Here's an elaborate algorithm for autonomous cars to solve the oh-so-huge problem at a 4-stop intersection:
0. Are we in a 4-stop intersection with three other cars?
Yes: Goto step 1
No: We're finished. 1. Are some of the cars human-driven?
Yes: Yield to them. Goto step 0.
No: Work out go-order by communicating with the other three autonomous cars. We're finished.
Heh, except it's not a bitmap font. FWIW I discovered "fontforge" which can open the compiled font and lets me edit it, but that's of course the wrong approach..
How hard can it be for browser addon to translate <video> tags into <img src="file:///var/tmp/kitten.jpg">, possibly depending on site and value of the video's src attribute?
Could we ever find the answer, since a brain without sensory input would never learn to communicate in any way.
FTFY. Note that this includes "communicating with itself", which we tend to call "thinking". I'm pretty sure that language is a strong requisite for actual thinking.
I can only speak for NetBSD, which these days I install by unpacking tarballs, but yes, the installer is pretty much like that. Granted, you'll have to arrow-up to 'yes' when it asks you the 'last chance to back out' question, and again before it overwrites the master boot record. I'm rather happy it's that way.
In fact, they argue that because there is no sensory stimulation, the brain can't be thinking. That... well, that's just a crock of shit, quite frankly.
What do you imagine a brain could possibly think, or how it would think in the first place, if it has never had any sensory input?
Today, Linux still wins out over BSD because it's easier.
Was it very easy to install, and very easy to use in 1994?
I don't see how it perhaps being difficult 20 years ago supports your claim that it would still be difficult today. Are you trying to make a point here or are you just "arguing" for the sake of it?
Today, Linux still wins out over BSD because it's easier.
What? This isn't true. Didn't you *just* imply that you didn't use the BSDs in any significant ways? Has it occured to you that you're not qualified to make a proper comparison, as a consequence of knowing only one of the two things you're attempting to compare?
BSD fans will tell you that this is a feature
And hence this is complete bullshit because the premise is wrong.
and then five minutes later bitch about something they don't have because BSD is less popular
And then ten minutes later enjoy the stuff they do have, because it is solid, well-designed and well-documented, rather than random pieces of junk thrown together in an unstructured mess and held together by hacks.
It isn't a handbrake in my vehicle since it is on the floor
Fair enough
and such systems were originally put in place to provide a backup braking system in case the hydraulic system failed
Today I learned. That's some pretty poor design then, especially considering that it usually brakes only the rear wheels. If you're vaguely familiar with driving physics, or if you have ever tried to actually brake with the handbrake, then you'll have realized that it is essentially useless as an ersatz brake. If you're going at a reasonably high speed, and attempt to brake that way, you'll notice it doesn't brake well. So you pull it harder, and then you lose traction on the rear wheels, which, again, if you're familiar with driving physics, you know the outcome of (Hint: it is often worse than shifting up and coasting to a stop, or grinding against a guard rail). In fact, parking on a steep slope and deliberately breaking traction on the rear wheels is all I ever use it for (the latter not on public roads, of course)
A well-designed emergency brake would a) attack the front wheels, or all wheels, and b) provide (mechanical) force amplification.
and are now often also referred to as a parking brake
IIRC the correct term is "locking brake", in Germany anyway.
But then ideas like yours is why most people never think to use it when their regular brakes fail just like they don't think to turn off the ignition if the throttle sticks.
Slashdot Mirror
No, you see, once the first car goes, the situation is no longer a 4-stop tie and thus the usual rules apply.
Here's an elaborate algorithm for autonomous cars to solve the oh-so-huge problem at a 4-stop intersection:
0. Are we in a 4-stop intersection with three other cars?
Yes: Goto step 1
No: We're finished.
1. Are some of the cars human-driven?
Yes: Yield to them. Goto step 0.
No: Work out go-order by communicating with the other three autonomous cars. We're finished.
I'm color blind, you insensitive clod. It's called fucking the middle grey.
Heh, except it's not a bitmap font. FWIW I discovered "fontforge" which can open the compiled font and lets me edit it, but that's of course the wrong approach..
You see, it's open source and all.
That said, does anyone know how to build that font from source? Nothing about it on their website, or in the README...
Came here to say this. Bridge builder was amazing.
I'm not a clock, though.
They even optimised it by making sure the dots in the clock didn't blink
*eyes parent with a dead stare*
Like the "dots of the clock" would somehow blink by default rather than due to code making them blink? Oh well.
It's webscale.
How hard can it be for browser addon to translate <video> tags into <img src="file:///var/tmp/kitten.jpg">, possibly depending on site and value of the video's src attribute?
At least on slashdot it is, I meant <video> tags.
Yeah. Because it's virtually impossible to detect and manipulate tags. Right.
Heh. My way of keeping anyone off my computer is using i3 on NetBSD...
(Microsoft can't make a decent operating system, but their keyboards and mice are first class.)
I agree, but I think the reason for this is that the only thing they have do with "their" keyboards and mice is the MS logo on it.
Could we ever find the answer, since a brain without sensory input would never learn to communicate in any way.
FTFY. Note that this includes "communicating with itself", which we tend to call "thinking". I'm pretty sure that language is a strong requisite for actual thinking.
I can only speak for NetBSD, which these days I install by unpacking tarballs, but yes, the installer is pretty much like that. Granted, you'll have to arrow-up to 'yes' when it asks you the 'last chance to back out' question, and again before it overwrites the master boot record. I'm rather happy it's that way.
In fact, they argue that because there is no sensory stimulation, the brain can't be thinking. That... well, that's just a crock of shit, quite frankly.
What do you imagine a brain could possibly think, or how it would think in the first place, if it has never had any sensory input?
Today, Linux still wins out over BSD because it's easier.
Was it very easy to install, and very easy to use in 1994?
I don't see how it perhaps being difficult 20 years ago supports your claim that it would still be difficult today.
Are you trying to make a point here or are you just "arguing" for the sake of it?
Today, Linux still wins out over BSD because it's easier.
What? This isn't true. Didn't you *just* imply that you didn't use the BSDs in any significant ways? Has it occured to you that you're not qualified to make a proper comparison, as a consequence of knowing only one of the two things you're attempting to compare?
BSD fans will tell you that this is a feature
And hence this is complete bullshit because the premise is wrong.
and then five minutes later bitch about something they don't have because BSD is less popular
And then ten minutes later enjoy the stuff they do have, because it is solid, well-designed and well-documented, rather than random pieces of junk thrown together in an unstructured mess and held together by hacks.
You realize that I couldn't care less, right? I've long since abandoned Linux for NetBSD.
It isn't a handbrake in my vehicle since it is on the floor
Fair enough
and such systems were originally put in place to provide a backup braking system in case the hydraulic system failed
Today I learned. That's some pretty poor design then, especially considering that it usually brakes only the rear wheels. If you're vaguely familiar with driving physics, or if you have ever tried to actually brake with the handbrake, then you'll have realized that it is essentially useless as an ersatz brake.
If you're going at a reasonably high speed, and attempt to brake that way, you'll notice it doesn't brake well. So you pull it harder, and then you lose traction on the rear wheels, which, again, if you're familiar with driving physics, you know the outcome of (Hint: it is often worse than shifting up and coasting to a stop, or grinding against a guard rail).
In fact, parking on a steep slope and deliberately breaking traction on the rear wheels is all I ever use it for (the latter not on public roads, of course)
A well-designed emergency brake would a) attack the front wheels, or all wheels, and b) provide (mechanical) force amplification.
and are now often also referred to as a parking brake
IIRC the correct term is "locking brake", in Germany anyway.
But then ideas like yours is why most people never think to use it when their regular brakes fail just like they don't think to turn off the ignition if the throttle sticks.
You seem to have seen too many bad movies.
You do realize that even a chicken can install Debian, so long as you put sufficient grain on the Enter key, right?
You don't seriously think the handbrake is an "emergency brake", right? Good grief, please be kidding.
22 seconds is longer than the attention span of most millennials.
That's actually not true. You see, we just-- oh, whatever.
It's an entropy death.