The internet is how you reach the people and sites at the other end of each of these interactions. What they're saying in this article is that the beauty of the internet is that it puts you in direct contact with four Palestinians, disadvantaged global youth, etc., and allows you to use the connection for whatever interaction you choose. You may feel like your interaction with the other ends is what the internet is, but that's just because the internet is so transparent that you think that the computers across the internet from you are the internet itself.
The internet is not a tool. It's how you hold a tool. That's why it can enable you to use millions of different tools.
That's because there are complete copies of the script at both ends. So long as Starfleet's responses are completely predictable, they can travel infinitely fast. If someone is slightly unpredictable... however... they have a short... lag... in their communications... due to the information... in the signal.
Since that may not work, because they might actually delegate non-existant domains to themselves, people should be ready to ignore all records that point to IPs that reverse-resolve to a certain domain (so that, if they round-robin the IP address, you don't have to change things, and so that the IP address doesn't get killed forever). Sure, that cuts off anyone actually hosted by VeriSign, but they should know better, and could cut off VeriSign itself, but they really should know better. If a big ISP did this, VeriSign would probably take notice.
Well, they also have to be past the uncanny valley. If they just made robots close to realistic, and ended up in that area, people would go nuts left and right. Imagine if, when checking in at the airport, you suddenly realized that the person behind the counter was a zombie, and, in fact, there are a dozen identical zombies around. Even if you know what's going on, you won't be able to shake the feeling that you're in a horror movie.
If they built robots in actual human corpses, people would be horrified. If they built robots in bodies that are indistinguishable from human corpses, people wouldn't be able to tell. In order for people to not freak out, they have to think either that the things are real live people or that there isn't a human body involved.
Even aside from this sort of perception, I think people would be more disturbed to interact with an intellectually lacking individual, particularly one who additionally does not act quite human. Even actual humans with autism or Tourette's tend to disturb people who aren't used to them.
Okay, we've observed the universe, and decided that it must have a certain amount of stuff in it, because of how things move. But we also noticed that we don't see nearly that much stuff in the universe. So, rather than rejecting either observation (or the calculations based on it), scientists have made up "Dark Matter" to refer to whatever it is that makes up the difference. There are some theories as to what "Dark Matter" is, but it's hard to prove such a theory, because the stuff is obviously hard to detect.
Imagine shaking a sealed box. You can't see the inside of the box, but you can see the outside and you can feel the resistance the box has to moving. Your view of the outside makes you expect it to be light, but it feels heavy. You therefore theorize that there's something heavy inside that you can't see.
This article discusses two ideas. The first is that we might have overlooked a different reason the universe might move the way it does; the reason the box feels heavy might be that it's giving you an electric shock which weakens your arm. The second is that we might have underestimated the visible mass of the universe; the reason the box looks light is because it's actually metal and not plastic.
Essentially, these are thoeries about what dark matter is: that dark matter is the "bonus" mass some things seem to have by doing a certain thing; or that dark matter is actually normal matter that we weren't looking at. In any case, since "Dark Matter" is the difference between two observations, it can't fail to exist. But, if either of these papers is right, it could fail to be matter of a special, dark, sort.
Depending on how it is configured, it might actually prevent outgoing connections on port 25 from programs not configured by the installer as mail programs and prevent users from modifying mail programs.
More to the point, it probably only has mail programs which make it clear that the user is arranging to download and run software from an untrusted source, as opposed to merely viewing something.
It's still about 50 years too early to teach students the rules of the English language, because they haven't been discovered yet. Sure, there are some preliminary ideas as to what some of them might be, but there are a number of areas of active research. Of course, kids are still taught in school a number of things about the English language which have been disproved decades ago.
Fluency in language is something that can only really be taught by example, because the exact rules (if there are even rules which are exact) are not known, and, even if they were, a speaker could not consciously apply them in any sort of timely fashion. Furthermore, students should learn a number of variations on English, because spoken and written English aren't the same (and IM is really more like transcribed spoken English), and the sentence constructions which are appropriate in an eyewitness account of an event and those which are appropriate in a love letter are quite different. For that matter, the grammar which is considered appropriate for academic papers changes about once a decade, as people trying to follow the accepted style become more and more extreme, to the point where the papers become incomprehensible and a new style is proposed to combat the flaws in the old one.
As a particular suggestion along these lines, geeks tend not to pay much attention to the ergonomics of their computers. It is pretty likely that you could get him something cheap that he'd never think to get that would substantially improve how he feels after a long coding session. Good candidates include lighting, comfortable indoor footwear, and a good chair.
You can also generally find better keyboards and mice, but you'll want to have him try a bunch and pick his favorite, because different ones feel better for different people.
Incidentally, the catalyst in this case, titanium dioxide, is, in fact, the white pigment in paint. The novel aspect here, as far as I can tell, is actually the silicon-base polymer that gets the NOx gas to the catalyst and the nitric acid to the calcium carbonate efficiently. There's little to worry about with the primary reaction, at least, because we've been painting things white for a long time now.
Re:This is a good sign
on
Review: KDE 3.2
·
· Score: 5, Funny
They're just trying to demonstrate that slashdot can deliver as good a slashdotting as google can.
I think Google normally has the logo link to a page which explains the logo. In this case, it linked to a search page without any information but with links, so people were actually still wondering about the logo and went to pages on small servers. I personally found it odd that the logo containing pictures linked to a search for pictures, rather than something informative (like why Feb 3rd).
Google can't become the standard for websites destruction, because it's already the standard for searching. People will never accept a verb that means "to search" as well as "to overwhelm by linking". On the other hand, google could deliver powerful slashdottings to sites of their choice.
Good thing it would be instantly wiped out by the inhospitable Earth conditions. Any life on Mars would be adapted to the Martian environment and extremely ill-suited to other conditions. It would be contending with significant differences in pressure, temperature, air content, and gravity just being on Earth, let alone trying to live in the human body. Sure, life can adapt to an extreme range of conditions. But a bacterium that could overwhelm Earth is not going to evolve on Mars.
The problem really comes from WYSIWYG computer programs, and the idea that it's remotely sane to show text on the screen at the same size that you would print it. If you print a document at 72 DPI and hold it at arm's length, you won't be able to read it at all with 10 or 12 point fonts. If you want to avoid driving you users crazy, you have to display the documents magnified, both to deal with the lower resolution and to deal with the distance from the screen. This means that higher resolution screens can also avoid magnifying the text as much.
For user interface text, it doesn't make any sense to choose fonts by either point size or pixel size; using a higher resolution on the same monitor, you'll want a smaller point size but a larger pixel size, since you can read smaller text if it's clearer, but not text which is smaller by the same factor. Furthermore, using point size will confuse people who are looking at a magnified image of a 12-point document intended for print, because your 12-point unmagnified interface will have smaller text than the 12-point magnified document.
To be more specific, "user[:password]@" *is* part of the official URI spec (both the one you cite and the RFC), but the "http" schema doesn't include it (again in both specs). The RFC actually explicitly states "No user name or password is allowed." The RFCs for both versions of HTTP exclude username and password as well.
So the correct answer is that "[username[:password]@]host[:port]" is part of URIs, but a "http:" URL is invalid if it includes either a username or a password. (On the other hand, "mailto:" is invalid without a username.)
So, in a very unusual turn of events, IE has become the first browser to conform to a particular specification, by making a non-standard change that happens to fit a bit of the specification that nobody who's written a browser actually read correctly. Makes you wonder if they looked at the spec to see if anyone was likely to care.
The old kernel had a lot of room for improvement on the systems they tested; but that's primarily due to the fact that the systems are substantially newer than the 2.4 series. A 2 GB dual Xeon system running 2.4 isn't going to use the processors efficiently (hyperthreading, imprecise locks), and isn't going to deal with the memory effectively. It was in part to take advantage of the availablity of such systems that the changes for 2.6 were made.
New conditions require new optimizations and new designs; a good program optimized for a set of inputs which are common at one time may be really inefficient at handling inputs that become common later. Sure, you can make a program that's good for both sorts of input, but it doesn't make sense to try to do so until someone actually has such an input to test with.
On older hardware, it isn't noticably better. But that's just because it was already fine on such hardware. For such hardware, the main interesting thing is that the CPU scheduler does a better job of recognizing tasks which need a bit of processor time at precise intervals, so that you can play audio and video without skips while under more total load.
It should also help with the ~5ms delay when you interact with the system, so that it "feels better", regardless of the actual system speed.
But these aren't things that are easy to benchmark, anyway. (At least, unless you're writing code to poll a sensor at precise intervals)
I think the "her fate is tied to the ring" thing is BS in the movie, at least so far as anyone's fate is not tied to the ring. But it's one of the things Elrond is saying to try to talk her and Aragorn out of the whole thing, because his parents did the same thing and it really sucked for them in the end. So you can't really take what he says at face value. For that matter, she's not going to go into the West at the end of the Third Age, which condemns her to a fate that Elrond considers terrible (but Arwen and non-elves don't).
Sure, someone could turn it off if they were there. Then they'd freeze to death when it actually did get cold. For that matter, NASA could probably do that now, from Earth.
Having somebody there would be useful if they had a spare part to install. It only makes sense for a manned mission to go to Mars after there's a reasonable amount of supplies already there. A long-lasting power source is one piece of that, but there are plenty of others. Also, before we can just "use nuclear power", someone will have to design a power plant that will reliably survive EDL and produce a significant amount of power afterwards. Playing around with rovers is giving NASA (and humanity) the experience necessary to supply a crew and get the crew there safely.
As it turns out, the power consumption necessary to use wireless is more than the power consumption necessary to do most computations locally. Sure, you could offload all your computations to a supercomputer, but then you'd need a heavy battery; it's lighter to just put the supercomputer and battery on you. This gets more and more true over time, because the energy needed to send a signal will always be the same, but processors get more efficient over time. The only reason to connect to the internet is to get data that you don't have locally.
I think the social stigma is due to the fact that people sometimes don't have their memory augmentation handy. People's cell phones break, or the batteries run out, or they lose them, or they replace them, and suddenly they don't know anything anymore. If someone were to always have their cell phone handy, they wouldn't think to tell you that they need it to remember your number; in fact, they wouldn't even know.
It is three syllables. It's also spelled "Schoen" (as in the username in the link), although it's pronounced the way you'd expect "Shoen" to be pronounced.
Syllabas tres est. "Schoen", etiam, scribitur (ut in nomine in vinculo). Verbum, tamen, dicitur quod exspectes "Shoen" dici.
They changes the APIs periodically, as needed to make the kernel work. They do plenty to help companies by documenting each version extensively and publishing the source, so that the companies can see what's actually going on. For 2.5/2.6, the editor of LWN wrote a complete guide to how to write drivers for the new version. Most of the changes to the API are actually there to make the API simpler, easier to use right, and harder to mess up.
Everything that makes it easy to write good open source Linux drivers also makes it easy to write good binary-only Linux drivers, with the exception of being able to modify an existing driver to make the new one. NVidia doesn't have any trouble keeping up with the kernel API.
Really, most companies don't have much research in their drivers; their work does into their hardware, which means that their drivers are pretty often buggy, but could be made open source without revealing much.
The customer doesn't generally have any access to the OS at all. In fact, the programming interface to the Linux phones is supposed to be Java ME. They're mainly interested in using Linux because it makes a good JVM.
It's possible that most Linux phones won't even have a shell, command-line-type programs, init, or/etc. The kernel doesn't dictate policy, so it's quite possible to have a very different userspace under Linux. There's nothing saying that a Linux phone would have to be a GNU/Linux phone, and it could actually make sense to make the distinction.
Slashdot Mirror
The internet is how you reach the people and sites at the other end of each of these interactions. What they're saying in this article is that the beauty of the internet is that it puts you in direct contact with four Palestinians, disadvantaged global youth, etc., and allows you to use the connection for whatever interaction you choose. You may feel like your interaction with the other ends is what the internet is, but that's just because the internet is so transparent that you think that the computers across the internet from you are the internet itself.
The internet is not a tool. It's how you hold a tool. That's why it can enable you to use millions of different tools.
That's because there are complete copies of the script at both ends. So long as Starfleet's responses are completely predictable, they can travel infinitely fast. If someone is slightly unpredictable... however... they have a short... lag... in their communications... due to the information... in the signal.
Since that may not work, because they might actually delegate non-existant domains to themselves, people should be ready to ignore all records that point to IPs that reverse-resolve to a certain domain (so that, if they round-robin the IP address, you don't have to change things, and so that the IP address doesn't get killed forever). Sure, that cuts off anyone actually hosted by VeriSign, but they should know better, and could cut off VeriSign itself, but they really should know better. If a big ISP did this, VeriSign would probably take notice.
Well, they also have to be past the uncanny valley. If they just made robots close to realistic, and ended up in that area, people would go nuts left and right. Imagine if, when checking in at the airport, you suddenly realized that the person behind the counter was a zombie, and, in fact, there are a dozen identical zombies around. Even if you know what's going on, you won't be able to shake the feeling that you're in a horror movie.
If they built robots in actual human corpses, people would be horrified. If they built robots in bodies that are indistinguishable from human corpses, people wouldn't be able to tell. In order for people to not freak out, they have to think either that the things are real live people or that there isn't a human body involved.
Even aside from this sort of perception, I think people would be more disturbed to interact with an intellectually lacking individual, particularly one who additionally does not act quite human. Even actual humans with autism or Tourette's tend to disturb people who aren't used to them.
Okay, we've observed the universe, and decided that it must have a certain amount of stuff in it, because of how things move. But we also noticed that we don't see nearly that much stuff in the universe. So, rather than rejecting either observation (or the calculations based on it), scientists have made up "Dark Matter" to refer to whatever it is that makes up the difference. There are some theories as to what "Dark Matter" is, but it's hard to prove such a theory, because the stuff is obviously hard to detect.
Imagine shaking a sealed box. You can't see the inside of the box, but you can see the outside and you can feel the resistance the box has to moving. Your view of the outside makes you expect it to be light, but it feels heavy. You therefore theorize that there's something heavy inside that you can't see.
This article discusses two ideas. The first is that we might have overlooked a different reason the universe might move the way it does; the reason the box feels heavy might be that it's giving you an electric shock which weakens your arm. The second is that we might have underestimated the visible mass of the universe; the reason the box looks light is because it's actually metal and not plastic.
Essentially, these are thoeries about what dark matter is: that dark matter is the "bonus" mass some things seem to have by doing a certain thing; or that dark matter is actually normal matter that we weren't looking at. In any case, since "Dark Matter" is the difference between two observations, it can't fail to exist. But, if either of these papers is right, it could fail to be matter of a special, dark, sort.
Depending on how it is configured, it might actually prevent outgoing connections on port 25 from programs not configured by the installer as mail programs and prevent users from modifying mail programs.
More to the point, it probably only has mail programs which make it clear that the user is arranging to download and run software from an untrusted source, as opposed to merely viewing something.
It's still about 50 years too early to teach students the rules of the English language, because they haven't been discovered yet. Sure, there are some preliminary ideas as to what some of them might be, but there are a number of areas of active research. Of course, kids are still taught in school a number of things about the English language which have been disproved decades ago.
Fluency in language is something that can only really be taught by example, because the exact rules (if there are even rules which are exact) are not known, and, even if they were, a speaker could not consciously apply them in any sort of timely fashion. Furthermore, students should learn a number of variations on English, because spoken and written English aren't the same (and IM is really more like transcribed spoken English), and the sentence constructions which are appropriate in an eyewitness account of an event and those which are appropriate in a love letter are quite different. For that matter, the grammar which is considered appropriate for academic papers changes about once a decade, as people trying to follow the accepted style become more and more extreme, to the point where the papers become incomprehensible and a new style is proposed to combat the flaws in the old one.
As a particular suggestion along these lines, geeks tend not to pay much attention to the ergonomics of their computers. It is pretty likely that you could get him something cheap that he'd never think to get that would substantially improve how he feels after a long coding session. Good candidates include lighting, comfortable indoor footwear, and a good chair.
You can also generally find better keyboards and mice, but you'll want to have him try a bunch and pick his favorite, because different ones feel better for different people.
Incidentally, the catalyst in this case, titanium dioxide, is, in fact, the white pigment in paint. The novel aspect here, as far as I can tell, is actually the silicon-base polymer that gets the NOx gas to the catalyst and the nitric acid to the calcium carbonate efficiently. There's little to worry about with the primary reaction, at least, because we've been painting things white for a long time now.
They're just trying to demonstrate that slashdot can deliver as good a slashdotting as google can.
I think Google normally has the logo link to a page which explains the logo. In this case, it linked to a search page without any information but with links, so people were actually still wondering about the logo and went to pages on small servers. I personally found it odd that the logo containing pictures linked to a search for pictures, rather than something informative (like why Feb 3rd).
Google can't become the standard for websites destruction, because it's already the standard for searching. People will never accept a verb that means "to search" as well as "to overwhelm by linking". On the other hand, google could deliver powerful slashdottings to sites of their choice.
6) Enjoy the same spam free mailbox I've had for 2 years...
Does it have any interesting mail in it? On second thought, maybe I'd prefer to have a different spam-free mailbox.
Good thing it would be instantly wiped out by the inhospitable Earth conditions. Any life on Mars would be adapted to the Martian environment and extremely ill-suited to other conditions. It would be contending with significant differences in pressure, temperature, air content, and gravity just being on Earth, let alone trying to live in the human body. Sure, life can adapt to an extreme range of conditions. But a bacterium that could overwhelm Earth is not going to evolve on Mars.
The problem really comes from WYSIWYG computer programs, and the idea that it's remotely sane to show text on the screen at the same size that you would print it. If you print a document at 72 DPI and hold it at arm's length, you won't be able to read it at all with 10 or 12 point fonts. If you want to avoid driving you users crazy, you have to display the documents magnified, both to deal with the lower resolution and to deal with the distance from the screen. This means that higher resolution screens can also avoid magnifying the text as much.
For user interface text, it doesn't make any sense to choose fonts by either point size or pixel size; using a higher resolution on the same monitor, you'll want a smaller point size but a larger pixel size, since you can read smaller text if it's clearer, but not text which is smaller by the same factor. Furthermore, using point size will confuse people who are looking at a magnified image of a 12-point document intended for print, because your 12-point unmagnified interface will have smaller text than the 12-point magnified document.
To be more specific, "user[:password]@" *is* part of the official URI spec (both the one you cite and the RFC), but the "http" schema doesn't include it (again in both specs). The RFC actually explicitly states "No user name or password is allowed." The RFCs for both versions of HTTP exclude username and password as well.
So the correct answer is that "[username[:password]@]host[:port]" is part of URIs, but a "http:" URL is invalid if it includes either a username or a password. (On the other hand, "mailto:" is invalid without a username.)
So, in a very unusual turn of events, IE has become the first browser to conform to a particular specification, by making a non-standard change that happens to fit a bit of the specification that nobody who's written a browser actually read correctly. Makes you wonder if they looked at the spec to see if anyone was likely to care.
The old kernel had a lot of room for improvement on the systems they tested; but that's primarily due to the fact that the systems are substantially newer than the 2.4 series. A 2 GB dual Xeon system running 2.4 isn't going to use the processors efficiently (hyperthreading, imprecise locks), and isn't going to deal with the memory effectively. It was in part to take advantage of the availablity of such systems that the changes for 2.6 were made.
New conditions require new optimizations and new designs; a good program optimized for a set of inputs which are common at one time may be really inefficient at handling inputs that become common later. Sure, you can make a program that's good for both sorts of input, but it doesn't make sense to try to do so until someone actually has such an input to test with.
On older hardware, it isn't noticably better. But that's just because it was already fine on such hardware. For such hardware, the main interesting thing is that the CPU scheduler does a better job of recognizing tasks which need a bit of processor time at precise intervals, so that you can play audio and video without skips while under more total load.
It should also help with the ~5ms delay when you interact with the system, so that it "feels better", regardless of the actual system speed.
But these aren't things that are easy to benchmark, anyway. (At least, unless you're writing code to poll a sensor at precise intervals)
I think the "her fate is tied to the ring" thing is BS in the movie, at least so far as anyone's fate is not tied to the ring. But it's one of the things Elrond is saying to try to talk her and Aragorn out of the whole thing, because his parents did the same thing and it really sucked for them in the end. So you can't really take what he says at face value. For that matter, she's not going to go into the West at the end of the Third Age, which condemns her to a fate that Elrond considers terrible (but Arwen and non-elves don't).
Singing "Shiny Happy People" and seven other songs over and over, perhaps?
Sure, someone could turn it off if they were there. Then they'd freeze to death when it actually did get cold. For that matter, NASA could probably do that now, from Earth.
Having somebody there would be useful if they had a spare part to install. It only makes sense for a manned mission to go to Mars after there's a reasonable amount of supplies already there. A long-lasting power source is one piece of that, but there are plenty of others. Also, before we can just "use nuclear power", someone will have to design a power plant that will reliably survive EDL and produce a significant amount of power afterwards. Playing around with rovers is giving NASA (and humanity) the experience necessary to supply a crew and get the crew there safely.
As it turns out, the power consumption necessary to use wireless is more than the power consumption necessary to do most computations locally. Sure, you could offload all your computations to a supercomputer, but then you'd need a heavy battery; it's lighter to just put the supercomputer and battery on you. This gets more and more true over time, because the energy needed to send a signal will always be the same, but processors get more efficient over time. The only reason to connect to the internet is to get data that you don't have locally.
I think the social stigma is due to the fact that people sometimes don't have their memory augmentation handy. People's cell phones break, or the batteries run out, or they lose them, or they replace them, and suddenly they don't know anything anymore. If someone were to always have their cell phone handy, they wouldn't think to tell you that they need it to remember your number; in fact, they wouldn't even know.
It is three syllables. It's also spelled "Schoen" (as in the username in the link), although it's pronounced the way you'd expect "Shoen" to be pronounced.
Syllabas tres est. "Schoen", etiam, scribitur (ut in nomine in vinculo). Verbum, tamen, dicitur quod exspectes "Shoen" dici.
They changes the APIs periodically, as needed to make the kernel work. They do plenty to help companies by documenting each version extensively and publishing the source, so that the companies can see what's actually going on. For 2.5/2.6, the editor of LWN wrote a complete guide to how to write drivers for the new version. Most of the changes to the API are actually there to make the API simpler, easier to use right, and harder to mess up.
Everything that makes it easy to write good open source Linux drivers also makes it easy to write good binary-only Linux drivers, with the exception of being able to modify an existing driver to make the new one. NVidia doesn't have any trouble keeping up with the kernel API.
Really, most companies don't have much research in their drivers; their work does into their hardware, which means that their drivers are pretty often buggy, but could be made open source without revealing much.
The customer doesn't generally have any access to the OS at all. In fact, the programming interface to the Linux phones is supposed to be Java ME. They're mainly interested in using Linux because it makes a good JVM.
/etc. The kernel doesn't dictate policy, so it's quite possible to have a very different userspace under Linux. There's nothing saying that a Linux phone would have to be a GNU/Linux phone, and it could actually make sense to make the distinction.
It's possible that most Linux phones won't even have a shell, command-line-type programs, init, or