Ahh, but you see Mike, the DVD collection would only signify music. In Saussurean terms, the sign is missing, at least until either (a) Roland Barthes learns to watch when he cross the street, or (b) a DVD driver becomes a reality for Linux.
----------------------------- Computers are useless. They can only give answers.
Make patents like the royalties musicians receive from airplay of their songs. Musicians can't control who plays them or when, but if their music is good they see a healthy return for years to come. At the same time, since the royalty is small and fixed, radio stations can afford it, and lawyers are eliminated (mostly) from the whole issue (radio stations pay a fixed amount each year according to their size, and a large national group handles who receives what portion of that money according to airplay statistics).
Software could be similar, not allowing anyone to block others from using a technology, and not allowing anyone to overprice licensing fees (a prime example of where this is needed even more in the U.S. is in medicines: companies charge such exhorbitant amounts for new medicines that only a handful can use them, while opening up the playing field would give inventors the same earnings yet allow the consumer to benefit). The only tricky part would be determining a reasonable price to charge companies.
Will something sensible like this happen? Of course not. Why? Because, if Europe is anything like the U.S., the politicians are.... lawyers!
>>Maybe if these are brought to light, people would wake up.
Don't bet the farm on that my friend. We've got video tape of the big man committing a federal felony (perjury) and the average 'merkin thought that it was "all about sex".
It's taken decades to stupify and pussify this country, it'll take decades to reverse that,
>>During WWI German and Irish immigrants did sabotage the US and Canadian war production.
None of them were hauled off and put into camps. Only the little yellow guys were. It was definately because of the remant racism of the time. It had NOTHING to do with national security.
>>It can be argued that greater security would have been the solution, but it was war and war is hell. Stalin killed people he susspected.
And this means what? We don't live in a communist nation where individual citizens have no rights.
>>I have no idea how would have solved it and I sure as hell don't need any "racist-pig" flames.
I don't know enough about you to be able to tell if you're a racist pig.
Well, speed. Do you know anything about eschelon? If not, then read up on it. The US government can tap into any telephone conversation in this country. They have the ability to track vehicles using sattelites. Only the US government and it's allies have the ability to track someone that precicely. Why do you think other nations resort to terrorism against the US? Because they can't muster an army that can attack us on our own soil.
>>The people in the compound HAD time to come out long before the government went in forcefully.
They did not come out beause they were afraid that they'd be shot. They had people shooting from helicopters. David Koresh took a 9mm round in the abdomen.
>>The main reason for the military assistance was to get armored vehicles to prevent even MORE deaths. As I recall, more than one agent was shot by the Davidians. Blame goes both ways.
I don't care what the reason was, they LIED in order to get ILLEGAL military assistance. Not a single FBI or BATF agent or supervisor lost his/her job because of this.
>>It would also prevent anyone from ever wanting to become a law enforcement agent.
It would only discourage those who have a propensity for abusing their power.
>>I agree that gummint agents should be punished for transgressions just like everyone else, but I cannot agree to the notion that they should be punished more than an ordinary citizen who commits the same crime.
If you murder a police officer, you have a much greater chance of facing execution in the US than if you killed a suburban housewife. Is that cop's life worth more than someone's mother?
released 3D specs, yes. Have not checked yet to see if they have released ALL of their specs (the released G200 and Mystique docs miss very important speed-related register sets, like the G200's WARP engine which does triangle setup)
Unfortuantly, I live in the UK. It's an american firm. Nasty international boerder problems. I guess I *could* sue them here, but, it's a whole different ball game.
At least there's some positive action US citizens can take easily - now if everyone did this the 'net would be a better place.
From what I remember about the subject from AI class :
1) There's not enough copmputing power, or seconds in the universe to do an exhastive search on the tree. It's one *big* tree.
2) Throwing computing power at the problem helps, but not much (as you get less and less dividends for your extra effort.) More significant is better stratagies in working out how to work things out (if you see what I mean.) Computing power has doubles every 18 months or so, but the ability of computers to play chess has greatly surpassed that.
>It has some nice specs and numbers. Don't count >on any Matrox drivers though. The G200 is now >outdated and there still isn't a decent OpenGL >driver available. It'll be a cold day in hell >before I buy another Matrox product. So have they released all the SPECS? FOr 3d, too?
Chess is a good candidate for being split up into n small tasks. It compartmentalizes well. Each client could examine a small subtree of possible moves, assigning an heuristic value to the top of their tree node. Clients pass this value up the chain until the top client just picks the move with the highest value. Everything would all be happening in parallel, and should thus make for a very strong and very fast player.
Of course, if *one* client in the net dies examining what is really the best possible move, the entire distributed.net system will suffer. The only way out is to introduce redundandy (the same tree of moves may be processed by many people). But this chips away at the total possible maximum strength of distributed.net. But then, that's always the fundamental tradeoff isn't it?
There will be a lot more movies and books about Jobs, Woz and Gates. Gad, we've yet to see their ghost written autobiographies - although I'm hoping Woz will construct a superior minimalist bio.
I don't think the whole biz will fly until there are nerd sex revelations. When I see the Enquirer running a story about Melissa spanking Bill, I know we'll have hit the Variety moment.
There could be a movie about you. Keep coding, keep schmoozing and hang out at Buck's.
This reminds of something an old, really old, retired IBM Software Engineer once told me. He said that IBM used to have this theory that if you put 100 programmers on a project it would be done 10 times faster than only having 10 programmers on the same project. How funny. With the same theory applied, the world should be 6 billion times better than Kasparov, assuming everyone in the world knows how to play chess and actually participates.
..which of course is exactly as simple as it is wrong. It is not by changing the state of the neurons the data is stored. The information lies in how these neurons are connected. Information can be stored in many different ways, and similar memories can share large parts of the neural network. That is, if i've got this stuff right.. Most of this is collected from various AI docs and "Creatures 2" mag reviews =) I think... =)
The question is, if brain can store 14 TB, why does avg person stores data at 100bps?
And my answer is: the average person stores data much faster than that. My example of the photographic memory person is just an easy target. My general claim is that even a blind person (no visual input) stores data faster than 100bps.
...its logical to suggest that a person who's storing at 1000bps has the same storage ability as another guy but has to get rid of that extra data eventually.
Logical, yes. Factual, no. Are their ANY recorded cases of persons with photographic memories suddenly having amnesia? Has anyone present researched photographic memory to find retension times?
In short, why are all the "ideas" coming from you while all the "facts" are coming from me? -- "Please remember that how you say something is often more important than what you say." - Rob Malda
I never said that they did. You're lying and putting words in my mouth. The origin of the fire is still in dispute and until there's more evidence I won't accuse anyone.
Slashdot Mirror
Posted by !ErrorBookmarkNotDefined:
Ahh, but you see Mike, the DVD collection would only signify music. In Saussurean terms, the sign is missing, at least until either (a) Roland Barthes learns to watch when he cross the street, or (b) a DVD driver becomes a reality for Linux.
-----------------------------
Computers are useless. They can only give answers.
How's this idea:
Make patents like the royalties musicians
receive from airplay of their songs. Musicians
can't control who plays them or when, but if their
music is good they see a healthy return for years
to come. At the same time, since the royalty is
small and fixed, radio stations can afford it,
and lawyers are eliminated (mostly) from the
whole issue (radio stations pay a fixed amount
each year according to their size, and a large
national group handles who receives what portion
of that money according to airplay statistics).
Software could be similar, not allowing anyone
to block others from using a technology, and not
allowing anyone to overprice licensing fees (a
prime example of where this is needed even more
in the U.S. is in medicines: companies charge
such exhorbitant amounts for new medicines that
only a handful can use them, while opening up the
playing field would give inventors the same
earnings yet allow the consumer to benefit). The
only tricky part would be determining a
reasonable price to charge companies.
Will something sensible like this happen? Of
course not. Why? Because, if Europe is anything
like the U.S., the politicians are.... lawyers!
Posted by OGL:
This was a _GREAT_ interview...really worth reading a few times. Thanks for posting this!
-W.W.
Posted by Lord Kano-The Gangster Of Love:
>>Maybe if these are brought to light, people would wake up.
Don't bet the farm on that my friend. We've got video tape of the big man committing a federal felony (perjury) and the average 'merkin thought that it was "all about sex".
It's taken decades to stupify and pussify this country, it'll take decades to reverse that,
LK
Posted by Lord Kano-The Gangster Of Love:
>>During WWI German and Irish immigrants did sabotage the US and Canadian war production.
None of them were hauled off and put into camps. Only the little yellow guys were. It was definately because of the remant racism of the time. It had NOTHING to do with national security.
>>It can be argued that greater security would have been the solution, but it was war and war is hell. Stalin killed people he susspected.
And this means what? We don't live in a communist nation where individual citizens have no rights.
>>I have no idea how would have solved it and I sure as hell don't need any "racist-pig" flames.
I don't know enough about you to be able to tell if you're a racist pig.
LK
Posted by Lord Kano-The Gangster Of Love:
Well, speed. Do you know anything about eschelon? If not, then read up on it. The US government can tap into any telephone conversation in this country. They have the ability to track vehicles using sattelites. Only the US government and it's allies have the ability to track someone that precicely. Why do you think other nations resort to terrorism against the US? Because they can't muster an army that can attack us on our own soil.
Use your brain speed. That's why you have one.
LK
Posted by Lord Kano-The Gangster Of Love:
>>The people in the compound HAD time to come out long before the government went in forcefully.
They did not come out beause they were afraid that they'd be shot. They had people shooting from helicopters. David Koresh took a 9mm round in the abdomen.
>>The main reason for the military assistance was to get armored vehicles to prevent even MORE deaths. As I recall, more than one agent was shot by the Davidians. Blame goes both ways.
I don't care what the reason was, they LIED in order to get ILLEGAL military assistance. Not a single FBI or BATF agent or supervisor lost his/her job because of this.
LK
Posted by Lord Kano-The Gangster Of Love:
>>It would also prevent anyone from ever wanting to become a law enforcement agent.
It would only discourage those who have a propensity for abusing their power.
>>I agree that gummint agents should be punished for transgressions just like everyone else, but I cannot agree to the notion that they should be punished more than an ordinary citizen who commits the same crime.
If you murder a police officer, you have a much greater chance of facing execution in the US than if you killed a suburban housewife. Is that cop's life worth more than someone's mother?
LK
Posted by Swarth:
Actually I learned in DOS.. 2.1 I think, on my Tandy 1000EX.
Posted by Dr Evil:
released 3D specs, yes. Have not checked yet to see if they have released ALL of their specs (the released G200 and Mystique docs miss very important speed-related register sets, like the G200's WARP engine which does triangle setup)
-David
Posted by ThickAsTwoShortPlanks:
Good idea - I didn't think about this at the time. It's been a while, buit I might have a go at dealing with this some time in the summer.
I supose this goes along the 'nobody has to forward your packets' line of thought.
Thanks.
Mark.
Posted by ThickAsTwoShortPlanks:
Great.
Unfortuantly, I live in the UK. It's an american firm. Nasty international boerder problems. I guess I *could* sue them here, but, it's a whole different ball game.
At least there's some positive action US citizens can take easily - now if everyone did this the 'net would be a better place.
Thanks for the advice.
Later.
Mark.
Posted by ThickAsTwoShortPlanks:
From what I remember about the subject from AI class :
1) There's not enough copmputing power, or seconds in the universe to do an exhastive search on the tree. It's one *big* tree.
2) Throwing computing power at the problem helps, but not much (as you get less and less dividends for your extra effort.) More significant is better stratagies in working out how to work things out (if you see what I mean.) Computing power has doubles every 18 months or so, but the ability of computers to play chess has greatly surpassed that.
Later.
Mark.
Posted by Moritz Moeller - Herrmann:
>It has some nice specs and numbers. Don't count >on any Matrox drivers though. The G200 is now >outdated and there still isn't a decent OpenGL >driver available. It'll be a cold day in hell >before I buy another Matrox product.
So have they released all the SPECS? FOr 3d, too?
Posted by Largo_3:
:P
Shesh, it sounds like you work for my company (SRA)
Posted by Napalm4u:
That's right yall read the subject.
When i get cancer i'm suing all those SateeLight persons.
SoNEE, PrimStarr, and those GPS's Compknees
payen for my bills!
Posted by Assmodeus:
we process 13 terabytes a second...not store it... i dont know how much we can store though... it has to be more than 13tb though.
assmodeus
Posted by PasswdIs ScoreOne:
Chess is a good candidate for being split up into n small tasks. It compartmentalizes well. Each client could examine a small subtree of possible moves, assigning an heuristic value to the top of their tree node. Clients pass this value up the chain until the top client just picks the move with the highest value. Everything would all be happening in parallel, and should thus make for a very strong and very fast player.
Of course, if *one* client in the net dies examining what is really the best possible move, the entire distributed.net system will suffer. The only way out is to introduce redundandy (the same tree of moves may be processed by many people). But this chips away at the total possible maximum strength of distributed.net. But then, that's always the fundamental tradeoff isn't it?
Posted by Nina Simone:
There will be a lot more movies and books about Jobs, Woz and Gates. Gad, we've yet to see their ghost written autobiographies - although I'm hoping Woz will construct a superior minimalist bio.
I don't think the whole biz will fly until there are nerd sex revelations. When I see the Enquirer running a story about Melissa spanking Bill, I know we'll have hit the Variety moment.
There could be a movie about you. Keep coding, keep schmoozing and hang out at Buck's.
Posted by Shady P:
This reminds of something an old, really old, retired IBM Software Engineer once told me. He said that IBM used to have this theory that if you put 100 programmers on a project it would be done 10 times faster than only having 10 programmers on the same project. How funny. With the same theory applied, the world should be 6 billion times better than Kasparov, assuming everyone in the world knows how to play chess and actually participates.
Posted by spookysys:
... =)
..which of course is exactly as simple as it is wrong. It is not by changing the state of the neurons the data is stored. The information lies in how these neurons are connected. Information can be stored in many different ways, and similar memories can share large parts of the neural network. That is, if i've got this stuff right.. Most of this is collected from various AI docs and "Creatures 2" mag reviews =)
I think
Posted by Bill, the Galactic Hero:
The Web is a tool. I use it to get journal publications. I send code back and forth over it. But that's it.
The web is not the greatest invention mankind has every created. That's a tossup between the harmonica and dynamite.
Ten years from now, (I hope) we'll look back on this frenzy over web pages full of kittens the way we look back on roller disco.
Posted by The Incredible Mr. Limpett:
Does anyone remember those Monorail "all in one" systems that came out a few years ago? (I think it was called Monorail...)
Looked JUST like this. I even saw one in use a couple of places (including a hardware store/UHaul center).
Posted by FascDot Killed My Previous Use:
...its logical to suggest that a person who's storing at 1000bps has the same storage ability as another guy but has to get rid of that extra data eventually.
The question is, if brain can store 14 TB, why does avg person stores data at 100bps?
And my answer is: the average person stores data much faster than that. My example of the photographic memory person is just an easy target. My general claim is that even a blind person (no visual input) stores data faster than 100bps.
Logical, yes. Factual, no. Are their ANY recorded cases of persons with photographic memories suddenly having amnesia? Has anyone present researched photographic memory to find retension times?
In short, why are all the "ideas" coming from you while all the "facts" are coming from me?
--
"Please remember that how you say something is often more important than what you say." - Rob Malda
Posted by Lord Kano-The Gangster Of Love:
>>Yeah the government burned it down, right
I never said that they did. You're lying and putting words in my mouth. The origin of the fire is still in dispute and until there's more evidence I won't accuse anyone.
LK