Unfortunately, they're using the only schtick they know when it comes to innovation. Build something vaguely similar to what everyone else is doing and then use their monopoly position to leverage everyone into using it. Trouble is, they don't have the lever any more and it doesn't work. So they have no idea how to proceed. This is why their response to the failure of Windows 8 is so confused.
But here's the thing. I'm sure there are a handful of people who don't have anything complex to do on their laptop but like having a keyboard when posting their instafacetwitter drivel but still like to have a portable tablet with a touch screen. However, the whole reason Windows 8 has been such an utter and complete failure is that the business world has people doing real work on real desktops and laptops that need real windows. We're not a bunch of hipster douchebags who have nothing better to do than to break out in bad choreographed dancing at staff meetings. We have work to do. We don't care about transitioning from desktop to anything because there's no reason for us to do it. We don't want a tablet UI infecting our desktop/laptop operating system. We want to get our work done. This absurd attempt to make one operating system fit for both business desktops and consumer electronics devices is a fool's errand. Call it whatever you want, it's a stupid idea. Desktops and work laptops need a desktop OS/UI. Phones and tablets need a mobile OS/UI. Trying to make one OS/UI for the whole market will just ensure that you will fail utterly at both. Microsoft needs to rectify their cranial-rectal inversion and break the two halves into separate products.
Let's be honest though, most people haven't read too many of the post ep-6 books. Sure, a lot of fans have, but the audience that has seen the movies eclipses the fan base that reads the books. And to them, the universe is wide open post ep-6 so they can do whatever they want with the movies and not offend a majority of the people who go see them. Besides, even if they tried to follow cannon, they would have to make some compromise for translation to the big screen that would offend the fans who read the books anyway so it's not like they would be happy with the movies no matter what they did.
My nostalgia for the originals extends as far as appreciating reasonably quality dialog, cast that can act instead of woodenly reciting lines in front of a camera, and a story line that is at least remotely compelling, convincing, and entertaining. Not really a high bar to clear but Lucas failed miserably on all of that with the prequels.
I agree. But the point was that TFA addressed how you get a keyboard attached to the system. I wouldn't ever buy or use this silly contraption. But it's possible to hook up a keyboard no matter how absurd the configuration is.
C as a first language has two significant drawbacks.
First is that it has an abnormally steep learning curve. It's virtually impossible to learn about arrays without learning about pointers and that's a complicated subject to tackle early.
Second is that it is only an iterative language. It has no significant support for OOP like more modern languages. Given the distribution of careers in the field, introducing students to OOP concepts early with a popular language that supports those features is a good idea. Students with knowledge of OOP can translate some of their understanding backwards to an iterative language. But students with no OOP knowledge are handicapped going forward.
Still, it's a good idea to teach standalone C once you get to an operating systems or embedded systems programming environment just so students can understand what it takes to build the foundation that supports a C++ program.
Maybe I was thinking of Javascript. I've been working in the embedded systems world my whole career so I don't use Java enough to remember much about it.
But the principle still stands with Javascript. Learn the basic constructs of iterative programming without having to worry about types first. Then introduce the more complex principles as you get towards a language like C++ When switching to Java, you can do types before OOP (which may be a good idea anyway) and then get to C++ to learn about pointers and so forth.
When they're done with the class they have exposure to multiple related industry standard languages and all of the basic comp sci principles that apply from top to bottom and they're ready to start in doing real work in advanced classes when they hit college.
Why not teach more than one language? These are AP classes for smart kids. They can handle it.
Start with Java. Run them through the basic iterative programming constructs (conditionals, loops, etc). Then go on to basic OOP principles. Once you're through that you can go back and start with C++ and introduce them to statically typed variables and pointers. There's no reason a smart kid in the last couple years of high school can't grasp all of this in a single AP class.
I know it's a radical idea to teach advanced topics to kids in an Advanced Placement class but hey, I like rocking the boat.
Plutocracy is the better term. Oligarchy simply refers to few ruling many and can include any structure where a small number of people rule the masses. The USA is a plutocracy, which is rule by the wealthy elite (and, by definition, one form of oligarchy).
Indeed, idiots abound at/. The computer program in TFA does exactly that. There's no way to do any better than in in the long run. Sure, you may win a few hands but the more hands you play, the hard it is going to be to beat the computer. The only outcome another computer program will have is to bring it closer towards being a tie. Knowing the action your opponent took does not provide you with enough information about what cards he holds to alter your decision at all. The program in TFA has optimized every single hand in the game so that it makes the most logical choice. Jesus Christ, it's like I'm playing cards with my sister's kids or something...
As others have said, there's no way for you to know what the other player (in this case the other computer) holds, so you can't have any additional data with which to make a different decision. All you know is whether they bet, call, raise, or fold.
The thing about this robot is that it only wins over time and many hands. The best you can do with another robot is to tie. But that's all in the long run and assumes you have deep enough pockets to keep playing through the losing hands. The odds don't hold up for individual games played in isolation. Texas Hold'Em is very dependent on the draw of the cards and that randomness makes it impossible to win every time. This robot won't win every single hand so it's maybe not so hard to beat in the short term over a few hands if you get a lucky draw. But in the long run it will win (or tie if it's playing another robot).
If AMC didn't release it, they would have found another channel to do it. It's not like there aren't options out there to shop around when trying to sell a show to a network.
Sure, there's still a few good shows out there. But the signal-to-noise ratio is a lot lower now than it ever was. And it gets worse the more channels you add.
Slashdot Mirror
Better question.
Who cares?
But will it run Linux?
Imagine a Beowulf cluster of these.
Unfortunately, they're using the only schtick they know when it comes to innovation. Build something vaguely similar to what everyone else is doing and then use their monopoly position to leverage everyone into using it. Trouble is, they don't have the lever any more and it doesn't work. So they have no idea how to proceed. This is why their response to the failure of Windows 8 is so confused.
But here's the thing. I'm sure there are a handful of people who don't have anything complex to do on their laptop but like having a keyboard when posting their instafacetwitter drivel but still like to have a portable tablet with a touch screen. However, the whole reason Windows 8 has been such an utter and complete failure is that the business world has people doing real work on real desktops and laptops that need real windows. We're not a bunch of hipster douchebags who have nothing better to do than to break out in bad choreographed dancing at staff meetings. We have work to do. We don't care about transitioning from desktop to anything because there's no reason for us to do it. We don't want a tablet UI infecting our desktop/laptop operating system. We want to get our work done. This absurd attempt to make one operating system fit for both business desktops and consumer electronics devices is a fool's errand. Call it whatever you want, it's a stupid idea. Desktops and work laptops need a desktop OS/UI. Phones and tablets need a mobile OS/UI. Trying to make one OS/UI for the whole market will just ensure that you will fail utterly at both. Microsoft needs to rectify their cranial-rectal inversion and break the two halves into separate products.
You specifically said "as the text could be compressed" and nothing else. I wasn't sure if you had thought of padding the message as well.
Let's be honest though, most people haven't read too many of the post ep-6 books. Sure, a lot of fans have, but the audience that has seen the movies eclipses the fan base that reads the books. And to them, the universe is wide open post ep-6 so they can do whatever they want with the movies and not offend a majority of the people who go see them. Besides, even if they tried to follow cannon, they would have to make some compromise for translation to the big screen that would offend the fans who read the books anyway so it's not like they would be happy with the movies no matter what they did.
My nostalgia for the originals extends as far as appreciating reasonably quality dialog, cast that can act instead of woodenly reciting lines in front of a camera, and a story line that is at least remotely compelling, convincing, and entertaining. Not really a high bar to clear but Lucas failed miserably on all of that with the prequels.
"The chair is against the wall, the chair is against the wall. John has a long mustache, John has a long mustache."
There isn't an encryption scheme the NSA hasn't already secretly cracked.
One time pads are unbreakable if you have truly random pads and never reuse them.
All you can know is that the block is x characters long and you can only really presume that, as the text could be compressed.
The message can also be padded with random data as well so you you don't even know the true length of the message.
Not only that but they gave us a bit scene in one of the greatest movies of all time.
Damn kids. They just don't know the classics... /facepalm
https://www.youtube.com/watch?...
I hate Illinois Nazis.
I agree. But the point was that TFA addressed how you get a keyboard attached to the system. I wouldn't ever buy or use this silly contraption. But it's possible to hook up a keyboard no matter how absurd the configuration is.
...on the keyboard...
Why not plug one into one of the two USB 3.0 ports that are mentioned in TFA but not in the synopsis?
C as a first language has two significant drawbacks.
First is that it has an abnormally steep learning curve. It's virtually impossible to learn about arrays without learning about pointers and that's a complicated subject to tackle early.
Second is that it is only an iterative language. It has no significant support for OOP like more modern languages. Given the distribution of careers in the field, introducing students to OOP concepts early with a popular language that supports those features is a good idea. Students with knowledge of OOP can translate some of their understanding backwards to an iterative language. But students with no OOP knowledge are handicapped going forward.
Still, it's a good idea to teach standalone C once you get to an operating systems or embedded systems programming environment just so students can understand what it takes to build the foundation that supports a C++ program.
Maybe I was thinking of Javascript. I've been working in the embedded systems world my whole career so I don't use Java enough to remember much about it.
But the principle still stands with Javascript. Learn the basic constructs of iterative programming without having to worry about types first. Then introduce the more complex principles as you get towards a language like C++ When switching to Java, you can do types before OOP (which may be a good idea anyway) and then get to C++ to learn about pointers and so forth.
When they're done with the class they have exposure to multiple related industry standard languages and all of the basic comp sci principles that apply from top to bottom and they're ready to start in doing real work in advanced classes when they hit college.
Why not teach more than one language? These are AP classes for smart kids. They can handle it.
Start with Java. Run them through the basic iterative programming constructs (conditionals, loops, etc). Then go on to basic OOP principles. Once you're through that you can go back and start with C++ and introduce them to statically typed variables and pointers. There's no reason a smart kid in the last couple years of high school can't grasp all of this in a single AP class.
I know it's a radical idea to teach advanced topics to kids in an Advanced Placement class but hey, I like rocking the boat.
True. It is the golden rule after all.
He who has the gold makes the rules.
Plutocracy is the better term. Oligarchy simply refers to few ruling many and can include any structure where a small number of people rule the masses. The USA is a plutocracy, which is rule by the wealthy elite (and, by definition, one form of oligarchy).
Indeed, idiots abound at /. The computer program in TFA does exactly that. There's no way to do any better than in in the long run. Sure, you may win a few hands but the more hands you play, the hard it is going to be to beat the computer. The only outcome another computer program will have is to bring it closer towards being a tie. Knowing the action your opponent took does not provide you with enough information about what cards he holds to alter your decision at all. The program in TFA has optimized every single hand in the game so that it makes the most logical choice. Jesus Christ, it's like I'm playing cards with my sister's kids or something...
As others have said, there's no way for you to know what the other player (in this case the other computer) holds, so you can't have any additional data with which to make a different decision. All you know is whether they bet, call, raise, or fold.
The thing about this robot is that it only wins over time and many hands. The best you can do with another robot is to tie. But that's all in the long run and assumes you have deep enough pockets to keep playing through the losing hands. The odds don't hold up for individual games played in isolation. Texas Hold'Em is very dependent on the draw of the cards and that randomness makes it impossible to win every time. This robot won't win every single hand so it's maybe not so hard to beat in the short term over a few hands if you get a lucky draw. But in the long run it will win (or tie if it's playing another robot).
If AMC didn't release it, they would have found another channel to do it. It's not like there aren't options out there to shop around when trying to sell a show to a network.
Sure, there's still a few good shows out there. But the signal-to-noise ratio is a lot lower now than it ever was. And it gets worse the more channels you add.