As a customer, I would *love* to buy AT&T Femtocell devices to have in my home and my office. The value proposition here seems excellent for all parties. AT&T gets load off their cell network so they can save much of that $18 billion upgrade cost they're facing. As a customer, I spend a small one-time cost (the price of a month or two of cell phone service, say), and in return, my cell phone can actually make calls reliably, for a change. When are they going to get these out of beta and let people start really using them?
This Python page is the best language reference page I've ever seen. And it's not just a quick reference. Once you have a vague familiarity with Python, or possibly even just a familiarity with scripting languages, this page is the fastest way to learn the bulk of the language and its libraries.
The only other language reference I've seen that comes close is the VisiBone JavaScript+DOM reference cards. It defines Javascript and its browser environment (DOM) in well-thought-out JavaScript snippets. But as far as I'm aware, you have to buy them in glossy spiral-bound cards; you can't just view them for free on the web.
DARPA invented the Internet Protocol before, and within a few decades the technology was widely deployed. Unfortunately, this time around, things won't be so easy.
Before, it was competing against a vacuum. Now, it's competing against ubiquitous IP. They may develop some cool stuff that works on a battlefield, but it will never get widespread usage, commoditization, and economy of scale that IP has. If they come up with new features that work great, somebody will find a way to get similar functionality built on top of good old IP.
IP isn't perfect, but it's good enough that there's no way to displace it, given its free nature and level of entrenchment=.
Line up people from ten different religions. Then we can say that, statistically speaking, at *least* 90% of their religions are wrong. So if morality must descend from religion, how do we know which one?
Further, let's say that we know which "religion" is the right one. Let's say it's "Christianity," based on "The Bible." Whose Christianity -- the Baptists, the Catholics, the Jehovah's Witnesses? Whose Bible? The Protestant King James Bible, a Catholic bible with the Apocrypha? A Mormom Bible with the Book of Mormon at the end? A Christian Science book, with the revelations of Mary Baker Eddy? What about auxiliary writings, like Papal Encyclicals, or the Catechism?
So let's say then that we have picked a particular set of holy writings, interpreted and translated in a language you can read; the Protestant King James Bible, perhaps. How do you interpret what it says and decide how you should live your life? People have been devoting their entire lives to studying this stuff for either hundreds (or thousands, depending how broadly you define "this stuff") of years, and there is still no consensus on lots of major issues. Jusficiation by Faith, or by Works, for starters.
So if your model of morality is that it has been divinely revealed to us, and we just need to follow its simple instructions, then I think you are on shaky ground, indeed.
I certainly don't have all the answers, but I think you're better off, morality-wise, starting off with "Do Unto Others As You Would Have Them Do Unto You" and proceeding from there as best you can than you are by deciding that no human-derived morality is better than any other, so you'll take your chances that your particular religion is the right one, send checks when they ask, and keep your mouth closed.
P.S. -- Yes, I know the correct answer is "The Mormons"; I saw that episode of South Park.:-)
Sending out checksums into Freenet where they can't be retracted is a two-edged sword. AOL could easily poison the waters by sending out bogus checksums - nonretractably.
Nonretractible information that is required to be correct should not be a feature of any sort of countermeasures system like you're describing.
UW imapd supports a file format called mbx. It is similar to mbox except that each mail record has a length pointer to the start of the next record. It is fast to use even on fairly large mailboxes.
My mail pipeline works like this.
sendmail receives the mail
sendmail reads ~/.forward sends it into procmail
.procmailrc categorizes the email, filters spam, etc. and uses dmail to store the mail (note: dmail is a part of imap-utils). The actual delivery lines look like "|dmail +Mail/Personal.spool".
UW imapd running on the mail server machine reads the mailbox file over NFS (I know, I know, I didn't design our mail system!) and delivers the mail to whatever IMAP4 mail client I'm running at the momemt (usually pine)
I don't know how you're supposed to create mbx files normally. However, I stumbled upon this great little Perl script a while back, called creatmbx (don't know the author):
#!/usr/bin/perl
# Ported from imap/src/osdep/unix/mbx.c
my $NUSERFLAGS = "30";
my $HDRSIZE = "2048";
my $string;
die "ERROR: creatmbx <file>\n" unless ($#ARGV == 0);
open(FILE,"> $ARGV[0]");
$string = sprintf ("*mbx*\015\012%08lx00000000\015\012", time);
for ($i = 0; $i < $NUSERFLAGS; ++$i) { $string.= sprintf "\015\012"; }
# Pad the rest of the file with nulls as expected
$string = unpack("a${HDRSIZE}", pack("a${HDRSIZE}","$string"));
print FILE $string;
close(FILE);
To use it, say "creatmbx MyMailboxFile". At that point, dmail will recognize it as being an mbx file when it delivers the mail, and UW imapd will, too; using it is then a lot like using an mbox file, but far faster.
It works pretty well for me. Your Mileage May Vary.
I have never understood what it means to 'map the genome.' Have they gotten a complete GATC sequencing for one person's DNA? If so, how will this help with all the coming miracle cures the media always mentions. It would make sense to me if we had gotten a GATC sequencing for a large statistical sampling of people so we correlate epidemiological data with genetic data; but this doesn't sound like what the media is always talking about. So what's really up?
A lyric in the song is "What's he building in there?" Hemos didn't claim he was stating a song title. Thus no further correction was needed (besides changing "doing" to "building").
Natural selection could still be considered "theory." There are several variations on the theme. There is not, as yet, a single theory of natural selection that has achieved massive concensus. This is a topic of much ongoing research.
Evolution, on the other hand, could only be labeled "fact." There is a large body of fossil records that have been studied, and indicate clearly that the Earth is billions of years old and that new species have come and gone over this time. (If you disagree with this, then I'm afraid we'll have to agree to disagree, and this discussion is over.) The next thing is to consider that all known forms of life come from previous life forms. For example, you came from your parents; you didn't just appear one day. This has been observed time and again, and indeed is common sense. There are no observed exceptions to this rule. If you accept both of these premises, then the conclusion is that evolution occurs: new species appear over time, and they descended from previous ones. If one witholds the label of "fact" from evolution, then nearly no observed phenomenon would qualify.
Natural selection theories are one way of explaining the observed fact of evolution. There is much to recommend them, but they are not so well established that no dissenting opinions is possible. As has been mentioned, natural selection is somewhat difficult to observe in action.
Another theory of explaining how evolution occurs would be divine intervention. It's not a theory I favor, because of the scarcity of any physical evidence to back it up. But many hold it to be true.
In any case, please be more precise when discussing evolution and natural selection. There are few that would truly dispute evolution, except when they mistakenly confuse it with natural selection.
Slashdot Mirror
As a customer, I would *love* to buy AT&T Femtocell devices to have in my home and my office. The value proposition here seems excellent for all parties. AT&T gets load off their cell network so they can save much of that $18 billion upgrade cost they're facing. As a customer, I spend a small one-time cost (the price of a month or two of cell phone service, say), and in return, my cell phone can actually make calls reliably, for a change. When are they going to get these out of beta and let people start really using them?
This Python page is the best language reference page I've ever seen. And it's not just a quick reference. Once you have a vague familiarity with Python, or possibly even just a familiarity with scripting languages, this page is the fastest way to learn the bulk of the language and its libraries.
The only other language reference I've seen that comes close is the VisiBone JavaScript+DOM reference cards. It defines Javascript and its browser environment (DOM) in well-thought-out JavaScript snippets. But as far as I'm aware, you have to buy them in glossy spiral-bound cards; you can't just view them for free on the web.
DARPA invented the Internet Protocol before, and within a few decades the technology was widely deployed. Unfortunately, this time around, things won't be so easy.
Before, it was competing against a vacuum. Now, it's competing against ubiquitous IP. They may develop some cool stuff that works on a battlefield, but it will never get widespread usage, commoditization, and economy of scale that IP has. If they come up with new features that work great, somebody will find a way to get similar functionality built on top of good old IP.
IP isn't perfect, but it's good enough that there's no way to displace it, given its free nature and level of entrenchment=.
Line up people from ten different religions. Then we can say that, statistically speaking, at *least* 90% of their religions are wrong. So if morality must descend from religion, how do we know which one?
:-)
Further, let's say that we know which "religion" is the right one. Let's say it's "Christianity," based on "The Bible." Whose Christianity -- the Baptists, the Catholics, the Jehovah's Witnesses? Whose Bible? The Protestant King James Bible, a Catholic bible with the Apocrypha? A Mormom Bible with the Book of Mormon at the end? A Christian Science book, with the revelations of Mary Baker Eddy? What about auxiliary writings, like Papal Encyclicals, or the Catechism?
So let's say then that we have picked a particular set of holy writings, interpreted and translated in a language you can read; the Protestant King James Bible, perhaps. How do you interpret what it says and decide how you should live your life? People have been devoting their entire lives to studying this stuff for either hundreds (or thousands, depending how broadly you define "this stuff") of years, and there is still no consensus on lots of major issues. Jusficiation by Faith, or by Works, for starters.
So if your model of morality is that it has been divinely revealed to us, and we just need to follow its simple instructions, then I think you are on shaky ground, indeed.
I certainly don't have all the answers, but I think you're better off, morality-wise, starting off with "Do Unto Others As You Would Have Them Do Unto You" and proceeding from there as best you can than you are by deciding that no human-derived morality is better than any other, so you'll take your chances that your particular religion is the right one, send checks when they ask, and keep your mouth closed.
P.S. -- Yes, I know the correct answer is "The Mormons"; I saw that episode of South Park.
Sending out checksums into Freenet where they can't be retracted is a two-edged sword. AOL could easily poison the waters by sending out bogus checksums - nonretractably.
Nonretractible information that is required to be correct should not be a feature of any sort of countermeasures system like you're describing.
UW imapd supports a file format called mbx. It is similar to mbox except that each mail record has a length pointer to the start of the next record. It is fast to use even on fairly large mailboxes.
My mail pipeline works like this.
I don't know how you're supposed to create mbx files normally. However, I stumbled upon this great little Perl script a while back, called creatmbx (don't know the author):
#!/usr/bin/perl .= sprintf "\015\012"; }
# Ported from imap/src/osdep/unix/mbx.c
my $NUSERFLAGS = "30";
my $HDRSIZE = "2048";
my $string;
die "ERROR: creatmbx <file>\n" unless ($#ARGV == 0);
open(FILE,"> $ARGV[0]");
$string = sprintf ("*mbx*\015\012%08lx00000000\015\012", time);
for ($i = 0; $i < $NUSERFLAGS; ++$i) { $string
# Pad the rest of the file with nulls as expected
$string = unpack("a${HDRSIZE}", pack("a${HDRSIZE}","$string"));
print FILE $string;
close(FILE);
To use it, say "creatmbx MyMailboxFile". At that point, dmail will recognize it as being an mbx file when it delivers the mail, and UW imapd will, too; using it is then a lot like using an mbox file, but far faster.
It works pretty well for me. Your Mileage May Vary.
I have never understood what it means to 'map the genome.' Have they gotten a complete GATC sequencing for one person's DNA? If so, how will this help with all the coming miracle cures the media always mentions. It would make sense to me if we had gotten a GATC sequencing for a large statistical sampling of people so we correlate epidemiological data with genetic data; but this doesn't sound like what the media is always talking about. So what's really up?
A lyric in the song is "What's he building in there?" Hemos didn't claim he was stating a song title. Thus no further correction was needed (besides changing "doing" to "building").
Please distinguish between these two phenomena:
Natural selection could still be considered "theory." There are several variations on the theme. There is not, as yet, a single theory of natural selection that has achieved massive concensus. This is a topic of much ongoing research.
Evolution, on the other hand, could only be labeled "fact." There is a large body of fossil records that have been studied, and indicate clearly that the Earth is billions of years old and that new species have come and gone over this time. (If you disagree with this, then I'm afraid we'll have to agree to disagree, and this discussion is over.) The next thing is to consider that all known forms of life come from previous life forms. For example, you came from your parents; you didn't just appear one day. This has been observed time and again, and indeed is common sense. There are no observed exceptions to this rule. If you accept both of these premises, then the conclusion is that evolution occurs: new species appear over time, and they descended from previous ones. If one witholds the label of "fact" from evolution, then nearly no observed phenomenon would qualify.
Natural selection theories are one way of explaining the observed fact of evolution. There is much to recommend them, but they are not so well established that no dissenting opinions is possible. As has been mentioned, natural selection is somewhat difficult to observe in action.
Another theory of explaining how evolution occurs would be divine intervention. It's not a theory I favor, because of the scarcity of any physical evidence to back it up. But many hold it to be true.
In any case, please be more precise when discussing evolution and natural selection. There are few that would truly dispute evolution, except when they mistakenly confuse it with natural selection.
John Dawson