I can't wait to play this as yet undeveloped game. The procedurally generated splashing noises should greatly enhance gameplay... uh, wait can't they just make fun games that don't require a cluster worth of processing just to procedurally simulate the sounds of fluids?
Sadly, God Almighty did not inspire man to invent the camera until about 150 years ago, and by that time all the Dinosaurs had been eradicated for being unrepentant sinners, as they so righteously deserved.
I'd like to see a Goo/Linux distro. In my experience as a user of several of their products, google really does a good job with user interfaces. I bet if they put some effort into a google desktop environment, it'd be pretty darn good.
It could be related to Android, or not, whatever makes sense.
The concept of satanic hackers seems over the top -- the threat just doesn't sound real enough. However, the threat of spammers relaying porn spam through their PCs is plausible enough to motivate a lot of religious users. If porn spam isn't distasteful enough, then ask "what if it's rape porn? kiddie porn?" That should do the trick.
You're quite right, but that was supposed to be the +1Funny portion of the post. I guess I was too subtle:)
The answer to this is to put the "personal" computer into context. PCs really stopped being personal computers the moment the availability of internet access became the norm. They should be called "social" computers now, but most people don't think of them that way.
How you put the "social" computer into context varies from person to person. I have a family member who I support who knows little about how computers work, and barely knows how to use one. He happens to be very politically minded, in a right-wing hardcore military patriot kind of way. I forward him some info about the Chinese hacking into US military and government networks and "cyber warfare" and that woke him up. Now he thinks it's his patriotic duty to keep his antivirus updated, and not open email attachments. I have very few problems from him these days, and the last few have been due to his security software being *too* tight. He thinks any problem he has with the computer could be a virus, as opposed to a bug or human error, or whatever, but he has gained enough sense of paranoia that he's made his usage habits a lot safer than they were when he was first going online.
You just have to find the right button to press (in the person, not on the computer) and then the rest will follow naturally because they finally care. If the user's a businessman, play up financial scammers and anarchist punk hackers. If the user's religious, invent satanic hackers. If the user's a leftist, talk about The Man and government spooks. If they're a concerned parent type, talk about child predators.
I can design a plastic coat hanger with a textured surface to keep clothes from slipping off, but if I want it to also be strong enough to support a 747, I don't think I could design in that feature, so ergo by your definition I can't really design ANYTHING.
More like, I disagree that you can call breeding "intelligent design" on the basis that you're merely flipping bits in a config file, not building something from scratch with whatever arbitrary features that you design into the system. Breeding isn't intelligent design, it's breeding. There are "designer breeds", and granted, it takes some intelligence to be able to breed a dog with the traits you desire. But it's still not the same thing as what "Intelligent Design" advocates are talking about when they are talking about "Intelligent Design".
I didn't say that you couldn't guide a dog breed's development to what you envision. In fact, that's exactly what I said people DO with dog breeding. You start with something close to what you want, and with some knowledge of genetics you breed for the trait you desire. What I was talking about with respect to chance was way long ago before people discovered the science of genetics. At some point someone noticed that a particular family line of dogs had especially good size, or good nose, or intelligence, so they favored that line, and its descendants developed those traits increasingly over time. The initial quality that was selected for was the "chance". Someone got a lucky dog with exceptional genes and it did well, and not at all by chance it was chosen as the stud dog for future generations.
Go *breed* me a flying dog with a venemous stinger on its tail, and attractive facial horns, and we'll talk about how close human breeding is to so-called intelligent design.
Just remember if you argue that dog breeds are different species, especially the case of the mastiff and chihuahua, or the teacup yorkie and newfoundland, these different species are verifiably the result of intelligent design. Selection was involved, but not natural selection.
Human intelligence evolved naturally through natural selection. It is natural for humans to apply their intelligence, as this gives them survival benefits in the wild.
As well, to say that humans "designed" the evolutionary traits of various breeds of dogs is a bit of a stretch. It's more accurate to say that humans selected the most desirable traits and bred for them. You cross-breed until something unexpected happens, and if it's desirable, you figure out how to repeat the unexpected result, until it breeds true. This isn't "design" per se. We can make a dog with a particular size or type of coat, but if I wanted to breed a dog with a shell or two heads or horns, I don't think I could "design in" these features.
other men will consider his life worth less than even the smallest dog.
Well, speaking as a misanthropic dog lover, the lives of other men *are* worth less than the smallest dog. Dogs are so much better at people, it's not even close.
Is it just me, or does the summary read like the start of a legend that serves as prelude to an epic adventure?
"One hundred million years ago a termite was wounded and its abdomen split open. The resin of a pine tree slowly enveloped its body and the contents of its gut. In what is now the Hukawng Valley in Myanmar, the resin fossilized and was buried until it was chipped out of an amber mine.
I want to go on a quest to this "Myanmar" place and find the termite amber and throw it into the nearest volcano before the Evil One's minions get their hands on it.
The time you invest in the learning curve to get up to speed with Ubuntu should be recouped down the road. Maintaining Windows systems to be secure and stable requires a lot of my time.
If all applications are on a server -- someone else's server -- it doesn't bode too well for my freedom. This is a fine model for a lightweight system, such as a thin client or terminal, but I think these will complement the personal computer rather than supplant it, and will only do so to the extent that bandwidth and ubiquity permit. Emerging devices like netbooks and smartphones do seem to point toward this model gaining in popularity in coming yearss, but I think a lot of people will still find having code that executes locally, and which they can own and control, to be valuable -- too valuable to discard entirely.
The "Beta" in Google's case is very much a marketing issue as much as it is a technical issue.
I thought about this recently, and it occurred to me that maybe the "perpetual beta" for the free Gmail service is probably also in part due to Google needing a large pool of beta users so that when they sell their Gmail product to organizations who want an outsourced email solution, they can deliver a better product.
Google gives away free email to everyone; google gets free beta testers in return, so google can sell a better product to corporations. Makes a lot of sense when you look at it this way. I don't expect the free, public Gmail service to ever leave beta. We'll always be testing it.
Slashdot Mirror
I just finished watching every episode of that show, and thought I was done. You mean to tell me there's going to be MOAR?
Oh really? What fraction of A-rod's salary is the top coder in China being paid?
Done in one.
I thought the problem was with two.
...to automatically purge their logs.
Super, now all the insurance company should need to do is establish that God exists.
And if they can do that, then isn't the entire Universe an Act of God?
What do we pay insurance for, then?
...should be ct.hulu.com
ct = content toll.
I can't wait to play this as yet undeveloped game. The procedurally generated splashing noises should greatly enhance gameplay... uh, wait can't they just make fun games that don't require a cluster worth of processing just to procedurally simulate the sounds of fluids?
Sadly, God Almighty did not inspire man to invent the camera until about 150 years ago, and by that time all the Dinosaurs had been eradicated for being unrepentant sinners, as they so righteously deserved.
I'd like to see a Goo/Linux distro. In my experience as a user of several of their products, google really does a good job with user interfaces. I bet if they put some effort into a google desktop environment, it'd be pretty darn good.
It could be related to Android, or not, whatever makes sense.
If the user's religious, invent satanic hackers.
The concept of satanic hackers seems over the top -- the threat just doesn't sound real enough. However, the threat of spammers relaying porn spam through their PCs is plausible enough to motivate a lot of religious users. If porn spam isn't distasteful enough, then ask "what if it's rape porn? kiddie porn?" That should do the trick.
You're quite right, but that was supposed to be the +1Funny portion of the post. I guess I was too subtle:)
The answer to this is to put the "personal" computer into context. PCs really stopped being personal computers the moment the availability of internet access became the norm. They should be called "social" computers now, but most people don't think of them that way.
How you put the "social" computer into context varies from person to person. I have a family member who I support who knows little about how computers work, and barely knows how to use one. He happens to be very politically minded, in a right-wing hardcore military patriot kind of way. I forward him some info about the Chinese hacking into US military and government networks and "cyber warfare" and that woke him up. Now he thinks it's his patriotic duty to keep his antivirus updated, and not open email attachments. I have very few problems from him these days, and the last few have been due to his security software being *too* tight. He thinks any problem he has with the computer could be a virus, as opposed to a bug or human error, or whatever, but he has gained enough sense of paranoia that he's made his usage habits a lot safer than they were when he was first going online.
You just have to find the right button to press (in the person, not on the computer) and then the rest will follow naturally because they finally care. If the user's a businessman, play up financial scammers and anarchist punk hackers. If the user's religious, invent satanic hackers. If the user's a leftist, talk about The Man and government spooks. If they're a concerned parent type, talk about child predators.
Also, I will never forget that day he spoke in class. He seemed so... harmless.
What's its AC and THAC0? :)
And big: not possible to mount on a Taepodong-2
Although, mounted on bigger, American dongs, it works just fine.
I can design a plastic coat hanger with a textured surface to keep clothes from slipping off, but if I want it to also be strong enough to support a 747, I don't think I could design in that feature, so ergo by your definition I can't really design ANYTHING.
More like, I disagree that you can call breeding "intelligent design" on the basis that you're merely flipping bits in a config file, not building something from scratch with whatever arbitrary features that you design into the system. Breeding isn't intelligent design, it's breeding. There are "designer breeds", and granted, it takes some intelligence to be able to breed a dog with the traits you desire. But it's still not the same thing as what "Intelligent Design" advocates are talking about when they are talking about "Intelligent Design".
I didn't say that you couldn't guide a dog breed's development to what you envision. In fact, that's exactly what I said people DO with dog breeding. You start with something close to what you want, and with some knowledge of genetics you breed for the trait you desire. What I was talking about with respect to chance was way long ago before people discovered the science of genetics. At some point someone noticed that a particular family line of dogs had especially good size, or good nose, or intelligence, so they favored that line, and its descendants developed those traits increasingly over time. The initial quality that was selected for was the "chance". Someone got a lucky dog with exceptional genes and it did well, and not at all by chance it was chosen as the stud dog for future generations.
Go *breed* me a flying dog with a venemous stinger on its tail, and attractive facial horns, and we'll talk about how close human breeding is to so-called intelligent design.
Just remember if you argue that dog breeds are different species, especially the case of the mastiff and chihuahua, or the teacup yorkie and newfoundland, these different species are verifiably the result of intelligent design. Selection was involved, but not natural selection.
Human intelligence evolved naturally through natural selection. It is natural for humans to apply their intelligence, as this gives them survival benefits in the wild.
As well, to say that humans "designed" the evolutionary traits of various breeds of dogs is a bit of a stretch. It's more accurate to say that humans selected the most desirable traits and bred for them. You cross-breed until something unexpected happens, and if it's desirable, you figure out how to repeat the unexpected result, until it breeds true. This isn't "design" per se. We can make a dog with a particular size or type of coat, but if I wanted to breed a dog with a shell or two heads or horns, I don't think I could "design in" these features.
other men will consider his life worth less than even the smallest dog.
Well, speaking as a misanthropic dog lover, the lives of other men *are* worth less than the smallest dog. Dogs are so much better at people, it's not even close.
Nostalgia didn't exist back then. It had to have been something else.
Is it just me, or does the summary read like the start of a legend that serves as prelude to an epic adventure?
I want to go on a quest to this "Myanmar" place and find the termite amber and throw it into the nearest volcano before the Evil One's minions get their hands on it.
Maybe the original cast could be the ghosts.
Besides, Ghostbusters isn't really an action film. It's a comedy with some effects.
"my time isn't free"
The time you invest in the learning curve to get up to speed with Ubuntu should be recouped down the road. Maintaining Windows systems to be secure and stable requires a lot of my time.
If all applications are on a server -- someone else's server -- it doesn't bode too well for my freedom. This is a fine model for a lightweight system, such as a thin client or terminal, but I think these will complement the personal computer rather than supplant it, and will only do so to the extent that bandwidth and ubiquity permit. Emerging devices like netbooks and smartphones do seem to point toward this model gaining in popularity in coming yearss, but I think a lot of people will still find having code that executes locally, and which they can own and control, to be valuable -- too valuable to discard entirely.
The "Beta" in Google's case is very much a marketing issue as much as it is a technical issue.
I thought about this recently, and it occurred to me that maybe the "perpetual beta" for the free Gmail service is probably also in part due to Google needing a large pool of beta users so that when they sell their Gmail product to organizations who want an outsourced email solution, they can deliver a better product.
Google gives away free email to everyone; google gets free beta testers in return, so google can sell a better product to corporations. Makes a lot of sense when you look at it this way. I don't expect the free, public Gmail service to ever leave beta. We'll always be testing it.
Micosoft Wang.