100% as fast would be 1.0x. They said 100% faster, which is (x + 1.0x)
or x+x or 2x
Is there some reason that you wanted to made this more complicated than it needs to be?
I checked your math, and 1+1 does in fact equal 2. Clearly, my math skills need some work (or maybe I intentionally left it in that form to better represent the concept). Choose whichever answer floats your boat.
I absolutely agree natural language processing is the future. Have you even used Siri? Have you seen the usage statistics? Cool idea, but nothing more than a gimmick in practice. I would give it a few more years until you ditch the traditional inputs and outputs. I imagine something more like IBM's Watson (which has been around much longer than Siri) will do the trick.
In order to achieve _true_ freedom, we need free and open access to ideas and information, which in turn will allow society to become more educated and enlightened. What I should have said* is that is that our copyright current system has a negative net effect on freedom ("society" is not a value, as I cannot argue we need to achieve "society"), because it creates monopolies that prohibit access to information and ideas.
* I realize this is moving the goal post, and is not a valid rebuttal that would require a response. Meh, I was never very good at debate anyways.
---side note--- For the record, I do think a limited form of copyright would be beneficial. Mainly, a) you cannot claim someone's work as your own, and b) you cannot sell someone else's work without their permission. This would be a civil matter and not a criminal one. With the exceptions of the civil court system, no government resources should go to enforcing copyright. This is irrelevant to my argument though. I would prefer no copyright to our existing copyright.
I agree that historically, copyright has been a benefit to society. It created an incentive for creation at a time when creating and distributing your own work was prohibitively expensive. Artists have always been artists, and will always continue to create great works, because that's what artists do. Creating works has never been the problem. The problem was getting those works distributed to the masses. Thus, we created the "art distribution" business via copyright to solve this problem.
What was once a simple business that solved a direct need for artists has become internationally reaching conglomerations with their fingers in many pies. 95% of all media in the US is now controlled by 6 conglomerations (I hear it's actually 5 now, but last I fact checked it was 6). Piracy in itself does not directly hurt these companies financially, and certainly not the artist. In fact, many studies have shown that the increase awareness also increases the amount of paying customers. This is a good thing for the artists, but NOT the media companies (even though they would most likely see net gain in profits for that specific media). So why are media companies so adamantly against piracy? It is because the real loss to them is the total control over the distribution channels, and thus, control over the national dialog of opinion.
Your original argument I was responding to was that one should not pirate media if they can get it through legitimate means for free. But if I subscribe to cable, then I have paid to consume that content. What should it matter I consume that content in a format that is more convenient? The reality is that there is no inherit moral dilemma in choosing to do so. This moral dilemma is a learned behavior ingrained in us over time so the media empire (or more specifically, their parent corporations) may keep their control that reaches into many governments and societies across the globe.
We are now at a point in time where copyright has a negative net effect on society. I'm not saying artists should not be able to profit from their work, only that society would benefit more from free and open access to information (education) than we benefit from copyright.
I'm no fan of Apple, but I can say for certainty that the battery on my iPad 1/2 lasts much longer than on my XOOM and Transformer. I can leave the iPads in my desk for weeks on standby and it will still have a charge. I take my Transformer home because I enjoy using it more, but it would be incorrect to say Android is just as power efficient as iOS (although I'm sure there are some corner cases where this is true).
Which would be true, had I been trying to win some kind of debate. Instead, I posed a hypothetical question, then ridiculed you because I knew you would not be able to answer it. Why? Because there is actually no inherent moral difference between the two, even though the media companies spend a lot of money trying to equate one of those actions to theft. Money well spent apparently...
What is the moral difference between recording a tv show and fast forwarding the commercials, or simply downloading it? Quit buying into all the BS propaganda man. You are being manipulated by those who have the means and motive to do so.
What? What? What? I can't believe I've been missing out on this. Thanks for the tip. Now I just need to place my most used items at the beginning instead of the end, and I will be a multi-tasking machine!
Everyone I know disables that shit as soon as they figure out how (or that they even can). "Everyone I know" includes far more than just smart people.
Really? I'm surprised to hear that. The task bar is actually my favorite UI feature on Windows 7. I have about 3/4 of my task bar pinned with the applications I use on a mostly daily basis. I pin the lesser used apps to my start menu. I am usually running quite a few apps at once, so it's nice knowing exactly where it will be on my taskbar when I need to switch to it. I can get the mouse in the general area of the icon before I even need to look at them. Before the Win7 task bar, I was an ALT+TAB guy. This way is much faster for me.
Interacting with content, however, is an entirely different matter. HTML5 is great for structured documents, but it blows chode for interactivity. Yes, I know, it's still possible to do it in HTML5, it is just really really needlessly painful. Seriously, to anyone who has done _real_ flash development (EG. if you are using the Flash IDE then you are just a glorified designer... sorry, it's true), HTML5 is a total joke.
I admit, there are many problems with the "Flash" eco system. But the solution to those problems is not HTML5!! It is not an improvement! Please drop this fad hard and fast so we can all get back to doing real work... pretty pretty please?
MD5 is a checksum algorithm. I have never seen it used to actually "encrypt" something, although I'm sure it happens from time to time. Regardless, removing it would be a bad idea.
I really like Eclipse, it's my favorite IDE in fact, but VS is hardly the worst. Ever use XCode? I always have a good chuckle when I see the fanboys scramble to defend that monstrosity.
"using browser-standard languages like HTML5 and JavaScript"
Fixed it for you.
Stop using "technology" for things when you don't know what they are. It makes Slashdot sound stupider.
Technically, it would be more correct to say, "using a browser-standard language like HTML5." Unlike previous versions of HTML, HTML5 refers to the whole stack.
The flash people already donated Tamarin to Mozilla, which uses NanoJIT in their current JavaScript VM. So speed should be similar to the flash plugin.
Yeah, it's unfortunate the Tarmin license was incompatible with Apache. I didn't realize it went to Mozilla though. It seems like it would be some interesting code to tinker around with. I might have to go pop into Mozilla's neck of the woods and check it out.
GWT + bst-player has worked well for me. I bet it would suit your needs just fine (albeit, not to the degree that a plugin solution would). You will at least be able to abstract any kind of media interactions from the browser. Also, GWT is what google uses for all their web apps, so the technology should be relatively sound.
You're right, parents who don't care are the primary problem, but Iv'e yet to see an effective, politicaly plausible approach presented to fix that in the US.
Get rid of the law that makes it mandatory to go to school. Problem solved.
I tried chrome on my Asus Transformer, but it seems to grind to a hault on a lot of the sites I use, just as bad as the stock Browser. So far, Dolphin HD is the only browser I've used on Android that doesn't totally suck when playing a form based BBG game (VIrtonomics in my case). However, it also seems to have a problem with frequent crashes (which I suppose is better than a consistent unusability). There are many things I hate about my iPad (in fact, pretty much everything), but at least the browser doesn't suck. Here's hoping Google fixes this in the final release version of Chrome. Hell, I would even pay for a good browser on Android, because the current selection SUCKS! (and this is coming from an Android fanboy)
Cash (or "money") is not a store of value, it's a lubricant for exchange. A monetary system without inflation (small, predictable) encourages people to store wealth in "money", as opposed to investing it in productive uses. Monetary systems with a small amount of inflation will encourage investment of wealth to earn a return at least as good as the inflation being experienced. Which is why virtually every economy on the planet left the gold standard; the economies with "inflatable" currencies will outperform those without.
+1 Insightful
I've been on the fence about fiat currencies, and leaning more to the Austrian side of the issue. While I still believe our current system is designed to benefit concentrated wealth, you do bring up an excellent point about the benefits of inflation; Wealth should be accumulated in assets, not currency, and inflation incentivizes this behavior. I wonder if there is a middle ground somewhere that encourages a fixed amount of inflation relative to the amount of hard assets produced (IE. not imaginary paper assets created from a perceived value).
We get around it (sort of) by loading non-executable data via RPC, and interpret it at runtime using the client side code. If your problem domain is relatively simple, it is not entirely impossible to express instructions in non executable data. Odly enough, this seems to be ok, while interpreting (downloaded) written instructions in text, is not. Go figure.
Slashdot Mirror
"xhost +"
Sorted.
This blatant security wole should be down-modded. You sir, should be ashamed of yourself. (unless you were just trolling, in which case, well played).
Remember, the common image of the Apple user is of the screenplay writer sitting at Starbucks. Ethernet does no good in that scenario.
Well of course. What's the point of buying a Mac if no one sees that shinny apple on that back? :P
100% as fast would be 1.0x. They said 100% faster, which is (x + 1.0x)
or x+x or 2x
Is there some reason that you wanted to made this more complicated than it needs to be?
I checked your math, and 1+1 does in fact equal 2. Clearly, my math skills need some work (or maybe I intentionally left it in that form to better represent the concept). Choose whichever answer floats your boat.
100% as fast would be 1.0x. They said 100% faster, which is (x + 1.0x)
I absolutely agree natural language processing is the future. Have you even used Siri? Have you seen the usage statistics? Cool idea, but nothing more than a gimmick in practice. I would give it a few more years until you ditch the traditional inputs and outputs. I imagine something more like IBM's Watson (which has been around much longer than Siri) will do the trick.
Hey, I knew there had to be someone who thought Siri was useful for anything more than a novelty. How does it feel to be that person?
In order to achieve _true_ freedom, we need free and open access to ideas and information, which in turn will allow society to become more educated and enlightened. What I should have said* is that is that our copyright current system has a negative net effect on freedom ("society" is not a value, as I cannot argue we need to achieve "society"), because it creates monopolies that prohibit access to information and ideas.
* I realize this is moving the goal post, and is not a valid rebuttal that would require a response. Meh, I was never very good at debate anyways.
---side note---
For the record, I do think a limited form of copyright would be beneficial. Mainly, a) you cannot claim someone's work as your own, and b) you cannot sell someone else's work without their permission. This would be a civil matter and not a criminal one. With the exceptions of the civil court system, no government resources should go to enforcing copyright. This is irrelevant to my argument though. I would prefer no copyright to our existing copyright.
I agree that historically, copyright has been a benefit to society. It created an incentive for creation at a time when creating and distributing your own work was prohibitively expensive. Artists have always been artists, and will always continue to create great works, because that's what artists do. Creating works has never been the problem. The problem was getting those works distributed to the masses. Thus, we created the "art distribution" business via copyright to solve this problem.
What was once a simple business that solved a direct need for artists has become internationally reaching conglomerations with their fingers in many pies. 95% of all media in the US is now controlled by 6 conglomerations (I hear it's actually 5 now, but last I fact checked it was 6). Piracy in itself does not directly hurt these companies financially, and certainly not the artist. In fact, many studies have shown that the increase awareness also increases the amount of paying customers. This is a good thing for the artists, but NOT the media companies (even though they would most likely see net gain in profits for that specific media). So why are media companies so adamantly against piracy? It is because the real loss to them is the total control over the distribution channels, and thus, control over the national dialog of opinion.
Your original argument I was responding to was that one should not pirate media if they can get it through legitimate means for free. But if I subscribe to cable, then I have paid to consume that content. What should it matter I consume that content in a format that is more convenient? The reality is that there is no inherit moral dilemma in choosing to do so. This moral dilemma is a learned behavior ingrained in us over time so the media empire (or more specifically, their parent corporations) may keep their control that reaches into many governments and societies across the globe.
We are now at a point in time where copyright has a negative net effect on society. I'm not saying artists should not be able to profit from their work, only that society would benefit more from free and open access to information (education) than we benefit from copyright.
I'm no fan of Apple, but I can say for certainty that the battery on my iPad 1/2 lasts much longer than on my XOOM and Transformer. I can leave the iPads in my desk for weeks on standby and it will still have a charge. I take my Transformer home because I enjoy using it more, but it would be incorrect to say Android is just as power efficient as iOS (although I'm sure there are some corner cases where this is true).
Which would be true, had I been trying to win some kind of debate. Instead, I posed a hypothetical question, then ridiculed you because I knew you would not be able to answer it. Why? Because there is actually no inherent moral difference between the two, even though the media companies spend a lot of money trying to equate one of those actions to theft. Money well spent apparently...
What is the moral difference between recording a tv show and fast forwarding the commercials, or simply downloading it? Quit buying into all the BS propaganda man. You are being manipulated by those who have the means and motive to do so.
What? What? What? I can't believe I've been missing out on this. Thanks for the tip. Now I just need to place my most used items at the beginning instead of the end, and I will be a multi-tasking machine!
Everyone I know disables that shit as soon as they figure out how (or that they even can). "Everyone I know" includes far more than just smart people.
Really? I'm surprised to hear that. The task bar is actually my favorite UI feature on Windows 7. I have about 3/4 of my task bar pinned with the applications I use on a mostly daily basis. I pin the lesser used apps to my start menu. I am usually running quite a few apps at once, so it's nice knowing exactly where it will be on my taskbar when I need to switch to it. I can get the mouse in the general area of the icon before I even need to look at them. Before the Win7 task bar, I was an ALT+TAB guy. This way is much faster for me.
Just my opinion anyways.
Interacting with content, however, is an entirely different matter. HTML5 is great for structured documents, but it blows chode for interactivity. Yes, I know, it's still possible to do it in HTML5, it is just really really needlessly painful. Seriously, to anyone who has done _real_ flash development (EG. if you are using the Flash IDE then you are just a glorified designer... sorry, it's true), HTML5 is a total joke.
I admit, there are many problems with the "Flash" eco system. But the solution to those problems is not HTML5!! It is not an improvement! Please drop this fad hard and fast so we can all get back to doing real work... pretty pretty please?
Sincerely,
~A Disgruntled Software Engineer
Lol. Busted!
MD5 is a checksum algorithm. I have never seen it used to actually "encrypt" something, although I'm sure it happens from time to time. Regardless, removing it would be a bad idea.
I really like Eclipse, it's my favorite IDE in fact, but VS is hardly the worst. Ever use XCode? I always have a good chuckle when I see the fanboys scramble to defend that monstrosity.
I have a transformer, and I assume that bezel is for the front facing speakers, which I greatly appreciate.
"using browser-standard languages like HTML5 and JavaScript"
Fixed it for you.
Stop using "technology" for things when you don't know what they are. It makes Slashdot sound stupider.
Technically, it would be more correct to say, "using a browser-standard language like HTML5." Unlike previous versions of HTML, HTML5 refers to the whole stack.
The flash people already donated Tamarin to Mozilla, which uses NanoJIT in their current JavaScript VM. So speed should be similar to the flash plugin.
Yeah, it's unfortunate the Tarmin license was incompatible with Apache. I didn't realize it went to Mozilla though. It seems like it would be some interesting code to tinker around with. I might have to go pop into Mozilla's neck of the woods and check it out.
GWT + bst-player has worked well for me. I bet it would suit your needs just fine (albeit, not to the degree that a plugin solution would). You will at least be able to abstract any kind of media interactions from the browser. Also, GWT is what google uses for all their web apps, so the technology should be relatively sound.
You're right, parents who don't care are the primary problem, but Iv'e yet to see an effective, politicaly plausible approach presented to fix that in the US.
Get rid of the law that makes it mandatory to go to school. Problem solved.
I tried chrome on my Asus Transformer, but it seems to grind to a hault on a lot of the sites I use, just as bad as the stock Browser. So far, Dolphin HD is the only browser I've used on Android that doesn't totally suck when playing a form based BBG game (VIrtonomics in my case). However, it also seems to have a problem with frequent crashes (which I suppose is better than a consistent unusability). There are many things I hate about my iPad (in fact, pretty much everything), but at least the browser doesn't suck. Here's hoping Google fixes this in the final release version of Chrome. Hell, I would even pay for a good browser on Android, because the current selection SUCKS! (and this is coming from an Android fanboy)
Cash (or "money") is not a store of value, it's a lubricant for exchange. A monetary system without inflation (small, predictable) encourages people to store wealth in "money", as opposed to investing it in productive uses. Monetary systems with a small amount of inflation will encourage investment of wealth to earn a return at least as good as the inflation being experienced. Which is why virtually every economy on the planet left the gold standard; the economies with "inflatable" currencies will outperform those without.
+1 Insightful
I've been on the fence about fiat currencies, and leaning more to the Austrian side of the issue. While I still believe our current system is designed to benefit concentrated wealth, you do bring up an excellent point about the benefits of inflation; Wealth should be accumulated in assets, not currency, and inflation incentivizes this behavior. I wonder if there is a middle ground somewhere that encourages a fixed amount of inflation relative to the amount of hard assets produced (IE. not imaginary paper assets created from a perceived value).
We get around it (sort of) by loading non-executable data via RPC, and interpret it at runtime using the client side code. If your problem domain is relatively simple, it is not entirely impossible to express instructions in non executable data. Odly enough, this seems to be ok, while interpreting (downloaded) written instructions in text, is not. Go figure.