Except for the whole 'only works for a rare brain disorder' bit you are correct!
We can't learn how to fix ourselves if we use crippled cells instead of known good ones.
Not unless I've forgotten more from my signals courses than I thought. If you use a fourier transform, your independent variable becomes w. w=2pi*f. You have positive w and negative w, but only positive w can be broadcast.
When you use a fourier transform to put a signal into frequency domain you end up with positive/negative components. If you then bandshift, the negative component becomes positive and will actually exist when broadcast. But only the positive part is actually a physical thing. It's... weird.
But you know what I mean. All the equations of motion work if we negative mass, but that alone isn't any reason to think that negative mass exists. Was that a better example?
What. The. Hell. This is not profound. This is trivial.
Anybody that took any science classes knows that the equations work fine as long as v != c. Just like I can get negative frequencies out of a fourier transform. The math works, but that doesn't mean I have actual, physical negative frequencies.
If the smoke coming out of a factory smelled as bad and was as toxic as cigarette smoke, the factory would be shut down. I don't feel bad for you.
As for the article, it's stupid that the gov't and business is trying to control what employees do on their off hours. It's frankly none of their business.
Look, you can do it the easy way or the hard way. When tech is cheap, why not do it the easy way? And when you've got the extra power, why not go for some bells and whistles?
And did you read the goddamn article? The guy wants to glance at his brewer and make sure it's still doing what it should. Should he make it beep morse just because he can?! Seriously, what kind of idiot would build something like this without a display?
It's really not. It's just going too fast. I mean it when I say it could shoot satellites.
Basically you're stuck in a catch-22. If you lower the power so you actually get a nice arc, you don't have enough destructive power. If you fire with enough power to get the destructive effect, trying to shoot over the horizon is pointless - your forward momentum runs out before it hits the ground. Railguns are direct-fire weapons.
I love railguns, but the only thing I can think of for them to shoot is aircraft and satellites. Maybe ICBM defence as well? Things above the horizon, anyway.
Railguns are exactly the wrong answer for point defence. You want lots of material in the air for that. Railguns put one very, very fast projectile out.
Unfortunately you're dead wrong. We can power them. Maybe not easily, but we can do it. The problem is that you get something like three shots before the rails have eroded to the point of uselessness. Too much friction, too much electrical arcing.
You are also wrong. If I remember correctly, the fuel costs for a single human are somewhere around $100,000. That's expensive, but not insanely so. Rich people could do it time and time again. Except that we throw away the launcher every time we go up, or the (space) shuttle requires so much maintenance that it might as well be rebuilt.
I agree that we need better methods. But even with just rockets, we could be doing miles better than we are.
I'd just like to point out - nuts and bolts will never, ever disappear. We have a million other ways to stick things together, but nuts and bolts still reign supreme. Why? Because they're the right size for humans to work with, they can be attached and removed a nearly infinite number of times with no damage to the parts they are holding, they are clean, they are cheap, and they are damn effective.
I think that Aubry DeGrey has this one right. They'd simply be murdered if they tried. It's the kind of discovery that more or less has to be distributed.
This is what I am afraid of. I am afraid that the technology to live forever will be in our grasp, but it might be thrown away because of mystical nutjobs.
Dying is natural. So is gangrene. Dying is inevitable. So is the heat death of the universe. I will take every goddamn second I can. The universe is cold and uncaring but who gives a shit? The play is pointless but I'll take every moment on stage I can.
Ever heard of the Nuremberg trials? The Allies hung plenty of people who were following orders. Talking about international laws as if they magically make things right and wrong is stupid beyond belief. You do what you feel is right. If your government is corrupt, you out them. If your orders are immoral, you don't follow them.
Sure, but if I understand 'Randism' at all correctly, the banks shouldn't be regulated because that would interfere with the liberty of the lenders. Somehow the threat of collapse would keep them from making poor choices.
Of course, it makes more sense to think that the owners would run it into the ground, make out like bandits, and leave the ashes of a company while they moved on. Because that's what happens now, even with regulation.
Some kinds of power plants need a minimum load or have significant ramp times to hit a target power output. Hydro is great because you can scale to meet demand really easily, but boiler-based plants, not so much. (You have to heat a huge amount of mass to increase the power output.) So if you adjust the baseline of the boiler plant to slightly lower than would otherwise be necessary, and use a storage station to meet the peaks, this kind of thing works out quite well.
Well yeah the design sucked. That's my point. It would be phenomenally hard to produce a contextual CLI that wasn't either really dangerous to your system and sanity, or really, really on-the-level-of-vista-UAC annoying.
Riiight. I remember a small independent gas station owner in my home town. The guy had to have the entire lot ripped up, and the dirt shipped away to be decontaminated. I bet everybody living near there wished he had followed the gov't regs a little closer.
I'm going to tell a story I once heard that I think illustrates the problem quite well.
A user was working with a Do What I Mean CLI prompt. He was trying to clean up some install logs, and tried to use 'rm *.log'
Unfortunately, made a typo, and used 'rm *.lg' instead. Since this didn't do anything, the parser assumed he meant 'rm *' instead. This had predictable results.
I don't know how true this story is, but compare it to a google search. If google misinterprets a search string, who cares? If my CLI does it, I care very much. How many times have you searched for something obscure, only to have google 'correct' you to something completely different?
We could make CLIs that interpreted and understood synonyms and tried to figure out what you actually intended. We HAVE made some. But they suck. We want our CLIs to do exactly what we instruct them, and choke on errors. Any other method leads to madness and broken systems.
Slashdot Mirror
Except for the whole 'only works for a rare brain disorder' bit you are correct!
We can't learn how to fix ourselves if we use crippled cells instead of known good ones.
Not unless I've forgotten more from my signals courses than I thought. If you use a fourier transform, your independent variable becomes w. w=2pi*f. You have positive w and negative w, but only positive w can be broadcast.
When you use a fourier transform to put a signal into frequency domain you end up with positive/negative components. If you then bandshift, the negative component becomes positive and will actually exist when broadcast. But only the positive part is actually a physical thing. It's... weird.
But you know what I mean. All the equations of motion work if we negative mass, but that alone isn't any reason to think that negative mass exists. Was that a better example?
What. The. Hell. This is not profound. This is trivial.
Anybody that took any science classes knows that the equations work fine as long as v != c. Just like I can get negative frequencies out of a fourier transform. The math works, but that doesn't mean I have actual, physical negative frequencies.
If the smoke coming out of a factory smelled as bad and was as toxic as cigarette smoke, the factory would be shut down. I don't feel bad for you.
As for the article, it's stupid that the gov't and business is trying to control what employees do on their off hours. It's frankly none of their business.
Glad you're gone.
Look, you can do it the easy way or the hard way. When tech is cheap, why not do it the easy way? And when you've got the extra power, why not go for some bells and whistles?
And did you read the goddamn article? The guy wants to glance at his brewer and make sure it's still doing what it should. Should he make it beep morse just because he can?! Seriously, what kind of idiot would build something like this without a display?
Basically you're stuck in a catch-22. If you lower the power so you actually get a nice arc, you don't have enough destructive power. If you fire with enough power to get the destructive effect, trying to shoot over the horizon is pointless - your forward momentum runs out before it hits the ground. Railguns are direct-fire weapons.
I love railguns, but the only thing I can think of for them to shoot is aircraft and satellites. Maybe ICBM defence as well? Things above the horizon, anyway.
Railguns are exactly the wrong answer for point defence. You want lots of material in the air for that. Railguns put one very, very fast projectile out.
Unfortunately you're dead wrong. We can power them. Maybe not easily, but we can do it. The problem is that you get something like three shots before the rails have eroded to the point of uselessness. Too much friction, too much electrical arcing.
You are also wrong. If I remember correctly, the fuel costs for a single human are somewhere around $100,000. That's expensive, but not insanely so. Rich people could do it time and time again. Except that we throw away the launcher every time we go up, or the (space) shuttle requires so much maintenance that it might as well be rebuilt. I agree that we need better methods. But even with just rockets, we could be doing miles better than we are.
But then they would have to read the paper itself! Good idea.
I'd just like to point out - nuts and bolts will never, ever disappear. We have a million other ways to stick things together, but nuts and bolts still reign supreme. Why? Because they're the right size for humans to work with, they can be attached and removed a nearly infinite number of times with no damage to the parts they are holding, they are clean, they are cheap, and they are damn effective.
I think that Aubry DeGrey has this one right. They'd simply be murdered if they tried. It's the kind of discovery that more or less has to be distributed.
This is what I am afraid of. I am afraid that the technology to live forever will be in our grasp, but it might be thrown away because of mystical nutjobs.
Dying is natural. So is gangrene. Dying is inevitable. So is the heat death of the universe. I will take every goddamn second I can. The universe is cold and uncaring but who gives a shit? The play is pointless but I'll take every moment on stage I can.
Bull. Shit. Dying is a tragedy. No more, no less. It's not noble in any way, and does nothing meaningful for a person's life.
Sure. Completely correct. And I'm saying that maybe we should think about whether we want the same 'obey at all costs' mentality.
Ever heard of the Nuremberg trials? The Allies hung plenty of people who were following orders. Talking about international laws as if they magically make things right and wrong is stupid beyond belief. You do what you feel is right. If your government is corrupt, you out them. If your orders are immoral, you don't follow them.
Sure, but if I understand 'Randism' at all correctly, the banks shouldn't be regulated because that would interfere with the liberty of the lenders. Somehow the threat of collapse would keep them from making poor choices. Of course, it makes more sense to think that the owners would run it into the ground, make out like bandits, and leave the ashes of a company while they moved on. Because that's what happens now, even with regulation.
Some kinds of power plants need a minimum load or have significant ramp times to hit a target power output. Hydro is great because you can scale to meet demand really easily, but boiler-based plants, not so much. (You have to heat a huge amount of mass to increase the power output.) So if you adjust the baseline of the boiler plant to slightly lower than would otherwise be necessary, and use a storage station to meet the peaks, this kind of thing works out quite well.
Well yeah the design sucked. That's my point. It would be phenomenally hard to produce a contextual CLI that wasn't either really dangerous to your system and sanity, or really, really on-the-level-of-vista-UAC annoying.
Doubly appropriate, since the user manual is always written after the fact, and inconsistent with the rest of the documentation.
Riiight. I remember a small independent gas station owner in my home town. The guy had to have the entire lot ripped up, and the dirt shipped away to be decontaminated. I bet everybody living near there wished he had followed the gov't regs a little closer.
We could make CLIs that interpreted and understood synonyms and tried to figure out what you actually intended. We HAVE made some. But they suck. We want our CLIs to do exactly what we instruct them, and choke on errors. Any other method leads to madness and broken systems.