Use the tracking of the individual snowflakes to steer a MW laser installed on the hood of the car, that blasts all the nearby snowflakes, reducing glare.
Why not, if it works with Microsoft? To be fair, the page I googled looked sensible. It's a defensible approach to use a sensible quote independent of the source - if it's not too much out of context.
Look, I wouldn't fuck you with a 6 foot pole. Do it yourself. As for the link. blame Google. It was harder than i thought to find a good link. There are lots of other links listing ancient dna , some claiming 40 million year old snippets, and couldn't find out which claims are still standing. Most of the old ones appear to have been abandoned though, if wikipedia is a guide.
That would be a fallback strategy yes. The trick I was thinking about was to give the robot enough cues to make it decide, and then change the hand movement. Of course this requires that the robot isn't allowed to change its mind after it's decided.
I checked the technical analysis document: the file involved is a fas file, that is compiled lisp. It's called acad.fas , maybe this increases the chances it gets executed automatically. The source in this case a mixture of vbs and lisp,probably the lisp file writes vbs scripts.
Although the malware is written in AutoLISP, its main functions are carried out by Visual Basic Scripts, which are dropped and executed by the VBS interpreter built in Windows. This is shown in the following code snippet, where the VBS script was previously stored to the MK-INFO-BIN variable.
You turned your flaws into a major asset then:) There are more patterns: the idea basher: There's the danger of becoming a smart person with a large ego that is tied to an ability to bash other people's ideas, which is mostly a negative achievement. Or the 'powerful car, bad driver' pattern where all kinds of skills are underdeveloped because one always managed to hang on without them. It sounds a bit like advice for gifted kids but I got it from old books about thinking in general by an Edward de Bono.
Yes you commit more mistakes when you think more about things. Guess what, you also reach a lot more correct conclusions. The best way to avoid making mistakes is not doing anything at all. Same principle.
There are concrete things that can be done though. There are also "smart people patterns" of systematic errors in thinking. For example, smart people are better at arguing their position, hence better at defending bad decisions , allowing them to persist in bad choices. Or, smart people can suffer more from analysis paralysis. It helps then to be aware of these weaknesses so you can compensate for them.
I agree with the main value of religion, as a metasystem for organizing society, and keeping things from going off the rails. But, a few quick (and uncommon) comments. One, deities are not necessarily central in religion.Buddhism is often given as example but, take early Christianity, the God concept isn't that important in it. It became more central afterwards, partly because it helped the authoritarian structure in the Catholic church. In practice Catholicism then evolved to polytheism. We all know what nonsense that is of course since the only Saint that really works is Saint Anthony. Two, the God concept shouldn't be made into a major issue. The authoritarian aspect can be a bit problematic, but the anthropomorphism isn't a problem. We do it all the time. Three, don't underestimate the wisdom of these old books. It may be hard to access because it's been filtered by centuries of reinterpretation, but there was a lot of insight in it. Who's aware of the radical rejection of scapegoating in early Christianity? By the looks of it, most of christianity certainly never was. Four, don't overestimate people. They think they're evolved and got over religion, and promptly switch to chakras, astrology, homeopathy and crystals. Don't think of people as rationality on two legs. They aren't and they shouldn't be. Freeman Dyson is an atheist who goes to church, something that's odd for Christians but normal for Jews. Acknowledge that religion has complex values, including social structure and belonging. Five, religions sure could use a major upgrade, but the worst approach is to first try and get rid of religion, and then find a replacement.
I don't know if it will be much lower than 7%. On one end of the spectrum, the test will show a false negative for a reason (a certain stage of the disease, or a variant)and repeating the test will give a failure for the same reason. on the other hand, the failure is random and a repeated test has 0.05% failure. And then the prescribed test procedure would indeed be to repeat it.
Slashdot Mirror
Use the tracking of the individual snowflakes to steer a MW laser installed on the hood of the car, that blasts all the nearby snowflakes, reducing glare.
Now it's cool.
Bummer, is that so? Wait, I have a way out: definitely a neanderthal is no homo sapiens. Now there! My reputation is saved. Sorta.
Why not, if it works with Microsoft? To be fair, the page I googled looked sensible. It's a defensible approach to use a sensible quote independent of the source - if it's not too much out of context.
Look, I wouldn't fuck you with a 6 foot pole. Do it yourself. As for the link. blame Google. It was harder than i thought to find a good link. There are lots of other links listing ancient dna , some claiming 40 million year old snippets, and couldn't find out which claims are still standing. Most of the old ones appear to have been abandoned though, if wikipedia is a guide.
It's not the oldest dna, but the oldest human DNA that they've found. This site reports DNA extracted from a 20 million year magnolia leaf.
I can just see it: a vietcong suddenly comes running straight at you, then farts and passes at top speed. And then a missile lands on your head.
Drug drones discover the smell of coca leaves is present in all of bolivia.
That would be a fallback strategy yes. The trick I was thinking about was to give the robot enough cues to make it decide, and then change the hand movement. Of course this requires that the robot isn't allowed to change its mind after it's decided.
It's well possible that once the robot is set up someone can learn to mislead it and turn 100% loss into 100% win.
Yes, an acad.fas file next to a drawing will be loaded automatically if you open the drawing by doubleclicking on it.
I checked the technical analysis document: the file involved is a fas file, that is compiled lisp. It's called acad.fas , maybe this increases the chances it gets executed automatically. The source in this case a mixture of vbs and lisp,probably the lisp file writes vbs scripts.
I think it can be made by a single person.
That's why it's called SAP. It drains your company of money and resources.
Well you should have thought of that earlier, now it doesn't count anymore.
Which you then play for 10 years in a row.
You turned your flaws into a major asset then:)
There are more patterns: the idea basher:
There's the danger of becoming a smart person with a large ego that is tied to an ability to bash other people's ideas, which is mostly a negative achievement.
Or the 'powerful car, bad driver' pattern where all kinds of skills are underdeveloped because one always managed to hang on without them.
It sounds a bit like advice for gifted kids but I got it from old books about thinking in general by an Edward de Bono.
There are concrete things that can be done though. There are also "smart people patterns" of systematic errors in thinking. For example, smart people are better at arguing their position, hence better at defending bad decisions , allowing them to persist in bad choices. Or, smart people can suffer more from analysis paralysis. It helps then to be aware of these weaknesses so you can compensate for them.
In any case since even Feynman himself didn't know he was a sleeper agent, the guys who were controlling him must have been pretty good.
Or to the neck. A guy I knew lost his brother due to a chainsaw accident.
Not that thing! The other thing!
I agree with the main value of religion, as a metasystem for organizing society, and keeping things from going off the rails.
But, a few quick (and uncommon) comments.
One, deities are not necessarily central in religion.Buddhism is often given as example but, take early Christianity, the God concept isn't that important in it. It became more central afterwards, partly because it helped the authoritarian structure in the Catholic church. In practice Catholicism then evolved to polytheism. We all know what nonsense that is of course since the only Saint that really works is Saint Anthony.
Two, the God concept shouldn't be made into a major issue. The authoritarian aspect can be a bit problematic, but the anthropomorphism isn't a problem. We do it all the time.
Three, don't underestimate the wisdom of these old books. It may be hard to access because it's been filtered by centuries of reinterpretation, but there was a lot of insight in it. Who's aware of the radical rejection of scapegoating in early Christianity? By the looks of it, most of christianity certainly never was.
Four, don't overestimate people. They think they're evolved and got over religion, and promptly switch to chakras, astrology, homeopathy and crystals. Don't think of people as rationality on two legs. They aren't and they shouldn't be. Freeman Dyson is an atheist who goes to church, something that's odd for Christians but normal for Jews.
Acknowledge that religion has complex values, including social structure and belonging.
Five, religions sure could use a major upgrade, but the worst approach is to first try and get rid of religion, and then find a replacement.
Exactly. People forget that Occam was a barber in Seville.
The next one will be called the 60 mile high club. It will be a bit wider and have room for two people.
Don't underestimate the gnat's fart effect though, there are those who claim it's even more powerful than a butterfly wingflap.
I don't know if it will be much lower than 7%. On one end of the spectrum, the test will show a false negative for a reason (a certain stage of the disease, or a variant)and repeating the test will give a failure for the same reason. on the other hand, the failure is random and a repeated test has 0.05% failure. And then the prescribed test procedure would indeed be to repeat it.
We need a nationwide network of marshmallow repositories to be kept on permanent 24/7 standby. And long sticks.