Aleph[1] is what you become when you die as an Aleph[0].
Jeebus is Aleph[CXD] (where CXD is my pathetic imitation of an infinity sign; it is also the ASCII representation of the Jeebus-fish, which eats its own tail while turning the water it swims in into wine).
This isn't a programming language, it's a model of computation, and a poor one at that.
Whoop de doo. Another extra-complicated Turing machine substitute.
To quote from the semantics manual: "implementations represent the semantics instead of the reverse -- What a wild thought!"
What a ridiculous thought! What a wrong thought! The land doesn't represent the map. This is just an example of poor semantics (take that either way, both work).
It might be useful if they defined a representation, but that would cost them their gimmick, and make Eidola just another language to be judged on its true merits, wouldn't it? The sensible thing to do to avoid getting hung up on the representation would be to define a simple and consistent back-end representation meant for computer processing, not human reading or writing. Instead, he promotes his poor, overcomplicated, model of computing and discourages standardizing the representation as "limiting" (how much better we would all be if we ignored other such limiting standard representations as ASCII and two's complement!).
On the bright side, he really seems to be having fun with TeX. It all looks much more respectable with Greek letters and logic symbols, doesn't it? ---
Genom is the name of the huge company that makes "Boomers" or semi-biological androids which are probably the most important part of the economy in their fictional world.
(Bubblegum Crisis is a Japanese animated series, about chicks in power armor fighting the Boomers; an overrated one, IMHO) ---
They've been accepting pre-orders on the PS9 since the ad was on the drawing boards... ---
Human intelligence is needed for human speech.
on
Wearable Translators
·
· Score: 2
Language strains our mental abilities, even with special hard-wired support. No matter how great the genius, he occasionally has a misunderstanding and asks for something to be rephrased, or misses the mistake and says something stupid. A good portion, perhaps even the majority, of philosophy could be described as arguing over the meanings of words.
There is simply no possibility for a machine without humanlike intelligence and learning ability to have the capacity for language that would make it remotely comparable to a human interpreter. Even then, there needs to be a base of utility for the proper reinforcement of correct speech, and that's hard to build into self-contained simulations, so we're talking about years of training in serial, probably before you even find out whether the thing can learn to speak at an adult human level.
I really think that this is an area where people really shouldn't even bother trying... at least in the form of commercial ventures. ---
I was talking about the roughly 1000 bugs you'll see die on average before you get completely bored with the lame Atari 2600 version and go searching for an arcade with a good collection of the classics. ---
Canada's bill of rights has a clauses that let it be set aside whenever it is inconvenient for the state. The police are very powerful. There is also a far superior, gentle brain-washing process in the prisons which mean a much lower rate of repeat offending.
Perhaps more importantly, it is cold in Canada, and it has a generous welfare policy, so nobody is truly desperate. You have to be pretty desperate to go running around in 40-below weather committing crimes. It isn't like Russia where a man might starve tomorrow if he doesn't steal today.
Japan is similar. The police there have far more "see no evil" power than American cops. Most people assume that if the cops are after someone, he is guilty, and there isn't a lot of sympathy for a criminal whose right to not get caught except by certain rules was violated.
Consider other places like Switzerland, where every household must have a weapon. Low crime rate there, too.
On the whole though, looking at all countries, you'll probably see less crime where there are fewer guns, but the causality is reversed. People buy more guns when they are more fearful, and police-states, with low "real" crime but plenty of abuse from the government itself, don't allow citizens to have guns.
Crime rates have never gone down after a mass weapon confiscation. You only get the guns from the law-abiding citizens. Burglaries shoot up, as they have in Australia and Britain.
Conversely, when citizens are allowed to carry concealed weapons, criminals become fearful.
There are plenty of studies to support these conclusions referenced by the NRA (it takes a bit of searching). However, there are plenty of studies which oppose these views, too. You have to get under into the methods used and judge for yourself, applying your own logic. It isn't something we're going to settle to anyone's satisfaction in a brief debate on slashdot. ---
I'm not saying they, like many other respected brand-name NPOs, haven't done great things in the past.
But this is just another sign of how every sufficiently old organization becomes infested with risk-averse bureaucrats who are more worried about keeping their paychecks rolling in than actually getting results.
For instance, the ACLU has a clear record on wanting to limit police power. To me, the obvious flip side of this is making sure that the cops can't claim sole responsibility for defending the law-abiding populace, which implies armed citizens. If the citizens aren't armed, and the criminals are (and they are now and will be for the forseeable future, police-state or not), the police need broad, sweeping power to defend the helpless citizens. But the ACLU doesn't oppose gun control. Instead they support both tying the hands of the police and disarming civilians.
Their justification? In their humble opinions, the second amendment means that the state has the right to bear arms, not civilians. Regardless of practical or moral implications, they don't care about whether civilians can carry guns, because the law doesn't say there's a guarantee. And the law's always right, right? Of course, these people would never lobby to change an unjust law...
An awfully thin reed, if you ask me. Perhaps a more honest answer is that their leftist contributors like gun control. Better to ignore a basic dilemma and screw everyone involved than alienate their income-source. ---
Of all the silly things to get worked up over...
on
ACLU Takes on ICANN
·
· Score: 3
This is the least important thing they could possibly be putting their efforts into.
How about legal bullying to steal or silence websites? How about legislation supporting such legal bullying?
Domain names are really not important. I know plenty of great sites without their own domain. Easily-remembered domains are only really important for people who advertise on TV.
The ACLU is just another money-sucking "cause" which makes noise to attract cash, and carefully avoids actually affecting the real problems that justify its funding. ---
You can't run win32 binaries without copying Windows right down to the bugs.
I'm totally amazed at the success the WINE project has accomplished. I'm quite surprised that anything runs in it at all. Even so, you still really need a copy of Windows to get the DLLs you need.
Personally, I think that Plex86 (and in the long term, Bochs) is the best way to handle it: keep it nicely locked up in its own little corner where it can't hurt anything, running the original software, just like emulating every other old platform. Hmm... how long 'till Mame runs Windows? (now that's a truly amazing project)
L1-Bill, we've looked at everything, they're not doing anything illegal.
BG-Look harder! There has to be something in the EULA that makes this illegal. The damn thing's longer than my arm in small print!
L2-You see, that's the problem, if they've agreed to the EULA, they've paid for the software. They have a right to run it however they want. We are getting paid for those copies.
BG-I want results not excuses.
L2-Calm down, sir...
L3-Wait! I've got it! You're only allowed to run Windows on one COMPUTER at a time, and we've defined COMPUTER as any digital electronic device, not necessarily a hardware device. I think we can convince a judge that it's a seperate computer when they run Linux.
L4-Also, if we can find a handful of people who are running illegal copies of Windows in Plex86, the software authors clearly contributed to copyright infringement.
BG-Excellent. I'm not sure it'll play in court, but it sound legit enough to scare some managers. Start sending threatening letters to the web hosts immediately.
People will continue to register each site under every TLD they can get their hands on. Government will continue to award sites based on trademark. Same old mess, some new scrambling for all the "sure-fire winner" names among the brokers.
What I want to know is, why bother with TLDs at all? Why not just arbitrary strings, with spaces and punctuation?
Look around. How much of your web-surfing time is spent reading totally static documents?
Don't you spend far more time on sites with some form of interactivity, or at the very least, which are updated from hour to hour?
Incidentally, I think the terminal client to terminal client approach is technologically backward. It may have some advantages in preventing censorship (though I'm willing to bet that it would be pretty easy to spoof freenet, one way or another, to lower it's signal-to-noise ratio below slashdot in flat mode, ignoring moderation scores), but it would make far more sense with a true "web" structure than with the internet which is closer in many ways to a free tree. Caching on machines that are only connected to each other through a backbone makes much less sense than caching on the backbone.
Just do what I do, create an extra user that has no access to anything important. IMHO, it's good policy to seperate your activities as different users. For example: edit (runs nothing but vi or emacs, has sole write access to your personal source code), compile (has read access to your edit area), archive (which backs up your code, so you can't even accidentally delete your own stuff), test (has read access to compile results, write access only to its own personal scratch area), toys (for internet access and games; has neither read nor write access to anything important), and root (as the default user, with "root" as the password, for letting other people telnet in and run whatever they want). The key to security is in sensible division of roles among special-purpose pseudousers.
Better yet, pick up an old 486 for fun stuff like screwing around with experimental file systems.
Go ahead, try hooking up something, anything that matters to you to an internet interface where any idiot can cause damage, and see if you aren't curled up in a ball and screaming within hours.
They should have sent you to the project homepage, where you can assist in the distributed training effort by sending stimulation to the pain centers of the monkey's brain when it screws up.
This is the more important part of the project. While only a few people are paralysed, most end up having disobedient children.
Unfortunately, they've been having little success in meeting their first objective: teaching the monkey not to curl up in a little ball and scream every time it's hooked up to the arm.
Slashdot Mirror
This one's just a lame joke.
---
Aleph[0] is what you become when you die.
Aleph[1] is what you become when you die as an Aleph[0].
Jeebus is Aleph[CXD] (where CXD is my pathetic imitation of an infinity sign; it is also the ASCII representation of the Jeebus-fish, which eats its own tail while turning the water it swims in into wine).
Jeebus told me so in a vision.
---
To ensure that the program is completely independent from the representation, you can't use the same notation twice.
---
This isn't a programming language, it's a model of computation, and a poor one at that.
Whoop de doo. Another extra-complicated Turing machine substitute.
To quote from the semantics manual: "implementations represent the semantics instead of the reverse -- What a wild thought!"
What a ridiculous thought! What a wrong thought! The land doesn't represent the map. This is just an example of poor semantics (take that either way, both work).
It might be useful if they defined a representation, but that would cost them their gimmick, and make Eidola just another language to be judged on its true merits, wouldn't it? The sensible thing to do to avoid getting hung up on the representation would be to define a simple and consistent back-end representation meant for computer processing, not human reading or writing. Instead, he promotes his poor, overcomplicated, model of computing and discourages standardizing the representation as "limiting" (how much better we would all be if we ignored other such limiting standard representations as ASCII and two's complement!).
On the bright side, he really seems to be having fun with TeX. It all looks much more respectable with Greek letters and logic symbols, doesn't it?
---
Genom is the name of the huge company that makes "Boomers" or semi-biological androids which are probably the most important part of the economy in their fictional world.
(Bubblegum Crisis is a Japanese animated series, about chicks in power armor fighting the Boomers; an overrated one, IMHO)
---
Haven't you seen their ads for the PS9?
They've been accepting pre-orders on the PS9 since the ad was on the drawing boards...
---
Language strains our mental abilities, even with special hard-wired support. No matter how great the genius, he occasionally has a misunderstanding and asks for something to be rephrased, or misses the mistake and says something stupid. A good portion, perhaps even the majority, of philosophy could be described as arguing over the meanings of words.
There is simply no possibility for a machine without humanlike intelligence and learning ability to have the capacity for language that would make it remotely comparable to a human interpreter. Even then, there needs to be a base of utility for the proper reinforcement of correct speech, and that's hard to build into self-contained simulations, so we're talking about years of training in serial, probably before you even find out whether the thing can learn to speak at an adult human level.
I really think that this is an area where people really shouldn't even bother trying... at least in the form of commercial ventures.
---
...they're dropping "Celera", and shortening their name to Genom. With their newfound electronics partners, they plan to go into android design.
---
And it's more of a Zelda than an FF.
---
I was talking about the roughly 1000 bugs you'll see die on average before you get completely bored with the lame Atari 2600 version and go searching for an arcade with a good collection of the classics.
---
I thought Mr. Potato Head didn't have an "extra-stimulation module" for a nose.
---
It was a brilliant dual-use product.
E.T. was the first game that doubled as fertilizer, ask anyone who played it!
---
...that I can get a Centipede cartridge, and exchange it for a thousand more Centipede cartridges, then exchange those for the rest of the stock?
---
Yeah, let's show those phonies by getting our own real free speech impediments!
CLISP
CMUCL
---
Canada's bill of rights has a clauses that let it be set aside whenever it is inconvenient for the state. The police are very powerful. There is also a far superior, gentle brain-washing process in the prisons which mean a much lower rate of repeat offending.
Perhaps more importantly, it is cold in Canada, and it has a generous welfare policy, so nobody is truly desperate. You have to be pretty desperate to go running around in 40-below weather committing crimes. It isn't like Russia where a man might starve tomorrow if he doesn't steal today.
Japan is similar. The police there have far more "see no evil" power than American cops. Most people assume that if the cops are after someone, he is guilty, and there isn't a lot of sympathy for a criminal whose right to not get caught except by certain rules was violated.
Consider other places like Switzerland, where every household must have a weapon. Low crime rate there, too.
On the whole though, looking at all countries, you'll probably see less crime where there are fewer guns, but the causality is reversed. People buy more guns when they are more fearful, and police-states, with low "real" crime but plenty of abuse from the government itself, don't allow citizens to have guns.
Crime rates have never gone down after a mass weapon confiscation. You only get the guns from the law-abiding citizens. Burglaries shoot up, as they have in Australia and Britain.
Conversely, when citizens are allowed to carry concealed weapons, criminals become fearful.
There are plenty of studies to support these conclusions referenced by the NRA (it takes a bit of searching). However, there are plenty of studies which oppose these views, too. You have to get under into the methods used and judge for yourself, applying your own logic. It isn't something we're going to settle to anyone's satisfaction in a brief debate on slashdot.
---
I'm not saying they, like many other respected brand-name NPOs, haven't done great things in the past.
But this is just another sign of how every sufficiently old organization becomes infested with risk-averse bureaucrats who are more worried about keeping their paychecks rolling in than actually getting results.
For instance, the ACLU has a clear record on wanting to limit police power. To me, the obvious flip side of this is making sure that the cops can't claim sole responsibility for defending the law-abiding populace, which implies armed citizens. If the citizens aren't armed, and the criminals are (and they are now and will be for the forseeable future, police-state or not), the police need broad, sweeping power to defend the helpless citizens. But the ACLU doesn't oppose gun control. Instead they support both tying the hands of the police and disarming civilians.
Their justification? In their humble opinions, the second amendment means that the state has the right to bear arms, not civilians. Regardless of practical or moral implications, they don't care about whether civilians can carry guns, because the law doesn't say there's a guarantee. And the law's always right, right? Of course, these people would never lobby to change an unjust law...
An awfully thin reed, if you ask me. Perhaps a more honest answer is that their leftist contributors like gun control. Better to ignore a basic dilemma and screw everyone involved than alienate their income-source.
---
This is the least important thing they could possibly be putting their efforts into.
How about legal bullying to steal or silence websites? How about legislation supporting such legal bullying?
Domain names are really not important. I know plenty of great sites without their own domain. Easily-remembered domains are only really important for people who advertise on TV.
The ACLU is just another money-sucking "cause" which makes noise to attract cash, and carefully avoids actually affecting the real problems that justify its funding.
---
You can't run win32 binaries without copying Windows right down to the bugs.
I'm totally amazed at the success the WINE project has accomplished. I'm quite surprised that anything runs in it at all. Even so, you still really need a copy of Windows to get the DLLs you need.
Personally, I think that Plex86 (and in the long term, Bochs) is the best way to handle it: keep it nicely locked up in its own little corner where it can't hurt anything, running the original software, just like emulating every other old platform. Hmm... how long 'till Mame runs Windows? (now that's a truly amazing project)
--------
L1-Bill, we've looked at everything, they're not doing anything illegal.
BG- Look harder! There has to be something in the EULA that makes this illegal. The damn thing's longer than my arm in small print!
L2-You see, that's the problem, if they've agreed to the EULA, they've paid for the software. They have a right to run it however they want. We are getting paid for those copies.
BG-I want results not excuses.
L2-Calm down, sir...
L3-Wait! I've got it! You're only allowed to run Windows on one COMPUTER at a time, and we've defined COMPUTER as any digital electronic device, not necessarily a hardware device. I think we can convince a judge that it's a seperate computer when they run Linux.
L4-Also, if we can find a handful of people who are running illegal copies of Windows in Plex86, the software authors clearly contributed to copyright infringement.
BG-Excellent. I'm not sure it'll play in court, but it sound legit enough to scare some managers. Start sending threatening letters to the web hosts immediately.
[general maniacal laughter all around]
--------
People will continue to register each site under every TLD they can get their hands on. Government will continue to award sites based on trademark. Same old mess, some new scrambling for all the "sure-fire winner" names among the brokers.
What I want to know is, why bother with TLDs at all? Why not just arbitrary strings, with spaces and punctuation?
--------
Look around. How much of your web-surfing time is spent reading totally static documents?
Don't you spend far more time on sites with some form of interactivity, or at the very least, which are updated from hour to hour?
Incidentally, I think the terminal client to terminal client approach is technologically backward. It may have some advantages in preventing censorship (though I'm willing to bet that it would be pretty easy to spoof freenet, one way or another, to lower it's signal-to-noise ratio below slashdot in flat mode, ignoring moderation scores), but it would make far more sense with a true "web" structure than with the internet which is closer in many ways to a free tree. Caching on machines that are only connected to each other through a backbone makes much less sense than caching on the backbone.
--------
Just do what I do, create an extra user that has no access to anything important. IMHO, it's good policy to seperate your activities as different users. For example: edit (runs nothing but vi or emacs, has sole write access to your personal source code), compile (has read access to your edit area), archive (which backs up your code, so you can't even accidentally delete your own stuff), test (has read access to compile results, write access only to its own personal scratch area), toys (for internet access and games; has neither read nor write access to anything important), and root (as the default user, with "root" as the password, for letting other people telnet in and run whatever they want). The key to security is in sensible division of roles among special-purpose pseudousers.
Better yet, pick up an old 486 for fun stuff like screwing around with experimental file systems.
--------
Go ahead, try hooking up something, anything that matters to you to an internet interface where any idiot can cause damage, and see if you aren't curled up in a ball and screaming within hours.
--------
It's a joke. J-O-K-E
And my karma is holding at about 150. If I wanted the highest karma possible, I would have quit posting when the karma ban started.
--------
They should have sent you to the project homepage, where you can assist in the distributed training effort by sending stimulation to the pain centers of the monkey's brain when it screws up.
This is the more important part of the project. While only a few people are paralysed, most end up having disobedient children.
Unfortunately, they've been having little success in meeting their first objective: teaching the monkey not to curl up in a little ball and scream every time it's hooked up to the arm.
--------