You're right... I forgot about G-d being the jewish way of writing God... Lately I've been spending some time on infidels.org and other messageboards where all the athiests etc insist on writing it that way, some going so far as writing Chr:st and such nonsense... I would have asked there, but I'm too lazy to register a login...
In unrelated news... Why did you write God that way? You may not believe in a god but it is an accepted proper noun in this language, and "I swear to God" is an accepted phrase which doesn't indicate anything about your personal beliefs. What you do is your perogative and I'm not trying to start any relgious debate I just find people doing that to be a little impolite and offensive. I do happen to believe in God, but I feel the same way when people feel the need to say things like "The unelected GWB" or similar things.
I guess it depends how you would enforce 'survival of the fittest'. I had in mind always requiring correct execution but I do see that in nature that is not a requirement. That is, it is very likely that in the process of gaining a new trait, the intermediate form may be at some disadvantage compared to its species before it had begun to gain this new trait (if we take my example of humans gaining gills... before the gills are functional and providing any benefit, the creature has to spend more energy when growing up to grow these not yet useful organs).
I suppose if we make the criteria to call an offspring 'successful' to be a combination of correctness and performance, we could allow a processor to be less correct than its parent if it does so while achieving nontrivially higher performance... under the assumption that in the future it may evolve into a processor which retains the higher peformance but also once again achieves correct execution. However, I still have my doubts about a processor evolving the more aggressive features that modern processors have. I don't know how much computer architecture you have studied, but the difference between an in-order processor and an out-of-order processor is very significant in terms of several processor structures. It is not clear to me that these structures could form by mere chance without overly disadvantaging the intermediate processors compared to other offspring. However, I am not an expert in evolution so perhaps equivalent things have occured in the past in nature.
The problem is, when constructing a computer, even the smallest of errors can lead to incorrect functioning. If you get a bit error under even the rarest of conditions, you can make the claim that produced processor is defective (yes I'm aware that probably every processor currently on the market has such defects). How many random changes does it take for one of these processors to 'grow' another pipeline stage, enabling a higher clock frequency? Probably about as many as it takes for a creature to birth an offspring with radically superior characteristics (ie, a human being born with both gills and lungs, for example). However, unlike in evolution in living beings, there are no intermediate steps that these processors can safely take. Unlike in humans where an intermediate step in the growth of gills might manifest itself as beneficial trait A (which somehow gives creatures with that trait a better chance of survival in the wild), these processors would have no such intermediate beneficial states in which to exist in their way to the definite and complete generation of a superior entity.
Slashdot Mirror
Lets not get into how the chinks have taken over the government... we have hippy clinton to thank for that happening...
Ahh... yeah I see... wait... no I don't...
Oh my god... don't you look fucking stupid... you were trying to make fun of dumb people and you don't even know it's called the interNET...
Geez!
I'm male but still interested... what do you say? I will provide snacks...
That's never happened to me but I can imagine that would really suck...
Hey I got a joke for you...
What do you say to a woman with two black eyes?
Nothing... you already told her twice!
So, apparently "letting it go" *is* beyond your capability... sad sad sad...
And for the record, I voted for Gore too...
suck my cock you wannabe wankers
Please violate my rectum
What does this have to do with Guns n' Roses?
Yes, and most of the time my cock is not in your mouth... but exceptions happen...
my cock... your ass...
your lungs... full of cum...
You're right... I forgot about G-d being the jewish way of writing God... Lately I've been spending some time on infidels.org and other messageboards where all the athiests etc insist on writing it that way, some going so far as writing Chr:st and such nonsense... I would have asked there, but I'm too lazy to register a login...
In unrelated news... Why did you write God that way? You may not believe in a god but it is an accepted proper noun in this language, and "I swear to God" is an accepted phrase which doesn't indicate anything about your personal beliefs. What you do is your perogative and I'm not trying to start any relgious debate I just find people doing that to be a little impolite and offensive. I do happen to believe in God, but I feel the same way when people feel the need to say things like "The unelected GWB" or similar things.
Just a question...
*zing*
I guess it depends how you would enforce 'survival of the fittest'. I had in mind always requiring correct execution but I do see that in nature that is not a requirement. That is, it is very likely that in the process of gaining a new trait, the intermediate form may be at some disadvantage compared to its species before it had begun to gain this new trait (if we take my example of humans gaining gills... before the gills are functional and providing any benefit, the creature has to spend more energy when growing up to grow these not yet useful organs).
I suppose if we make the criteria to call an offspring 'successful' to be a combination of correctness and performance, we could allow a processor to be less correct than its parent if it does so while achieving nontrivially higher performance... under the assumption that in the future it may evolve into a processor which retains the higher peformance but also once again achieves correct execution. However, I still have my doubts about a processor evolving the more aggressive features that modern processors have. I don't know how much computer architecture you have studied, but the difference between an in-order processor and an out-of-order processor is very significant in terms of several processor structures. It is not clear to me that these structures could form by mere chance without overly disadvantaging the intermediate processors compared to other offspring. However, I am not an expert in evolution so perhaps equivalent things have occured in the past in nature.
Any insufficiently bright slashdot poster is indistinguishable from a karma whore/troll...
The problem is, when constructing a computer, even the smallest of errors can lead to incorrect functioning. If you get a bit error under even the rarest of conditions, you can make the claim that produced processor is defective (yes I'm aware that probably every processor currently on the market has such defects). How many random changes does it take for one of these processors to 'grow' another pipeline stage, enabling a higher clock frequency? Probably about as many as it takes for a creature to birth an offspring with radically superior characteristics (ie, a human being born with both gills and lungs, for example). However, unlike in evolution in living beings, there are no intermediate steps that these processors can safely take. Unlike in humans where an intermediate step in the growth of gills might manifest itself as beneficial trait A (which somehow gives creatures with that trait a better chance of survival in the wild), these processors would have no such intermediate beneficial states in which to exist in their way to the definite and complete generation of a superior entity.
That's actually pretty funny I think...
Wanna fuck?
That, and the fact that niggers are generally lazy and greedy...
Same comment as other responder but replace 'english' with 'humor'
Can I be your, like, disciple?
get it? the joke is funny because it's about masturbation...
If they don't get around to the sucking off of you, I'd like in on that action, if possible...