I've read enough of the science to be satisfied with it. I'm reasonably familiar with the standards of psych research, and it's certainly not all set in stone, but the preponderance of evidence right now is on the side of my claim, and at least there isn't any real evidence behind the grandparent's claim.
That could be true. I don't know of any research about it. I just know the research on lying pretty well, which says that no lying and a lot of lying are bad, and the best point is (as usual) somewhere in the middle, and not at the extreme.
That's been scientifically proven untrue. The world needs a certain amount of harmless lying to grease the social wheels. It makes our society function better.
Except that pretty much all the studies about birth rate and intelligence are based on highest education level completed as their proxy for intelligence. I can't find any that even use IQ tests (which would have other issues as far as actually measuring intelligence is concerned).
For #1, most of the major commute roads in CA are so congested that hitting even 60 during commute hours is lucky. For #2, a 35 mile (one-way) commute is covered, with left over for small errands. That's good enough for at least half of CA, where the average commute is still under half an hour. For #3, I don't know why so many cars are designed ugly. That's really inexplicable. Maybe its an aerodynamic thing.
By the time I have hundreds of gigabits of bandwidth in my house, I expect my cpu to be well over 30ghz, with at least 16 cores, so no problem. There's also no reason to believe that most of that processing won't be at least 32bit, if not 64bit. And every cpu made in the last couple of years can deliver at least 3-wide execution.
So there's another 100fold multiplier on the side of the cpu for you.
You're confusing the possibility that a dust storm can lift enough dust into the atmosphere to block sunlight with the possibility that the wind intensity is sufficiently high to drive a wind turbine. Mars has a very thin atmosphere, and this wind isn't nearly enough to drive a turbine that would produce enough power for the rovers. Lifting dust is a lot easier than pushing the blades of a fan.
Also, whatever turbine you added would go into the weight of the rover, which then affects the parachute/airbag requirements for landing, and during drive around time you're carrying that extra weight uselessly most of the time.
generates about twice as much power as the article suggests is needed, on earth (presumably 1atm pressure) at 10m/s wind speed.
http://www.nap.edu/openbook/0309084261/html/22.htm l claims that martian windspeeds peak at 50m/s, but that the dynamic pressure is only 1/9th of that due to the lower atmospheric pressure. That gives you an equivalent of only 6m/s equivalent speed (at peak intensity!).
So... even at peak windspeed it's going to be hard to generate enough power with turbines that the rover could reasonably carry, and that would all be deadweight for the solar panels during non wind times.
Evolution will get over it in a couple of generations, don't worry about it. And on the plus side, it'll drastically reduce the problem of funding social security for the stupid baby boomers.
Unfortunately, you can't get away with reflective walls in most communities in the US. Your neighbors will sue you, and even if you win, you'll spend a lot more in court than you would have just buying rooftop solar.
I know this is just flamebait, but you are aware that all of the modern disease cures are built on heavy amounts of basic math developed by previous generations of mathematicians, right?
The reason to think that beos would become slow when its apps reached maturity is that mature apps on other platforms can use 100% of a quad core cpu with no difficulty, and small overhead from threading. Threading capabilities in the OS just aren't the choke point.
Extent of commenting is a topic long debated by people with a huge amount of total experience.
There are people who recommend commenting at this level:/* increment i */ i++;//i is inremented here
Fortunately, most experienced programmers agree that such comments make the code less clear, as they obstruct visibility, and potentially confound refactoring, which is a much better path to long term maintainability and clarity.
So if you're not willing to comment at this level, then you're on a slippery slope: if some things don't need comments, what does?
It becomes a matter of opinion, which of course leads to abuse in the other direction. Reaching a good, balanced point on comments is a strong sign of good experience in a software engineer.
I would have to say that yes, designing your implementation in such a way as to be incompatible with the majority of tools represents a design flaw on the side of the implementation, not of the tools.
I've seen some windows and some office code. Neither was impressive. Lot's of fun things like locally duplicated bugfixes for things that should have been refactored, spaghetti code, all your usual favorite kinds of code that happen to large organizations unwilling or unable to take seriously the idea of repairing their core code infrastructure.
Your theory is blatantly contradicted by the facts. Plenty of people create and share material without need or want of copyright. That would continue to be true in a no copyright world. Service and knowledge would become what is valued in that world. And yes, I do think that would be a great world to live in.
I'd have to say that from my point of view you're looking at things exactly backwards: you may or may not be able to run any software you want on a tivo device, but what's much more interesting is to take the tivo software and run it on some device of your own so you don't have to buy a device from tivo. It opens up your hardware purchasing. Obviously, in the no copyright world order, people will have a choice: restricted platforms that won't run any software they want, and open platforms that do.
Microsoft can make computers that will only run certified software, but open systems will run any software you want, including microsoft's, so why buy their hardware? They can cherry pick all the open source they want, but you can also cherry pick all the code you want from them, making it much easier to create interoperability and superior software. Who will choose Microsoft when they aren't locked in anymore?
It's really impossible to know for sure what the outcome would be, but it seems unlikely it could actually be worse than what we have now, because we already have or will soon have all the problems you've described anyway.
Slashdot Mirror
Are you sure that's not just an 8 data bit + 2 parity bit issue (3mbit data * 8data/10total = 2.4mbit data)?
Best answer I've seen in quite a while. :-)
Much better than the moderation war that started up on what I thought was a fairly innocuous comment.
I've read enough of the science to be satisfied with it. I'm reasonably familiar with the standards of psych research, and it's certainly not all set in stone, but the preponderance of evidence right now is on the side of my claim, and at least there isn't any real evidence behind the grandparent's claim.
That could be true. I don't know of any research about it. I just know the research on lying pretty well, which says that no lying and a lot of lying are bad, and the best point is (as usual) somewhere in the middle, and not at the extreme.
Here's a few. There are lots of studies on this, it's very well established science.
) 4%3A3%3C478%3ALDASAM%3E2.0.CO%3B2-M6 43/5 mcs0701_7?cookieSet=1&journalCode=mcs
http://links.jstor.org/sici?sici=1047-7039(199308
http://www.springerlink.com/content/r3n4241065781
http://www.thomsoncustom.com/cj/cases/MOD018.pdf
http://www.leaonline.com/doi/abs/10.1207/s1532782
That's been scientifically proven untrue. The world needs a certain amount of harmless lying to grease the social wheels. It makes our society function better.
I didn't sign any contract when I bought my ds or wii. I did sign a contract when I rented my apartment. That's the difference.
Except that pretty much all the studies about birth rate and intelligence are based on highest education level completed as their proxy for intelligence. I can't find any that even use IQ tests (which would have other issues as far as actually measuring intelligence is concerned).
For #1, most of the major commute roads in CA are so congested that hitting even 60 during commute hours is lucky.
For #2, a 35 mile (one-way) commute is covered, with left over for small errands. That's good enough for at least half of CA, where the average commute is still under half an hour.
For #3, I don't know why so many cars are designed ugly. That's really inexplicable. Maybe its an aerodynamic thing.
Or to simplify: no violations of http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fallacy allowed.
Linus' attack in this case was http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ad_hominem, and that's why it bothers people.
By the time I have hundreds of gigabits of bandwidth in my house, I expect my cpu to be well over 30ghz, with at least 16 cores, so no problem.
There's also no reason to believe that most of that processing won't be at least 32bit, if not 64bit.
And every cpu made in the last couple of years can deliver at least 3-wide execution.
So there's another 100fold multiplier on the side of the cpu for you.
By this type of application, are you referring to networked applications, for which cpu time is in no way a limiting factor?
You're confusing the possibility that a dust storm can lift enough dust into the atmosphere to block sunlight with the possibility that the wind intensity is sufficiently high to drive a wind turbine. Mars has a very thin atmosphere, and this wind isn't nearly enough to drive a turbine that would produce enough power for the rovers. Lifting dust is a lot easier than pushing the blades of a fan.
w ith-generato.html
m l
... even at peak windspeed it's going to be hard to generate enough power with turbines that the rover could reasonably carry, and that would all be deadweight for the solar panels during non wind times.
Also, whatever turbine you added would go into the weight of the rover, which then affects the parachute/airbag requirements for landing, and during drive around time you're carrying that extra weight uselessly most of the time.
This setup:
http://store.motorwavegroup.com/8-micro-turbines-
generates about twice as much power as the article suggests is needed, on earth (presumably 1atm pressure) at 10m/s wind speed.
http://www.nap.edu/openbook/0309084261/html/22.ht
claims that martian windspeeds peak at 50m/s, but that the dynamic pressure is only 1/9th of that due to the lower atmospheric pressure.
That gives you an equivalent of only 6m/s equivalent speed (at peak intensity!).
So
Evolution will get over it in a couple of generations, don't worry about it.
And on the plus side, it'll drastically reduce the problem of funding social security for the stupid baby boomers.
Unfortunately, you can't get away with reflective walls in most communities in the US. Your neighbors will sue you, and even if you win, you'll spend a lot more in court than you would have just buying rooftop solar.
What utterly baffles me is why the installers don't just bring a cheap / light windows laptop with them.
I know this is just flamebait, but you are aware that all of the modern disease cures are built on heavy amounts of basic math developed by previous generations of mathematicians, right?
In fairness back to you, if you haven't listened to the mp3 song on goatse, you're missing half the joke.
The reason to think that beos would become slow when its apps reached maturity is that mature apps on other platforms can use 100% of a quad core cpu with no difficulty, and small overhead from threading. Threading capabilities in the OS just aren't the choke point.
Extent of commenting is a topic long debated by people with a huge amount of total experience.
/* increment i */ //i is inremented here
There are people who recommend commenting at this level:
i++;
Fortunately, most experienced programmers agree that such comments make the code less clear, as they obstruct visibility, and potentially confound refactoring, which is a much better path to long term maintainability and clarity.
So if you're not willing to comment at this level, then you're on a slippery slope: if some things don't need comments, what does?
It becomes a matter of opinion, which of course leads to abuse in the other direction. Reaching a good, balanced point on comments is a strong sign of good experience in a software engineer.
I would have to say that yes, designing your implementation in such a way as to be incompatible with the majority of tools represents a design flaw on the side of the implementation, not of the tools.
I've seen some windows and some office code. Neither was impressive. Lot's of fun things like locally duplicated bugfixes for things that should have been refactored, spaghetti code, all your usual favorite kinds of code that happen to large organizations unwilling or unable to take seriously the idea of repairing their core code infrastructure.
Your theory is blatantly contradicted by the facts.
Plenty of people create and share material without need or want of copyright. That would continue to be true in a no copyright world.
Service and knowledge would become what is valued in that world. And yes, I do think that would be a great world to live in.
While they didn't tell the I,robot story, they did of course license, and he is credited as an author.
http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0343818/
I'd have to say that from my point of view you're looking at things exactly backwards: you may or may not be able to run any software you want on a tivo device, but what's much more interesting is to take the tivo software and run it on some device of your own so you don't have to buy a device from tivo. It opens up your hardware purchasing. Obviously, in the no copyright world order, people will have a choice: restricted platforms that won't run any software they want, and open platforms that do.
Microsoft can make computers that will only run certified software, but open systems will run any software you want, including microsoft's, so why buy their hardware? They can cherry pick all the open source they want, but you can also cherry pick all the code you want from them, making it much easier to create interoperability and superior software. Who will choose Microsoft when they aren't locked in anymore?
It's really impossible to know for sure what the outcome would be, but it seems unlikely it could actually be worse than what we have now, because we already have or will soon have all the problems you've described anyway.