This may be a completely impractical idea, but I wonder how much energy would be required to adjust the earth's rotation to keep the spin-down predicatble?
Note, I'm not saying we maintain a constant rotational speed. I'm suggesting we apply just enough energy to smooth out the irregularities, thereby maintaining a constant rate of slow down. We could then predict the future accurately using an algorithm and simulatanesouly keep in synch with solar time.
So in other words, Linus has decided to deliberately damage the kernel (by introducing unnecessary instability) in order to make it harder for people to write software that uses it.
I thought that Linus usually put technical correctness above political correctness, but it looks like I was wrong.
Whoa there, slow down. I never said I believed that. I said life is an elaborate pile of goo. I never said there wasn't an "animating spirit", or whatever.
Wow, that's pretty funny. Go back and read your original post -- it makes exactly that argument. If you intended something different, you sure didn't express yourself very clearly.
The idea that humans have those characteristics and other intelligent social animals don't is dogma, no more. My dog is more self-aware than a lot of people I've known.
Upon reflection, I tend to agree with you. The difference in self-awareness between you and your dog may just be a matter of degree.
However, I don't think that negates my central point -- that the purely materialistic, reductionistic view of life currently provides no adequate explanation for such self-awareness.
I am a strict materialist, as you seem to be. Therefore, I agree that organic life has no "animating spirit" that fundamentally distinguishes it from non-life. In that sense, you are correct that life is just "an elaborate pile of goo".
On the other hand, human life exhibits some characteristics that are currently beyond all scientific explanation. In particular, I am thinking of free will, conciousness, and self-awareness (which are all probably words for the same underlying phenomenon). No one has the slightest idea how these characteristics arise in a human (and, puzzlingly, don't seem to in any other form of life).
While this doesn't necessarily imply that humans have "souls", it does leave the question very much up in the air. Therefore, it is entirely possible that your personal pile of goo is home to some extremely unusual processes. Some have speculated, for example, that quantum mechanical uncertainity is at the heart of free will. In this sense, the difference between "human" and "a bunch of cells" is an immense one.
This is nothing new. To give a serious example, Charles Darwin issued six different editions of The Origin of Species during his lifetime. Each new edition contained material in response to reactions to previous editions. The phrases "evolution" and "survival of the fittest" were first introduced in these follow-on editions.
Most of these changes improved the book, but some did not. So, which edition is "definitive"?
This is easy. Just rip the CD to your hard drive, then mount the resulting.ISO image as a CD. Hard drives are so big these days that you're not going to miss the 650MB you have to waste on the CD image.
That's guaranteed to make Mr. Knows very angry with you, since you're making him look incompetent in front of Mr. Weed.
What you actually do is talk to Mr. Knows in person and say, "Brown, there's a conflict between what you're telling me and what Dick is telling me. Please sort it out with him so that we can all be sucessful." You then follow up with Mr. Knows every day (or hour, if necessary) until he resolves the conflict.
Is to help you understand the real-world constraints you are operating under, and then protect you from being further bothered by senior management. It sounds like he is not doing either one.
Because it gives some insight into the role of sexual reproduction in evolution.
A long time ago, there was a kingdom of 10,000 people. Half were male and half were female. The king decreed that males were intrinsically superior, and he wished to increase the ratio of males to females in his kingdom without shedding blood. To accomplish this, he dictated that each couple must stop having babies after giving birth to a girl. As long as they had *only* boys, though, they could continue to bear children (but didn't have to).
In other words: Any couple that gave birth to a girl was forbidden to have more children.
This policy was enforced for 1000 years. At the end of this time, what was the (approximate) ratio of males to females in the kingdom?
Assume that the base ratio of giving birth to a boy vs. a girl is 1:1. That is, each outcome is equally likely.
My favorite these days is very simple (good for kids), and actually quite practical:
By what procedure can two people split a single piece of cake (or slice of pizza, or bowl of soup, etc.) such that both agree that the outcome is fair? In other words, how do you avoid the "No fair! His piece is bigger than mine!" problem?
If anyone is personally liable for damages, it should be the owners of the company, not the employees.
But isn't the whole point of a corporation to protect the owners from personal liability in situations like this? This is why the corporation has been granted "personhood" under our system. (A bad idea, in my opinion, but that's a different topic.)
I can see why the brain cancer/cell phone controversy exists - Basically you have a very, very powerful source of EM in a concentrated spot next to your ear.
I do? My cell phone has a tiny little battery that probably couldn't even keep my ears warm on a cold day. How does a battery like that cause my phone to emit such a powerful blast of EM?
I'm pretty sure that fast user switching is based on Terminal Services, and I'm pretty sure that Microsoft acquired the code for Terminal Services from Citrix.
Hasn't Google already copied the entire thing for their own use?
I think that's a good point, but note that it's no different from the current Google web search: they have a cached copy of the entire web, including loads of copyrighted material. Is that legal?
Slashdot Mirror
This may be a completely impractical idea, but I wonder how much energy would be required to adjust the earth's rotation to keep the spin-down predicatble?
Note, I'm not saying we maintain a constant rotational speed. I'm suggesting we apply just enough energy to smooth out the irregularities, thereby maintaining a constant rate of slow down. We could then predict the future accurately using an algorithm and simulatanesouly keep in synch with solar time.
So in other words, Linus has decided to deliberately damage the kernel (by introducing unnecessary instability) in order to make it harder for people to write software that uses it.
I thought that Linus usually put technical correctness above political correctness, but it looks like I was wrong.
Whoa there, slow down. I never said I believed that. I said life is an elaborate pile of goo. I never said there wasn't an "animating spirit", or whatever.
Wow, that's pretty funny. Go back and read your original post -- it makes exactly that argument. If you intended something different, you sure didn't express yourself very clearly.
The idea that humans have those characteristics and other intelligent social animals don't is dogma, no more. My dog is more self-aware than a lot of people I've known.
Upon reflection, I tend to agree with you. The difference in self-awareness between you and your dog may just be a matter of degree.
However, I don't think that negates my central point -- that the purely materialistic, reductionistic view of life currently provides no adequate explanation for such self-awareness.
I am a strict materialist, as you seem to be. Therefore, I agree that organic life has no "animating spirit" that fundamentally distinguishes it from non-life. In that sense, you are correct that life is just "an elaborate pile of goo".
On the other hand, human life exhibits some characteristics that are currently beyond all scientific explanation. In particular, I am thinking of free will, conciousness, and self-awareness (which are all probably words for the same underlying phenomenon). No one has the slightest idea how these characteristics arise in a human (and, puzzlingly, don't seem to in any other form of life).
While this doesn't necessarily imply that humans have "souls", it does leave the question very much up in the air. Therefore, it is entirely possible that your personal pile of goo is home to some extremely unusual processes. Some have speculated, for example, that quantum mechanical uncertainity is at the heart of free will. In this sense, the difference between "human" and "a bunch of cells" is an immense one.
This is nothing new. To give a serious example, Charles Darwin issued six different editions of The Origin of Species during his lifetime. Each new edition contained material in response to reactions to previous editions. The phrases "evolution" and "survival of the fittest" were first introduced in these follow-on editions.
Most of these changes improved the book, but some did not. So, which edition is "definitive"?
Daemon tools can emulate several of the common copy protection schemes: Safedisc, Securom, Laserlock, RPMS.
I use it, for example, to play Age of Empires I/II/III without needing any of the CDs.
This is easy. Just rip the CD to your hard drive, then mount the resulting .ISO image as a CD. Hard drives are so big these days that you're not going to miss the 650MB you have to waste on the CD image.
It's not *like* that, it *is* that.
That's guaranteed to make Mr. Knows very angry with you, since you're making him look incompetent in front of Mr. Weed.
What you actually do is talk to Mr. Knows in person and say, "Brown, there's a conflict between what you're telling me and what Dick is telling me. Please sort it out with him so that we can all be sucessful." You then follow up with Mr. Knows every day (or hour, if necessary) until he resolves the conflict.
Is to help you understand the real-world constraints you are operating under, and then protect you from being further bothered by senior management. It sounds like he is not doing either one.
Article is slashdotted, so I can't tell if this is the Clock of the Long Now, but it certainly sounds similar.
Although the submitter asked you not to reveal the answer in the thread.
A man can sire children by multiple wives, and vice versa, as long as any given couple stops after giving birth to a girl.
Because it gives some insight into the role of sexual reproduction in evolution.
A long time ago, there was a kingdom of 10,000 people. Half were male and half were female. The king decreed that males were intrinsically superior, and he wished to increase the ratio of males to females in his kingdom without shedding blood. To accomplish this, he dictated that each couple must stop having babies after giving birth to a girl. As long as they had *only* boys, though, they could continue to bear children (but didn't have to).
In other words: Any couple that gave birth to a girl was forbidden to have more children.
This policy was enforced for 1000 years. At the end of this time, what was the (approximate) ratio of males to females in the kingdom?
Assume that the base ratio of giving birth to a boy vs. a girl is 1:1. That is, each outcome is equally likely.
My favorite these days is very simple (good for kids), and actually quite practical:
By what procedure can two people split a single piece of cake (or slice of pizza, or bowl of soup, etc.) such that both agree that the outcome is fair? In other words, how do you avoid the "No fair! His piece is bigger than mine!" problem?
That makes sense. Thanks!
The movie you are watching (that was no doubt ripped from a DVD and has low volume)
Can anyone explain to me why DVDs typically have such low volume? This drives me nuts.
If anyone is personally liable for damages, it should be the owners of the company, not the employees.
But isn't the whole point of a corporation to protect the owners from personal liability in situations like this? This is why the corporation has been granted "personhood" under our system. (A bad idea, in my opinion, but that's a different topic.)
I can see why the brain cancer/cell phone controversy exists - Basically you have a very, very powerful source of EM in a concentrated spot next to your ear.
I do? My cell phone has a tiny little battery that probably couldn't even keep my ears warm on a cold day. How does a battery like that cause my phone to emit such a powerful blast of EM?
God, I love geek humor.
[Obligatory comment]
I'm pretty sure that fast user switching is based on Terminal Services, and I'm pretty sure that Microsoft acquired the code for Terminal Services from Citrix.
So I don't think that counts as a MS innovation.
Hasn't Google already copied the entire thing for their own use?
I think that's a good point, but note that it's no different from the current Google web search: they have a cached copy of the entire web, including loads of copyrighted material. Is that legal?
-- Brian
Hah! Now that's actually funny.