World" Versions 1 through 20 on Sourceforge to get the credit. I have a large, verifiable team, and I have a release history. Now gimme my money.
And by the time we get Moonlight 2.0, Silverlight will be 3.0. You'd almost think they were doing it on purpose...
Still not treason. Treason is not just "doing stuff that hurts the US."
Constitution, Article III, Section 3:
Treason against the United States, shall consist only in levying war against them, or in adhering to their enemies, giving them aid and comfort. No person shall be convicted of treason unless on the testimony of two witnesses to the same overt act, or on confession in open court.
That's how this is not treason.
Roll it up, stick it under my arm, and carry it to where I need it. Yeah, that sounds pretty handy.
Control with a mouse. Not draw with a mouse. I've given whiteboard talks, sketching out what I'm talking about. And I'm here to tell you you CANNOT give a whiteboard talk by trying to sketch with a mouse.
Not one person using standard accounting ledgers said, "You know, this is just unacceptable. This has to be able to do arithmetic on its own for me to do my job." Then they got to see computer spreadsheets.
How can you have a monopoly on out-of-copyright books?
He did. And he did. Henry IV Part 2 was basically a tacked-on sequel to wildly popular Henry IV Part 1, where he reversed all the character development of Prince Henry (the future Henry V) to do it all over again. And then he did The Merry Wives of Windsor to bring Falstaff back for yet another encore.
Are you pondering what I'm pondering?
Well, he has, hasn't he? At least if it flies, he has.
...but at least *their* Skycar isn't slashdotted...