Re:Von Neumann Architecture Can't Do It.
on
Arguing A.I.
·
· Score: 1
Training and letting the AI work out the some of the problems may be required. However the AI has a great advantage. We can simulate those inputs, creating a virtual world that we let the AI run on. Perhaps running through years worth of sensory input, filtering and communication, in days. At that point we have a virtual life that we can burn to as many AI brains as we want possibly tweaking a few personality variables to create variety.
I was just at the Security Focus Vulnerabilities page and the page has had the linux aggregate stat removed from the list, sometime between 9am pdt and 12:30pm pdt. I guess some good came out of the article.
Where does this reporter get off comparing Windows to the Linux Aggregate? Looking at the stats he evidently used, you will have less vulnerabilities using all the Linux distros, except Redhat. The reporter makes it sound like if you install Linux you will have more than twice as many vulnerabilities, when in all actuality you will have many fewer, unless you use Redhat and then you only have twelve more.
I don't know how common it is, but there is a feature that some DVD players have that will start the DVD in the exact spot you were watching when you turned off your DVD Player. No intros or disclaimers. I imagine in the near future this will be standard.
You have to remember though that the people that run AOL don't have the foggiest idea who Red Hat is. AOL can get programmers, they must have someone creating the current version of the AOL client. I can't see how this will help them at all. If they want to do it they can do it without Red Hat. Most importantly aren't the users going to be annoyed after installing the new AOL OS and find out that the vast majority of software they can buy in retail outlets doesn't run on their system.
This is all about being able to get MS software on as many computers as possible. MS is seeing that there is a slowdown in the PC market. The non computer enthusiast is happy with his P3 1Ghz and will be able to surf the web for a very long time without needing an upgrade to windows. MS wants new markets. With CLR Windows could provide the virtual machine for that embedded chip in your stove so you can pull up recipes you did in Office..Net and internet based applications MS probably plans on having us subscribe to pretty much require platform independence.
Well, if any of them tried to sue I would probably try to get one of the/. guys to post the story with this headline "Dead mathematicians join to sue Publishing Company"
It's just a start, but if you head to this link you can get a preview stack for Windows 2000 SP1.
http://msdn.microsoft.com/downloads/sdks/platform/ tpipv6.asp
We are continually told that the top 10% of the population pays roughly one third of all taxes. With the information provided it does sound unfair, however I wonder if we would find that statistic unfair if we were provided with more information such as the percentage of income the top 10% make. In a quick search I was unable to find the percentage of income for the top 10%. I did find the 1992 percentage for the top 1% of the population. The 1992 income percentage for the top 1% was 8.3% of all income. Without more data I can't say for sure, but this does lead me to believe that by income the top 10% should be paying somewhere around 33% of all taxes.
If a tax cut is needed, I can't see the fairness in giving the majority of it to the rich.
Slashdot Mirror
Training and letting the AI work out the some of the problems may be required. However the AI has a great advantage. We can simulate those inputs, creating a virtual world that we let the AI run on. Perhaps running through years worth of sensory input, filtering and communication, in days. At that point we have a virtual life that we can burn to as many AI brains as we want possibly tweaking a few personality variables to create variety.
I was just at the Security Focus Vulnerabilities page and the page has had the linux aggregate stat removed from the list, sometime between 9am pdt and 12:30pm pdt. I guess some good came out of the article.
Where does this reporter get off comparing Windows to the Linux Aggregate? Looking at the stats he evidently used, you will have less vulnerabilities using all the Linux distros, except Redhat. The reporter makes it sound like if you install Linux you will have more than twice as many vulnerabilities, when in all actuality you will have many fewer, unless you use Redhat and then you only have twelve more.
I don't know how common it is, but there is a feature that some DVD players have that will start the DVD in the exact spot you were watching when you turned off your DVD Player. No intros or disclaimers. I imagine in the near future this will be standard.
You have to remember though that the people that run AOL don't have the foggiest idea who Red Hat is. AOL can get programmers, they must have someone creating the current version of the AOL client. I can't see how this will help them at all. If they want to do it they can do it without Red Hat. Most importantly aren't the users going to be annoyed after installing the new AOL OS and find out that the vast majority of software they can buy in retail outlets doesn't run on their system.
This is all about being able to get MS software on as many computers as possible. MS is seeing that there is a slowdown in the PC market. The non computer enthusiast is happy with his P3 1Ghz and will be able to surf the web for a very long time without needing an upgrade to windows. MS wants new markets. With CLR Windows could provide the virtual machine for that embedded chip in your stove so you can pull up recipes you did in Office. .Net and internet based applications MS probably plans on having us subscribe to pretty much require platform independence.
Well, if any of them tried to sue I would probably try to get one of the /. guys to post the story with this headline "Dead mathematicians join to sue Publishing Company"
It's just a start, but if you head to this link you can get a preview stack for Windows 2000 SP1. http://msdn.microsoft.com/downloads/sdks/platform/ tpipv6.asp
We are continually told that the top 10% of the population pays roughly one third of all taxes. With the information provided it does sound unfair, however I wonder if we would find that statistic unfair if we were provided with more information such as the percentage of income the top 10% make. In a quick search I was unable to find the percentage of income for the top 10%. I did find the 1992 percentage for the top 1% of the population. The 1992 income percentage for the top 1% was 8.3% of all income. Without more data I can't say for sure, but this does lead me to believe that by income the top 10% should be paying somewhere around 33% of all taxes. If a tax cut is needed, I can't see the fairness in giving the majority of it to the rich.