I've never met a person who was a PHD, or who had straight A's that didn't have a personality disorder of some kind. Something has to be wrong with anyone who would be willing to put up with that much bs for that many years for almost no reason at all. It says something about your priorities.
So? I've never met a person who didn't have a personality disorder of some sort.
I organize my daily comics in to groups of tabs and folders, then open the ones that are updated that day with one click. A dozen tab open on certain day, then I close them out as I read them.
Whilst you are correct, if Microsoft is going to essentially replace the standard C library with one that has an incompatible API, why not just call it a new library and have done with it?
The ultimate goal I would have to guess would be to ensure incompatibility.
First they change the C language so that it is incompatible while claiming that its more secure.
Then the patent those changes, and use their army of lawyers to try and prevent compatibility from competition like Wine.
*This* is why I don't want the government running businesses (mail, trains, hospitals, schools). The people in power use that power to censor information contrary to their personal beliefs, and they push agendas we are forced to adopt (like the "feel good" philosophy that is failing to teach our kids anything). It's a rigged system, a monopoly, not freedom or liberty.
And private people would never try and force a personal agenda, or belief system, (like the young earthers, or IDiots), on society.
No, it wouldn't settle anything. Any being sufficiently more powerful than you can convince you that it is omnipotent. Any being sufficiently more clever than you could convince you that it is omniscient. An advanced alien race, claiming to be God, could determine who believes in God and who doesn't, and rain sulfur and fire on the nonbelievers, so a rain of fire and sulfur from something claiming to be God would not prove God exists, sorry.
A truly omnipotent being does not have to try convince anyone of its omnipotent. The very act of trying to convince me simply proves that the being is not omnipotent.
Artificial Ethics seems to not be too far away from the laws of robotics.
0. A robot may not harm humanity, or, by inaction, allow humanity to come to harm.
1. A robot may not injure a human being or, through inaction, allow a human being to come to harm.
2. A robot must obey orders given to it by human beings, except where such orders would conflict with the First Law.
3. A robot must protect its own existence as long as such protection does not conflict with the First or Second Law.
Isaac Asimov was probably predicting the need for those laws really well.
I suspect that the laws of robotics are a bit too simplified to really work well in reality, but they do provide some food for thoughts.
And how do you really implement those laws. A law may be easy to follow in a strict sense, but it may be a short-sighted approach. A case of protecting one human may cause harm to many and how can a machine predict that the actions it takes will cause harm to many if it isn't apparent.
So I suspect that Asimov is going to be recommended reading for anyone working with intelligent robots, even though his works may in some senses be outdated it still contains valid points when it comes to logical pitfalls.
Some pitfalls are the definition of a human, and is it always important to place humanity foremost at the cost of other species?
Lumping gamers together, should be like lumping book buyers together; you can't.
I mean I could start lumping all Nintendo players together with the pre-pubescent 10 year old running around the house in dirty underwear screaming in a scratch voice: "I want to play Nintendo!"
Many of us loyal fans are royally pissed off with how J.J. Abrams wiped his ass with Star Trek canon in this movie.
I was willing to give him lots of benefit of doubt, but now, having seen the movie, I believe that he fucked it up good. He fucked up everything he *could have* fucked up.
Because perhaps the work is interesting? The USPS uses extensive computer vision tech for autorouting of mail. USGS uses computers throughout their work for cartography, remote sensing, etc. Defense departments, especially the national laboratories, consume the latest supercomputers, storage systems, and visualization tech.
But I understand if your view of government work is purely rubber-stamping papers underneath a buzzing flourescent light.
Having worked in DoD simulations, I can say that I'm unimpressed. The government is always willing to fork out for newer hardware, but as a software geek and can say that it felt like they were 5-10 years behind private industry.
As an addendum to my own posting saying "Don't get a masters, I have to add, "unless you want to work for the government. Then again, why on earth would you want to work for the government?
Do do chip development he probably wants a Masters in Computer Engineering, because a BS is worthless.
With a MSCE, he's in for a private industry roller coaster ride. If he goes for government and gets a security clearance, he should at least have steady employment.
A Bachelors in Computer Engineering will get you exactly the same place a Bachelors in Engineering Physics will get you; a Programming position.
If you ever want to do any real engineering work, get the Masters. If you actually want to get into R&D get the Ph.D. and start building industry relationships.
And most companies aren't going to pay for a Masters in Computer Engineering since it isn't related to your job; but they'll pay for a Masters in Software Engineering.
They've done two live action adaptations of Dune... the time has come for an Anime adaptation!
Hey, if it's good enough for E. E. "Doc" Smith.... okay, really bad example...
The Lensman anime, like getting Mark Hammil to play Connan, instead of Ahhhnald.
The only redeeming feature of that anime, was that it inspired me to read the books to find out WTF, many years later, after I found out it was a novel adaptation. Yeah, I saw it in the Mid 80s, bad vhs copy with the white subtitles.
I seem to remember the poor bastard's reaction to doing the Lensman Anime comic book. He was a Lensman fan, and found out after the fact that he had the rights to the Anime, not the novels.
This rant about the Lensman Anime has been interrupted by Fujisawa Sensei's second Long Island Iced Tea taking effect, and he is no longer able to continue the post, lest he end up sounding like a certain chapter from "Portrait of the Artist". He's also hoping that he's sober enough by morning to actually make it to work.
They never seem to get it that a "working" example of a "libertarian society" is... Somalia. No functional central government..
C'mon, you call it a libertarian example, and then completely contradict that statement in the next sentence by essentially saying it's anarchy instead. No functional government (i.e. no enforcement of property rights or civil rights) means a place is as just as unlike libertarian utopia as the Soviet Union was.
The libertarian fantasy is not anarchy. It's not Mad Max. It's 1789 America, or more precisely, a romanticized version of that with certain revisionist modifications (e.g. no slavery).
1789? How about 1879?
No organized labor, no nasty government regulation on corporations, just business taking care of business.
How did Manga/Anime become such a nerd thing? I have been a nerd for quite a few years now and none of my nerd friends (RL friends that is) are into Manga. However, whenever I browse online nerdy things (/. in this example) Manga seems a prevalent thing. Can people tell me how you got into it and why you like it?
How did playing RPGs become such a nerd thing? None of my nerd friends play RPGs, and I mostly remembered the delinquents from middle school being the group that was into it.
In some middle schools being into RPGs made you a delinquent.
>>>The Libertarian assholes don't get it and never will get it.
You just called the Founders of this nation (Jefferson, Henry, Washington, Madison, Franklin, et al) assholes. Nice job. Maybe you ought to take a moment and actually READ what they said about government, before you decide not to hear their words, and prejudge those words as assinine?
Perhaps you're the one who needs to re-read history, and look at what they actually did. Because their actions speak a lot more loudly than their theories.
They believed that unless you were a man of means, meaning you owned your own property and didn't work for somebody else, you weren't allowed to vote because you could be easily influenced by your boss or landlord. So according to the founding fathers,pretty much everybody here wouldn't even have a say in government. Some of this is still in place, you know the electoral college.
In addition, Washington used military force to put down the Whiskey Rebellion after they decided to tax whiskey to pay off the national debt.
Sure as hell don't sound like a Libertarians to me.
The Libertarian assholes don't get it and never will get it.
Its the same "Fuck everybody else so I can line my own pocket", asshole mentality that created the need for the progressive movement at the end of the 19th Century.
If they had it their way, the only rights we would end up having were ones we could afford to buy and enforce as an individuals.
Cable set to the side.
Forcing me to pay taxes and then using those taxes to benefit someone else is theft.
Theft from me and my family.
You think taxes are good, then defend taxes, don't dispute that they are theft though.
If I stuck a gun in your face and demanded 20% of your money it would be armed robbery.
When the government does it, it is called taxation.
And I personally could not care any less than I do now, (zero), if Billy-Joe Bob gets anew heart or not. He could die before I walked across the road and pissed on him if that was all he needed.
I also don't care if your mewling brats get an education or if your parents have to eat roadkill.
Taking my money to benefit you and yours is fucking wrong,immoral and exactly what the founders of the USA were dead set against.
Then pack the fuck up and leave. Nobody is stopping you.
The United Arab Emirates have a 0% tax rate; perhaps you should consider immigrating there.
Slashdot Mirror
So? I've never met a person who didn't have a personality disorder of some sort.
Mmmm, try leaving slashdot
I have. The disorders are worse.
I've never met a person who was a PHD, or who had straight A's that didn't have a personality disorder of some kind. Something has to be wrong with anyone who would be willing to put up with that much bs for that many years for almost no reason at all. It says something about your priorities.
So? I've never met a person who didn't have a personality disorder of some sort.
Now this might not be feasible for use by children, but I'm certain many of managers out there would love to implement it in their office.
I like my tabs!
I organize my daily comics in to groups of tabs and folders, then open the ones that are updated that day with one click. A dozen tab open on certain day, then I close them out as I read them.
Whilst you are correct, if Microsoft is going to essentially replace the standard C library with one that has an incompatible API, why not just call it a new library and have done with it?
The ultimate goal I would have to guess would be to ensure incompatibility.
First they change the C language so that it is incompatible while claiming that its more secure.
Then the patent those changes, and use their army of lawyers to try and prevent compatibility from competition like Wine.
*This* is why I don't want the government running businesses (mail, trains, hospitals, schools). The people in power use that power to censor information contrary to their personal beliefs, and they push agendas we are forced to adopt (like the "feel good" philosophy that is failing to teach our kids anything). It's a rigged system, a monopoly, not freedom or liberty.
And private people would never try and force a personal agenda, or belief system, (like the young earthers, or IDiots), on society.
d)it's a test of faith.
In what, some all powerful jerk who preaches love while threatening to burn people for eternity.
The teacher fails.
No, it wouldn't settle anything. Any being sufficiently more powerful than you can convince you that it is omnipotent. Any being sufficiently more clever than you could convince you that it is omniscient. An advanced alien race, claiming to be God, could determine who believes in God and who doesn't, and rain sulfur and fire on the nonbelievers, so a rain of fire and sulfur from something claiming to be God would not prove God exists, sorry.
A truly omnipotent being does not have to try convince anyone of its omnipotent. The very act of trying to convince me simply proves that the being is not omnipotent.
Artificial Ethics seems to not be too far away from the laws of robotics.
0. A robot may not harm humanity, or, by inaction, allow humanity to come to harm. 1. A robot may not injure a human being or, through inaction, allow a human being to come to harm. 2. A robot must obey orders given to it by human beings, except where such orders would conflict with the First Law. 3. A robot must protect its own existence as long as such protection does not conflict with the First or Second Law.
Isaac Asimov was probably predicting the need for those laws really well.
I suspect that the laws of robotics are a bit too simplified to really work well in reality, but they do provide some food for thoughts.
And how do you really implement those laws. A law may be easy to follow in a strict sense, but it may be a short-sighted approach. A case of protecting one human may cause harm to many and how can a machine predict that the actions it takes will cause harm to many if it isn't apparent.
So I suspect that Asimov is going to be recommended reading for anyone working with intelligent robots, even though his works may in some senses be outdated it still contains valid points when it comes to logical pitfalls.
Some pitfalls are the definition of a human, and is it always important to place humanity foremost at the cost of other species?
Asimov != Moses
If you're posting on slashdot, it should be obvious he was talking about the Unix/Risc server market versus Lintel.
In other words, one-buttoners GTFO.
UNIX servers need a mouse, that's X.
Google is providing a standardized UI on top of Linux.
Remember how CDE was supposed to be the standardized UI on top of X?
Remember how successful it was?
Unix is dying because Linux is growing and Unix is not.
Perhaps you should let Steve Jobs and Apple know about this.
Lumping gamers together, should be like lumping book buyers together; you can't.
I mean I could start lumping all Nintendo players together with the pre-pubescent 10 year old running around the house in dirty underwear screaming in a scratch voice: "I want to play Nintendo!"
Many of us loyal fans are royally pissed off with how J.J. Abrams wiped his ass with Star Trek canon in this movie.
I was willing to give him lots of benefit of doubt, but now, having seen the movie, I believe that he fucked it up good. He fucked up everything he *could have* fucked up.
They nuked cannon ST, and annoyed the trekkies?
This is a movie I have got to see.
Because perhaps the work is interesting? The USPS uses extensive computer vision tech for autorouting of mail. USGS uses computers throughout their work for cartography, remote sensing, etc. Defense departments, especially the national laboratories, consume the latest supercomputers, storage systems, and visualization tech.
But I understand if your view of government work is purely rubber-stamping papers underneath a buzzing flourescent light.
Having worked in DoD simulations, I can say that I'm unimpressed. The government is always willing to fork out for newer hardware, but as a software geek and can say that it felt like they were 5-10 years behind private industry.
As an addendum to my own posting saying "Don't get a masters, I have to add, "unless you want to work for the government. Then again, why on earth would you want to work for the government?
Do do chip development he probably wants a Masters in Computer Engineering, because a BS is worthless.
With a MSCE, he's in for a private industry roller coaster ride. If he goes for government and gets a security clearance, he should at least have steady employment.
A Bachelors in Computer Engineering will get you exactly the same place a Bachelors in Engineering Physics will get you; a Programming position.
If you ever want to do any real engineering work, get the Masters. If you actually want to get into R&D get the Ph.D. and start building industry relationships.
And most companies aren't going to pay for a Masters in Computer Engineering since it isn't related to your job; but they'll pay for a Masters in Software Engineering.
Government and maybe defence work, perhaps.
Having worked Defense, I can say that a Masters is worth at least 5 years experience. And experience outside of defense/government doesn't count.
1) don't buy one
What alternatives to iPhone and iPod Touch would you recommend for a U.S. resident? Are BlackBerry phones any better?
As a current BlackBerry user, I'm sold on the iPhone. I think the BB is garbage.
They've done two live action adaptations of Dune... the time has come for an Anime adaptation!
Hey, if it's good enough for E. E. "Doc" Smith.... okay, really bad example...
The Lensman anime, like getting Mark Hammil to play Connan, instead of Ahhhnald.
The only redeeming feature of that anime, was that it inspired me to read the books to find out WTF, many years later, after I found out it was a novel adaptation. Yeah, I saw it in the Mid 80s, bad vhs copy with the white subtitles.
I seem to remember the poor bastard's reaction to doing the Lensman Anime comic book. He was a Lensman fan, and found out after the fact that he had the rights to the Anime, not the novels.
This rant about the Lensman Anime has been interrupted by Fujisawa Sensei's second Long Island Iced Tea taking effect, and he is no longer able to continue the post, lest he end up sounding like a certain chapter from "Portrait of the Artist". He's also hoping that he's sober enough by morning to actually make it to work.
C'mon, you call it a libertarian example, and then completely contradict that statement in the next sentence by essentially saying it's anarchy instead. No functional government (i.e. no enforcement of property rights or civil rights) means a place is as just as unlike libertarian utopia as the Soviet Union was.
The libertarian fantasy is not anarchy. It's not Mad Max. It's 1789 America, or more precisely, a romanticized version of that with certain revisionist modifications (e.g. no slavery).
1789? How about 1879?
No organized labor, no nasty government regulation on corporations, just business taking care of business.
So I have an honest question.
How did Manga/Anime become such a nerd thing? I have been a nerd for quite a few years now and none of my nerd friends (RL friends that is) are into Manga. However, whenever I browse online nerdy things (/. in this example) Manga seems a prevalent thing. Can people tell me how you got into it and why you like it?
How did playing RPGs become such a nerd thing? None of my nerd friends play RPGs, and I mostly remembered the delinquents from middle school being the group that was into it.
In some middle schools being into RPGs made you a delinquent.
>>>The Libertarian assholes don't get it and never will get it.
You just called the Founders of this nation (Jefferson, Henry, Washington, Madison, Franklin, et al) assholes. Nice job. Maybe you ought to take a moment and actually READ what they said about government, before you decide not to hear their words, and prejudge those words as assinine?
Perhaps you're the one who needs to re-read history, and look at what they actually did. Because their actions speak a lot more loudly than their theories.
They believed that unless you were a man of means, meaning you owned your own property and didn't work for somebody else, you weren't allowed to vote because you could be easily influenced by your boss or landlord. So according to the founding fathers ,pretty much everybody here wouldn't even have a say in government. Some of this is still in place, you know the electoral college.
In addition, Washington used military force to put down the Whiskey Rebellion after they decided to tax whiskey to pay off the national debt.
Sure as hell don't sound like a Libertarians to me.
The Libertarian assholes don't get it and never will get it.
Its the same "Fuck everybody else so I can line my own pocket", asshole mentality that created the need for the progressive movement at the end of the 19th Century.
If they had it their way, the only rights we would end up having were ones we could afford to buy and enforce as an individuals.
Cable set to the side. Forcing me to pay taxes and then using those taxes to benefit someone else is theft. Theft from me and my family. You think taxes are good, then defend taxes, don't dispute that they are theft though. If I stuck a gun in your face and demanded 20% of your money it would be armed robbery. When the government does it, it is called taxation. And I personally could not care any less than I do now, (zero), if Billy-Joe Bob gets anew heart or not. He could die before I walked across the road and pissed on him if that was all he needed. I also don't care if your mewling brats get an education or if your parents have to eat roadkill. Taking my money to benefit you and yours is fucking wrong,immoral and exactly what the founders of the USA were dead set against.
Then pack the fuck up and leave. Nobody is stopping you.
The United Arab Emirates have a 0% tax rate; perhaps you should consider immigrating there.