You have ways of dealing with bacteria in the human body.
First you kill the bacteria.(war) Eventually that may cease to work, at this point your body develops immunity to the bacteria (it defends against it) the evolution occurs when the body finds ways to make that bacteria "GOOD" and useful to the human body. (this is the route we should take)
The Human Body even knows not to have war with something forever. It stresses the body (hurts the enviornment), it consumes resouces (money, time, effort), it kills many many cells (lives are lost)
The body has an evolution process, you are saying we shouldnt? we should be in perpetual war even when we have nano technology and biotechnology? The technologies which allow us to control nature?
I'm sorry but the rules HAVE changed. When technology reaches a certain point just like when the body is sick for a certain amount of time, it evolves, this is how we create vaccines!
Vaccines are the cure, you can have a Vaccine for aids, or you can keep taking AZT drug cocktails and wait until its time for you to die from aids.
Religion is not the cause of war. The problem is people dont follow religions which are anti war, and if they do, they ignore the "do not kill" sign on the front of their bibles and qurans.
Its not religion, its people. People want to destroy themselves. Some people their only purpose in life, are to destroy other people, Hitler is a good example.
Theres lots of other people like hitler, all of his Nazi followers, the KKK, Al Qaeda, these people live only to kill other people, they are like rogue cancer cells of society.
Yes I'm calling these people a cancer, because its going to be one of these groups of people, who will take a nano virus and lets say the KKK and Nazis get together, make a nano virus which kills all minorities.
You'll wake up one morning and every non white aryan person will be dead.
The technology is at the point where if we dont evolve, we wont survive another terrorist attack, theres terrorists INSIDE the USA, the KKK and Nazis are INSIDE the USA!!
I'm betting it was one of these groups who sent Antrax, let them get ahold of nano technology!
I dont want War, I'm not greedy, I dont have any of those problems, I dont steal, I dont exploit people, I dont murder, From what I know, based on the definition of Human Nature, I'm not human?
Uh no, I think its the other way around, Human Nature was meant to evolve, some Humans have the nature of CaveMen, other humans have a more evolved Human Nature.
I'll say that its human nature to love, but most humans dont.
So I guess thats just MY nature. I want a utopia where everyone loves everyone and shares,
Of course, the rest of the world does not seem to be ready for it, the problem is, our technology is ready for this, when you have nano technology, if you arent evolved enough to handle it, you'll use it to destroy yourself.
Its no diffrent than giving a monkey an atomic bomb and letting him play with it.
The problem with most people on this planet is they dont seek enlightenment, they dont TRY to improve theirselves,
I'm not christian, but i believe what jesus and other prophets were trying to teach us, is we should constantly improve ourselves, and search for enlightenment.
Most people are satisfied living like cavemen, doing stuff they shouldnt be doing and having no morals, they dont even give it any time to think that what they are doing is WRONG.
War isnt Human Nature, its Caveman nature, not every Human is a Caveman.
The reason we arent evolving, the anti war people are ignored and are considered stupid college kids, or hippies.
Look, while some of us MAY be evolved above the rest of the haters and war lovers, it doesnt change they fact that they decide the fate of humanity not us.
If they want to destroy us in wars, they can, if they want to pollute the air and enviornment they can.
You cant even get in their position in government because its like a fucking monarchy, the green party has been trying for years to get in and arent getting anywhere.
Thats right, its a goal of many people to kill themselves, they dont know they are doing this, they think they are killing the enemy.
What humans just cant figure out is, we are all one, instead of us acting as a team we fight ourselves. This is why I dont think we will last for 50 more years, because the next big war wont involve nukes, its going to be a nano war, mixed with bio terrorism, a war you cant stop no matter what technology you have, and a war where both sides will die.
So whats the choice? The choice is to end all war, and all causes of war, such as hate, find ways to handle political disputes or just form a one world government for all I care, but war is something that should cease to exsist in the next 10-20 years, because if it still exsists at this time, it wont just be nuking one country, it will be spores spreading all over the world killing billions, or nano viruses killing the whole planet.
Technology is at the point now where war is just no longer practical. When will we evolve socially to the level we are at with technology? If theres no balance, we wont properly use our new technology and will destroy ourselves.
The amount of wars we have, and considering we are entering the nano age and still cant get along. Expect us to destroy ourselves for good in the next world war.
The setup image is most likely how E17 will look when finished, the setup image is running on evas i believe, when Xrender is up to par, or evas is up to par, the rest of E17 should look like that. Right now however i believe because of X, hardware accelleration via Evas and OpenGL is difficult, the setup screen is done in openGL
I think you all should check out a few of these pictures
http://desktopian.org/e17/screenshots/
Theres an example of themes. I'm Glad Themes.org is back, now we have a place to show off our linux desktops and help kill the whole "Linux is hard to use" myth.
Its hard to configure, but its easy to install and use, it DOES have a GUI, and the GUI is better than XP (even if its alittle bit slower due to xfree)
Face it, its their way of trying to make you feel morally wrong for doing what you have a right to do.
You paid for access to the information, once it gets to you its YOURS to do whatever you want with it, or at least thats how it should be. information is NOT an object, its more like air, they want to charge you for air and then say you are a thief if you use the air in the wrong way, (example you find a way to use the air to create more air)
Information is not a physical object, it cannot be stolen. It can be copied, shared, illegally distributed, but to call someone a thief or a pirate, is just a way of issuing out your propaganda, to make you feel morally wrong for doing whats right.
Its that simple, change business model or go out of business.
Im fucking sick of this corperate bailouts, its far worse than welfare for the commons who may actually need it, corperate welfare is to help some rich billionare monopoly corperation stay on top.
If we pass this into law, we are fucking morons, they already bailed out airports i mean damn
The only people who want legislation are the MPAA/RIAA, and congress and senate who are influenced(or bribed) by these groups.
The consumers dont want new laws, they dont even want the DMCA, the musicians dont want new laws, the techies like us dont want new laws.
Why should we create laws just to bail out record companies, its almost as stupid as the airport bailout 20 billion dollar thing, to put it simply, its corperate welfare.
Why the hell should billionare companies get welfare?!
Say I want to put your peices on "BAD" squares. So I check your king early on, to force you to block check with a pawn, then i set up an exchange which puts two more pawns in the way or your bishop. I've just blocked your bishop from attacking giving me a peice advantage. Lets say i move more pawns forward and slowly take away spots your knight can move to.
What you have here is no good moves to choose from, you've lost control of the game, all my peices are on the best squares while all your peices are trapped behind pawns and have poor angles, by using checks, timely exchanges, and etc, if planned right you can easily TRICK a computer into giving you control of the board.
Let a simple exchange of peices can have the end result with my peice on a better square, a simple check can put your pawn on a square i want it to be on, a simple THREAT via my improved position can force you to move your peices to defend against it, i've effectively taken control of the board and you'll spend the entire game reacting to my every move struggling to fight your way out of checkmate, threats of checkmate, and trying to get your peices on decent squares.
What good is your knight if its in the corner of the board because i put your knight there via some exchange which forced your knight to go there. What good is a bishop if its behind a pawn because i PUT the pawn there when I checked you.
Seems like a wasted move, but that pawn blocking your king was your BEST and ONLY move, and it happened to give me control of the board.
By the flow of the game I mean, depending on the squares your peices are on decides the possible moves the opponent has.
If you have your peices on all the best squares with the best angles of attack, no matter if your opponnent is deep blue, fritz or the most powerful computer ever created, its still not going to have any GOOD moves to choose from, all the moves will be a choice between which bad move they want to make.
This guy doesnt live in a city so he doesnt know about the 1k a month rent. BUT thats how much rent is here too.
You need at least 35k to survive, and thats to survive on the edge of poverty.
Anything under 30k is poverty in terms of your standard of living, you wont have enough money to get an apartment so you'll either share one, or live in a shelter.
Thats my point, computers dont understand that position is the most important aspect of chess.
Not tactics, not calculations, and problem solving.
You can teach a computer to be perfect with problem solving and calculations, but to teach a computer to recognize good positions, and understand the flow of the board, thats VERY difficult.
In chess, the first person to lose control of the board, loses the game most of the time when the game is between two very good players.
A chess program no matter how good it can possibly be, cant get its way all of the time, when the position swings in your favor, you have the chance to win, when it swings in the machines favor the machine has the chance to win.
Machines are good with calculations, machines are bad with switching the board in their favor.
To beat most machines you have to be like an enforcer, you set the pace, you keep attacking, you litterally pound it into submission keeping it on defense all game until you checkmate it.
IF the machine gains control even once, it can calculate a checkmate
Chess games flow like a river, the aggressor usually controls the flow of the river, computers are almost never the aggressor, if the computer is, the game will most likely be a win for the computer, if the human is the aggressor like usually, the game will be a draw because computers dont make mistakes, humans do.
Chess games on the higher level come down to which human makes a mistake first, when you have a grandmaster who never makes mistakes playing another grandmaster who never makes mistakes, and the game isnt timed to create error, it will be a draw 90 percent of the time, the winning factor in these games are strategy.
players have styles, I play positional, but i have difficulity playing games with lots of traps. I often take chances via gambits to gain positional and development advantage early on to establish the flow of the game.
If both players are good and use preset openings, yes it will always be a draw. most openings go for 20-30 moves, somem go for 40-50 moves, and lead to equal positions for both sides, a quick exchange of pieces and you end up with a draw.
Slashdot Mirror
Humans arent bacteria.
You have ways of dealing with bacteria in the human body.
First you kill the bacteria.(war) Eventually that may cease to work, at this point your body develops immunity to the bacteria (it defends against it) the evolution occurs when the body finds ways to make that bacteria "GOOD" and useful to the human body. (this is the route we should take)
The Human Body even knows not to have war with something forever. It stresses the body (hurts the enviornment), it consumes resouces (money, time, effort), it kills many many cells (lives are lost)
The body has an evolution process, you are saying we shouldnt? we should be in perpetual war even when we have nano technology and biotechnology? The technologies which allow us to control nature?
I'm sorry but the rules HAVE changed. When technology reaches a certain point just like when the body is sick for a certain amount of time, it evolves, this is how we create vaccines!
Vaccines are the cure, you can have a Vaccine for aids, or you can keep taking AZT drug cocktails and wait until its time for you to die from aids.
Religion is not the cause of war. The problem is people dont follow religions which are anti war, and if they do, they ignore the "do not kill" sign on the front of their bibles and qurans.
Its not religion, its people. People want to destroy themselves. Some people their only purpose in life, are to destroy other people, Hitler is a good example.
Theres lots of other people like hitler, all of his Nazi followers, the KKK, Al Qaeda, these people live only to kill other people, they are like rogue cancer cells of society.
Yes I'm calling these people a cancer, because its going to be one of these groups of people, who will take a nano virus and lets say the KKK and Nazis get together, make a nano virus which kills all minorities.
You'll wake up one morning and every non white aryan person will be dead.
The technology is at the point where if we dont evolve, we wont survive another terrorist attack, theres terrorists INSIDE the USA, the KKK and Nazis are INSIDE the USA!!
I'm betting it was one of these groups who sent Antrax, let them get ahold of nano technology!
I dont want War, I'm not greedy, I dont have any of those problems, I dont steal, I dont exploit people, I dont murder, From what I know, based on the definition of Human Nature, I'm not human?
Uh no, I think its the other way around, Human Nature was meant to evolve, some Humans have the nature of CaveMen, other humans have a more evolved Human Nature.
I'll say that its human nature to love, but most humans dont.
So I guess thats just MY nature. I want a utopia where everyone loves everyone and shares,
Of course, the rest of the world does not seem to be ready for it, the problem is, our technology is ready for this, when you have nano technology, if you arent evolved enough to handle it, you'll use it to destroy yourself.
Its no diffrent than giving a monkey an atomic bomb and letting him play with it.
The problem with most people on this planet is they dont seek enlightenment, they dont TRY to improve theirselves,
I'm not christian, but i believe what jesus and other prophets were trying to teach us, is we should constantly improve ourselves, and search for enlightenment.
Most people are satisfied living like cavemen, doing stuff they shouldnt be doing and having no morals, they dont even give it any time to think that what they are doing is WRONG.
War isnt Human Nature, its Caveman nature, not every Human is a Caveman.
Evolution. Human Nature was meant to EVOLVE.
I'm sick of every cave man, murderer, theif, and other bad person getting the term "Oh its just human nature"
No, its caveman nature. This is 2002, Humans should evolve to my level, or else why should I consider them human? I can consider them animals.
The reason we arent evolving, the anti war people are ignored and are considered stupid college kids, or hippies.
Look, while some of us MAY be evolved above the rest of the haters and war lovers, it doesnt change they fact that they decide the fate of humanity not us.
If they want to destroy us in wars, they can, if they want to pollute the air and enviornment they can.
You cant even get in their position in government because its like a fucking monarchy, the green party has been trying for years to get in and arent getting anywhere.
Thats right, its a goal of many people to kill themselves, they dont know they are doing this, they think they are killing the enemy.
What humans just cant figure out is, we are all one, instead of us acting as a team we fight ourselves. This is why I dont think we will last for 50 more years, because the next big war wont involve nukes, its going to be a nano war, mixed with bio terrorism, a war you cant stop no matter what technology you have, and a war where both sides will die.
So whats the choice? The choice is to end all war, and all causes of war, such as hate, find ways to handle political disputes or just form a one world government for all I care, but war is something that should cease to exsist in the next 10-20 years, because if it still exsists at this time, it wont just be nuking one country, it will be spores spreading all over the world killing billions, or nano viruses killing the whole planet.
Technology is at the point now where war is just no longer practical. When will we evolve socially to the level we are at with technology? If theres no balance, we wont properly use our new technology and will destroy ourselves.
The End.
The amount of wars we have, and considering we are entering the nano age and still cant get along. Expect us to destroy ourselves for good in the next world war.
The setup image is most likely how E17 will look when finished, the setup image is running on evas i believe, when Xrender is up to par, or evas is up to par, the rest of E17 should look like that. Right now however i believe because of X, hardware accelleration via Evas and OpenGL is difficult, the setup screen is done in openGL
E17 is improving drastically.
I think you all should check out a few of these pictures
http://desktopian.org/e17/screenshots/
Theres an example of themes. I'm Glad Themes.org is back, now we have a place to show off our linux desktops and help kill the whole "Linux is hard to use" myth.
Its hard to configure, but its easy to install and use, it DOES have a GUI, and the GUI is better than XP (even if its alittle bit slower due to xfree)
Face it, its their way of trying to make you feel morally wrong for doing what you have a right to do.
You paid for access to the information, once it gets to you its YOURS to do whatever you want with it, or at least thats how it should be. information is NOT an object, its more like air, they want to charge you for air and then say you are a thief if you use the air in the wrong way, (example you find a way to use the air to create more air)
Information is not a physical object, it cannot be stolen.
It can be copied, shared, illegally distributed, but to call someone a thief or a pirate, is just a way of issuing out your propaganda, to make you feel morally wrong for doing whats right.
Practice.
Your brain ic capable. You just need to play chess more often.
Its simple, These companies can change their business and adapt, or go out of business.
We should NOT help billionares keep their monopoly because they are afraid of napster!
And change their damn business model.
Its that simple, change business model or go out of business.
Im fucking sick of this corperate bailouts, its far worse than welfare for the commons who may actually need it, corperate welfare is to help some rich billionare monopoly corperation stay on top.
If we pass this into law, we are fucking morons, they already bailed out airports i mean damn
The only people who want legislation are the MPAA/RIAA, and congress and senate who are influenced(or bribed) by these groups.
The consumers dont want new laws, they dont even want the DMCA, the musicians dont want new laws, the techies like us dont want new laws.
Why should we create laws just to bail out record companies, its almost as stupid as the airport bailout 20 billion dollar thing, to put it simply, its corperate welfare.
Why the hell should billionare companies get welfare?!
Say I want to put your peices on "BAD" squares. So I check your king early on, to force you to block check with a pawn, then i set up an exchange which puts two more pawns in the way or your bishop. I've just blocked your bishop from attacking giving me a peice advantage. Lets say i move more pawns forward and slowly take away spots your knight can move to.
What you have here is no good moves to choose from, you've lost control of the game, all my peices are on the best squares while all your peices are trapped behind pawns and have poor angles, by using checks, timely exchanges, and etc, if planned right you can easily TRICK a computer into giving you control of the board.
Let a simple exchange of peices can have the end result with my peice on a better square, a simple check can put your pawn on a square i want it to be on, a simple THREAT via my improved position can force you to move your peices to defend against it, i've effectively taken control of the board and you'll spend the entire game reacting to my every move struggling to fight your way out of checkmate, threats of checkmate, and trying to get your peices on decent squares.
What good is your knight if its in the corner of the board because i put your knight there via some exchange which forced your knight to go there.
What good is a bishop if its behind a pawn because i PUT the pawn there when I checked you.
Seems like a wasted move, but that pawn blocking your king was your BEST and ONLY move, and it happened to give me control of the board.
By the flow of the game I mean, depending on the squares your peices are on decides the possible moves the opponent has.
If you have your peices on all the best squares with the best angles of attack, no matter if your opponnent is deep blue, fritz or the most powerful computer ever created, its still not going to have any GOOD moves to choose from, all the moves will be a choice between which bad move they want to make.
MONEY
theres not a supply problem, thats a complete myth.
Programs like that start becuase its cheaper to hire them than to hire you.
This guy doesnt live in a city so he doesnt know about the 1k a month rent. BUT thats how much rent is here too.
You need at least 35k to survive, and thats to survive on the edge of poverty.
Anything under 30k is poverty in terms of your standard of living, you wont have enough money to get an apartment so you'll either share one, or live in a shelter.
Thats my point, computers dont understand that position is the most important aspect of chess.
Not tactics, not calculations, and problem solving.
You can teach a computer to be perfect with problem solving and calculations, but to teach a computer to recognize good positions, and understand the flow of the board, thats VERY difficult.
In chess, the first person to lose control of the board, loses the game most of the time when the game is between two very good players.
A chess program no matter how good it can possibly be, cant get its way all of the time, when the position swings in your favor, you have the chance to win, when it swings in the machines favor the machine has the chance to win.
Machines are good with calculations, machines are bad with switching the board in their favor.
To beat most machines you have to be like an enforcer, you set the pace, you keep attacking, you litterally pound it into submission keeping it on defense all game until you checkmate it.
IF the machine gains control even once, it can calculate a checkmate
Anonymous coward is right.
But most good chessplayers take notes and go through a list of the best lines just like a computer does.
I do it, i have notes with the best lines and i pick the one which leads to the best outcome
Chess is not one sided.
Chess games flow like a river, the aggressor usually controls the flow of the river, computers are almost never the aggressor, if the computer is, the game will most likely be a win for the computer, if the human is the aggressor like usually, the game will be a draw because computers dont make mistakes, humans do.
Chess games on the higher level come down to which human makes a mistake first, when you have a grandmaster who never makes mistakes playing another grandmaster who never makes mistakes, and the game isnt timed to create error, it will be a draw 90 percent of the time, the winning factor in these games are strategy.
players have styles, I play positional, but i have difficulity playing games with lots of traps. I often take chances via gambits to gain positional and development advantage early on to establish the flow of the game.
If both players are good and use preset openings, yes it will always be a draw. most openings go for 20-30 moves, somem go for 40-50 moves, and lead to equal positions for both sides, a quick exchange of pieces and you end up with a draw.
Any chess players here who want to play chess online.
http://chessline.cjb.net Play on Chessline