I thought it was kind of funny. Yeah, it's adolescent to take pictures of your toys in sexual positions, but some of his descriptions were pretty funny, especially if you've ever read the Kama Sutra. "The Otter and the Clam"? Think about that.
Do you think it would be easier to fly if you had real-time video feedback from the helicopter's point of view? Maybe not as good as balance feedback from your inner ear, but to the uninitiated (me) it seems like the hard part of flying an R/C heli would be visually picking up the subtle changes in orientation and correcting through the controller.
Also, the..AA can still set up a fake server which logs you, since the server knows the client's IP
Wouldn't that be entrapment or something? If the copyright holder is essentially giving away their own material on a P2P network, could they sue you for accessing it?
And would that be more like (a) putting your possessions out on the street and then trying to press burglary charges, or (b) leaving your front door open and sniping people when they come in to take your stuff?
Right. Morpheus said something like "Your brain makes it real" but that seemed a little far out. If you died in the matrix, I'd accept that your meatspace self might go into a coma, but could your brain really rupture blood vessels and be tricked into stopping your autonomous functions (heartbeat, respiration, etc)
Maybe "Your brain makes it real" was Morpheus' rationalization of observed effects, but the reality is the "matrix within a matrix" explanation.
I agree that the "monoculture of poor quality software" line smacks of the usual Slashdot editorializing, but note that the Times article may as well mention Microsoft specifically:
The rogue program does not affect the Apple Macintosh line of computers or computers running variants of the Unix operating system.
The paper said that in addition to seeing more e-mail or junk mail, consumers who call companies on other business may now have to listen to sales pitches while negotiating voice mail messages.
Oh, this is great. I could barely contain myself when some credit card company couldn't accept my multiple "I'd like to cancel my (zero-balance) account, please" without subjecting me to twenty questions about why, and would I consider this offer, oh I'm sorry but I have to ask you this, well what if we gave you this rate, etc.
Sure, if one finds embedded sales pitches offensive there's always the option to find an alternative... the 'vote with your dollar' argument. But damn that seems slow, and worse yet subject to interpretation. Will the company recogize that profits are lower than they could be, and identify the reason? Better off to lodge a complaint and tell them why they're not getting your business.
"For millions of years earth was fertile and rich. Then polution(sic) and waste began to take their toll. Civilization fell into ruin. This is the world of the 25th century. Only a handful of scientists remain. Men, who have vowed to rebuild what has been destroyed...This is their achievement...Ark II, a mobile storehouse of scientific knowledge, manned by a highly trained crew of young people. Their mission: to bring the hope of a new future to mankind. Ark II log, entry #1 - I Jonah, Ruth, Samuel and Adam are fully aware of the dangers we face as we venture into unknown, maybe even hostile areas. But, we're determined to bring the promise of a new civilization to our people and our planet."
Now my childhood TV memories are flooding back... even Shazam and ISIS. Dear god, did I have some sort of primitive Shazam underoos? Maybe these memories are better left uncovered.
What was that old show where a small crew traveled around the planet on this funky all-terrain RV-like thing? I wanted to "Ask Slashdot" but this was just too small a question. Some here has got to know.
The problem may be this... MPA members do not get any cash from the sale of that CD.
How would the MPA get any cash from the sale of a CD under any other circumstances? Do they have a web site where this guy could have searched for Billy Joel lyric snippets?
I'm sure the moderators are long gone, so what the heck...
I think you're saying this: I've met two of three siblings, and they're both girls. The other one we don't know. If it's a boy, then there are six combinations (MF1F2, MF2F1, F1MF2, F2MF1, F1F2M, F2F1M) and if it's a girl there are six combinations (F1F2F3, F1F3F2, F2F1F3, F2F3F1, F3F1F2, F3F2F1). I agree that there are an equal number of ordered combinations depending on the gender of the third child.
But the gender of the third child depends on the distribution of three-child families with three girls. Three-girl families are 12.5% of the total number of three-child families. Three boys make up 12.5%. Two girls/one boy (in any order) make up 37.5% of the distribution, and two boys/one girl (in any order) make up the final 37.5%.
So once you know there are two girls, you've eliminated three boy families (12.5% of the population) and two boy/one girl families (37.5% of the population). 50% of the original population remains, and of that half, 75% are families with two boys and one girl.
Imagine I have a marble-producing machine that randomly outputs 50% white and 50% black marbles. I use this machine to fill many paper bags with three marbles each. Suppose you are placed in a room with 100,000 of these marble bags. You pick a bag, pull out two marbles, and they're both white. What are the chances the third one is black? 75%. Although this marble had a 50/50 chance when it was selected, you have chosen a bag from a sub-group of the unevenly-distributed population.
Similarly, when you pull the first white marble out, you know you're not dealing with any of the 12,500 bags that are black-black-black.
I'm counting it three times because it occurs three times more often that FFF; once as MFF, once as FMF, and once as FFM.
Look at it this way: of all the families with three children, there are eight ordered combinations (M=Male, F=Female, and left-to-right order = order of birth):
Now if you meet a family with three children, and all you know is that two are girls (you have no idea aabout the order) then you can eliminate the (ordered) arrangements MMM, MMF, MFM, and FMM because they're impossible. You're left with a remaining subset, again diagrammed as above:
MFF - 25% FMF - 25% FFM - 25% FFF - 25%
So if you guess the mystery child is a male, you'll cover 75% of the possible ordered combinations.
The unordered idea of "two female, one male" (FFM/FMF/MFF) covers 3/8 of the possibilities, "three females" represents 1/8 of the possibilities, and all the others are impossible because you know there are two girls.
Your sig mentions EMusic. I listen to a lot of jazz. For the price of a CD every month, I get unlimited *legal* MP3 downloads of classic stuff. Bought a Penguin guide to jazz on CD to help sort through EMusic's collection, and have pulled maybe 11G of tunes in three months (and I haven't been hitting it that hard). It's practically more than one can listen to.
I guess it's a product life-cycle thing. Relatively few people are buying classic jazz these days (compared to top 40/pop/alternative), so the record labels are figuring they'll take what they can get for it.
I think the puzzle was *based* on not uniquely identifying the females. If you look at a large sample of three-children families, half of them will have at least two girls.
Of that subgroup, most often the other sibling will be a boy.
I love this stuff, I don't care if it's a little off-topic.:)
I heard an argument that there would be 75% chance of a boy. It's because you don't know the birth order. There are eight combinations of sexes for three siblings; MMM, MMF, MFM, MFF, FMM, FMF, FFM, FFF.
If all you know is that there are two girls, the only options left are MFF, FMF, FFM, and FFF. And in 75% of the cases, the third sibling is a boy.
I have to keep telling people this. If you flip a coin a million times, and lands on heads every time, you still have a 50% chance of landing on heads the next time. If you say you are going to flip the coin a million + 1 times, the chances of not getting tails once is astronomical.
Actually, if it comes up heads a million times, I'd say there's a good chance that the coin isn't 'fair' anymore.:)
But I know what you mean. So if you meet a family with three children, and you don't know the gender, but two in the room are girls, what do you predict for the other? Still 50/50?
Do you work in industry? I don't mean the IT industry, but some branch of manufacturing?
Modern manufacturing plants are extensively automated. Logic control 30 years ago was all done with hardwired relays and timers, then 20 years ago with programmable logic controllers (PLC's), and now there are virtual PLC's running in x86-based PC's with extensive networking between controllers. There are DSP's in sensors, web guides, vision systems, and even glue gun controls. Technology has driven production speeds higher and higher, and now we need more sophisticated control systems on all sorts of equipment.
I stand by the idea that overclockers are a minority and Intel's not worried about losing millions to the relatively few overclocking enthusiasts out there. But there's probably a much larger population of crooked dealers that overclock cheap chips for profit. If Joe Consumer buys one of these cheap PC's and the CPU cooks after a month, then Intel gets the rap because Joe doesn't know any better.
Yes, you own it, and you got what you paid for; if it's a 2.8 GHz processor, you own a 2.8 GHz processor. And since you own it, you're free to open it up and take the governer off.
No, I don't work for Intel. No, I don't see the problem.
The whole point of this patent is that even though it borrows the temperature control circuitry to throttle the speed, it doesn't rely on measuring the chip's temperature to determine if the chip is being overclocked in the first place. In other words, it can't be tricked by keeping the chip cool.
Right.
Who wants a car that's been throttled to top off at 85 miles an hour, even if you might never have need to go faster in real life?
Uh, maybe the car is unsafe at speeds over 85? Maybe if you want to drive something faster than 85 you should pay the extra money for a performance car that has better brakes, engine, and suspension?
Don't tell me you're one of those guys with the VTEC sticker and fat exhaust tip on your Honda Civic!
No, sounds like the overclock detection circuit is based on frequency ratios, not temperature.
The difference under this new scheme is that *two* things that can trigger the clock-limiting action: the thermal detection circuit (temperature-based) or the overclock detection circuit (frequency-based). So keeping the processor at a safe temperature won't work.
They're probably not going to save millions with this effort (what percent of computer owners are elite dudes that overclock?) but times are tight and hey, it's their product.
Slashdot Mirror
I thought it was kind of funny. Yeah, it's adolescent to take pictures of your toys in sexual positions, but some of his descriptions were pretty funny, especially if you've ever read the Kama Sutra. "The Otter and the Clam"? Think about that.
...but rather than just admit I am a dork and move on, I am going to PROVE I am a dork by proposing Snapster 2.0...
It's hard not to like this guy, isn't it?
Do you think it would be easier to fly if you had real-time video feedback from the helicopter's point of view? Maybe not as good as balance feedback from your inner ear, but to the uninitiated (me) it seems like the hard part of flying an R/C heli would be visually picking up the subtle changes in orientation and correcting through the controller.
Also, the ..AA can still set up a fake server which logs you, since the server knows the client's IP
Wouldn't that be entrapment or something? If the copyright holder is essentially giving away their own material on a P2P network, could they sue you for accessing it?
And would that be more like (a) putting your possessions out on the street and then trying to press burglary charges, or (b) leaving your front door open and sniping people when they come in to take your stuff?
Right. Morpheus said something like "Your brain makes it real" but that seemed a little far out. If you died in the matrix, I'd accept that your meatspace self might go into a coma, but could your brain really rupture blood vessels and be tricked into stopping your autonomous functions (heartbeat, respiration, etc)
Maybe "Your brain makes it real" was Morpheus' rationalization of observed effects, but the reality is the "matrix within a matrix" explanation.
Damn, now I'm really fired up for Revolutions.
I agree that the "monoculture of poor quality software" line smacks of the usual Slashdot editorializing, but note that the Times article may as well mention Microsoft specifically:
The rogue program does not affect the Apple Macintosh line of computers or computers running variants of the Unix operating system.
Credit where credit is due, right?
Man, and all this time I was thinking C.H.U.D. stood for Cannibalistic Humanoid Underground Dwellers!
The paper said that in addition to seeing more e-mail or junk mail, consumers who call companies on other business may now have to listen to sales pitches while negotiating voice mail messages.
Oh, this is great. I could barely contain myself when some credit card company couldn't accept my multiple "I'd like to cancel my (zero-balance) account, please" without subjecting me to twenty questions about why, and would I consider this offer, oh I'm sorry but I have to ask you this, well what if we gave you this rate, etc.
Sure, if one finds embedded sales pitches offensive there's always the option to find an alternative... the 'vote with your dollar' argument. But damn that seems slow, and worse yet subject to interpretation. Will the company recogize that profits are lower than they could be, and identify the reason? Better off to lodge a complaint and tell them why they're not getting your business.
From TV Tome:
"For millions of years earth was fertile and rich. Then polution(sic) and waste began to take their toll. Civilization fell into ruin. This is the world of the 25th century. Only a handful of scientists remain. Men, who have vowed to rebuild what has been destroyed...This is their achievement...Ark II, a mobile storehouse of scientific knowledge, manned by a highly trained crew of young people. Their mission: to bring the hope of a new future to mankind. Ark II log, entry #1 - I Jonah, Ruth, Samuel and Adam are fully aware of the dangers we face as we venture into unknown, maybe even hostile areas. But, we're determined to bring the promise of a new civilization to our people and our planet."
Ooh, and a cheesy picture here.
Thank you!
Ark II
Now my childhood TV memories are flooding back... even Shazam and ISIS. Dear god, did I have some sort of primitive Shazam underoos? Maybe these memories are better left uncovered.
What was that old show where a small crew traveled around the planet on this funky all-terrain RV-like thing? I wanted to "Ask Slashdot" but this was just too small a question. Some here has got to know.
I must be missing something. What happens when *2065551212 matches 10 different numbers, provided by 10 different wireless companies?
The problem may be this... MPA members do not get any cash from the sale of that CD.
How would the MPA get any cash from the sale of a CD under any other circumstances? Do they have a web site where this guy could have searched for Billy Joel lyric snippets?
I'm sure the moderators are long gone, so what the heck...
I think you're saying this: I've met two of three siblings, and they're both girls. The other one we don't know. If it's a boy, then there are six combinations (MF1F2, MF2F1, F1MF2, F2MF1, F1F2M, F2F1M) and if it's a girl there are six combinations (F1F2F3, F1F3F2, F2F1F3, F2F3F1, F3F1F2, F3F2F1). I agree that there are an equal number of ordered combinations depending on the gender of the third child.
But the gender of the third child depends on the distribution of three-child families with three girls. Three-girl families are 12.5% of the total number of three-child families. Three boys make up 12.5%. Two girls/one boy (in any order) make up 37.5% of the distribution, and two boys/one girl (in any order) make up the final 37.5%.
So once you know there are two girls, you've eliminated three boy families (12.5% of the population) and two boy/one girl families (37.5% of the population). 50% of the original population remains, and of that half, 75% are families with two boys and one girl.
Imagine I have a marble-producing machine that randomly outputs 50% white and 50% black marbles. I use this machine to fill many paper bags with three marbles each. Suppose you are placed in a room with 100,000 of these marble bags. You pick a bag, pull out two marbles, and they're both white. What are the chances the third one is black? 75%. Although this marble had a 50/50 chance when it was selected, you have chosen a bag from a sub-group of the unevenly-distributed population.
Similarly, when you pull the first white marble out, you know you're not dealing with any of the 12,500 bags that are black-black-black.
I'm counting it three times because it occurs three times more often that FFF; once as MFF, once as FMF, and once as FFM.
Look at it this way: of all the families with three children, there are eight ordered combinations (M=Male, F=Female, and left-to-right order = order of birth):
MMM - 12.5%
MMF - 12.5%
MFM - 12.5%
MFF - 12.5%
FMM - 12.5%
FMF - 12.5%
FFM - 12.5%
FFF - 12.5%
-----------
100.0%
Now if you meet a family with three children, and all you know is that two are girls (you have no idea aabout the order) then you can eliminate the (ordered) arrangements MMM, MMF, MFM, and FMM because they're impossible. You're left with a remaining subset, again diagrammed as above:
MFF - 25%
FMF - 25%
FFM - 25%
FFF - 25%
So if you guess the mystery child is a male, you'll cover 75% of the possible ordered combinations.
The unordered idea of "two female, one male" (FFM/FMF/MFF) covers 3/8 of the possibilities, "three females" represents 1/8 of the possibilities, and all the others are impossible because you know there are two girls.
Your sig mentions EMusic. I listen to a lot of jazz. For the price of a CD every month, I get unlimited *legal* MP3 downloads of classic stuff. Bought a Penguin guide to jazz on CD to help sort through EMusic's collection, and have pulled maybe 11G of tunes in three months (and I haven't been hitting it that hard). It's practically more than one can listen to.
I guess it's a product life-cycle thing. Relatively few people are buying classic jazz these days (compared to top 40/pop/alternative), so the record labels are figuring they'll take what they can get for it.
I think the puzzle was *based* on not uniquely identifying the females. If you look at a large sample of three-children families, half of them will have at least two girls.
:)
Of that subgroup, most often the other sibling will be a boy.
I love this stuff, I don't care if it's a little off-topic.
I heard an argument that there would be 75% chance of a boy. It's because you don't know the birth order. There are eight combinations of sexes for three siblings; MMM, MMF, MFM, MFF, FMM, FMF, FFM, FFF.
If all you know is that there are two girls, the only options left are MFF, FMF, FFM, and FFF. And in 75% of the cases, the third sibling is a boy.
I have to keep telling people this. If you flip a coin a million times, and lands on heads every time, you still have a 50% chance of landing on heads the next time. If you say you are going to flip the coin a million + 1 times, the chances of not getting tails once is astronomical.
:)
Actually, if it comes up heads a million times, I'd say there's a good chance that the coin isn't 'fair' anymore.
But I know what you mean. So if you meet a family with three children, and you don't know the gender, but two in the room are girls, what do you predict for the other? Still 50/50?
Do you work in industry? I don't mean the IT industry, but some branch of manufacturing?
Modern manufacturing plants are extensively automated. Logic control 30 years ago was all done with hardwired relays and timers, then 20 years ago with programmable logic controllers (PLC's), and now there are virtual PLC's running in x86-based PC's with extensive networking between controllers. There are DSP's in sensors, web guides, vision systems, and even glue gun controls. Technology has driven production speeds higher and higher, and now we need more sophisticated control systems on all sorts of equipment.
Well, then we can continue the conversation. :)
I stand by the idea that overclockers are a minority and Intel's not worried about losing millions to the relatively few overclocking enthusiasts out there. But there's probably a much larger population of crooked dealers that overclock cheap chips for profit. If Joe Consumer buys one of these cheap PC's and the CPU cooks after a month, then Intel gets the rap because Joe doesn't know any better.
Yes, you own it, and you got what you paid for; if it's a 2.8 GHz processor, you own a 2.8 GHz processor. And since you own it, you're free to open it up and take the governer off.
No, I don't work for Intel. No, I don't see the problem.
The whole point of this patent is that even though it borrows the temperature control circuitry to throttle the speed, it doesn't rely on measuring the chip's temperature to determine if the chip is being overclocked in the first place. In other words, it can't be tricked by keeping the chip cool.
Right.
Who wants a car that's been throttled to top off at 85 miles an hour, even if you might never have need to go faster in real life?
Uh, maybe the car is unsafe at speeds over 85? Maybe if you want to drive something faster than 85 you should pay the extra money for a performance car that has better brakes, engine, and suspension?
Don't tell me you're one of those guys with the VTEC sticker and fat exhaust tip on your Honda Civic!
No, sounds like the overclock detection circuit is based on frequency ratios, not temperature.
The difference under this new scheme is that *two* things that can trigger the clock-limiting action: the thermal detection circuit (temperature-based) or the overclock detection circuit (frequency-based). So keeping the processor at a safe temperature won't work.
They're probably not going to save millions with this effort (what percent of computer owners are elite dudes that overclock?) but times are tight and hey, it's their product.
On the other hand, that is a swell icon for LoTR stories. Is that new?