That's what Verizon's FIOS is, internally known as FTTP - Fiber To The Premis.
Verizon is engaged in the staggering task of rewiring (dewiring?) America, or at least that part of it that falls into Verizon's territory. Whole towns are being upgraded to fiber - first down the street, then indeed brought to your home when you order the service.
The fiber carries voice, data (internet) and video into your home, with the voice being ATM based (converted so that you can use your existing phones), although obviously you could choose to use VOIP instead.
Actually, if astrology ever did have anything going for it, it certainly hasn't done so for a least the last thousand years or so. It used to be that your star sign was the zodical constellation that the sun was (if plotted against the night sky) in at the time of your birth. The significance of the zodiacal constellations vs any others merely being that they lay on the plane of earth's rotation hence on the path that the sun appears to take through the year... something of significance if you believe the sun and planets to be gods as the Romans did.
What happened well over a thousand years ago is that star signs became divorced from astronomy and instead bcame fixed to months of the year. Thanks to the "precession of the equinoxes" caused by the varying axis of earth's rotation, the two are not fixed, and nowadays your astrological sign is not the same as the constellation you were "born in". In another 25,000 years (it's a 26,000 year axis wobble cycle) we'll be back were the fixed (broken clock) is correct and your modern star sign corresponds with the astrominical reality, for what that's worth (not very much).
Re:Interesting for kernel performance comparisons.
on
Debian GNU/Solaris
·
· Score: 2, Interesting
Presumably any benchmarks (meaningful ones at least) are going to interface with the kernel via core POSIX libraries such as libc and pthreads, which may also differ between the two. On Solaris one could also benchmark Sun libc vs GNU libc, but on the linux kernel that's not an option, nor is there a serious Linux/Solaris kernel-portable implementation of pthreads that I'm aware of.
So what's stopping me from having science insert that gene into my offspring?
Well, it may not specifically end up in the gene's of your offspring, but it's likely that evolution will see to it that it does end up in the genes of the future human race.
... which of course some future IDers will take as proof of the existence of God.
> Let's see how long the US holds together without the monetary support of the > rest of the world.
Just a point; if anyone tried to destroy the US monetarily, the effect on the rest of the workl would be easily as bad. The dependency works both ways. Yes, the US is dependent of foreign trade, but most of the nations we trade with are dependent on it as well. Some few nations would just suffer loss of income and products, but many would suffer pains equal to some of the worst natural disasters.
I don't think the original poster was talking about a trade embargo - he was talking about debt... US treasury bonds to be precise.
When Bush spent $200B to invage Iraq, where do you think the money came from? Sadly the answer "US tax payers" is wrong (at least in the short term). The answer is that this was decicit spending - the US didn't have that money available, so they borrowed from other countries by way of issuing US debt instruments (30 yr bonds) which other countries bought (or in simple english - they lent the US the money, at the interest rate payable on the bonds). Of course the US taxpayers will eventually foot the bill as those 30 yr IOUs become payable.
So, other countries don't need to start a trade war to cause the US economy to crash - they just need to stop lending the US the money (i.e. buying US debt) that keep the US economy afloat (at least while it's being run by a profligate spender like Bush Jr or Sr.. Clinton was actually running a budget surplus).
The Oil producing countries could also cause the US economy to tank by the simple measure of choosing to price/sell oil in Euros rather than dollars. The demand for dollars would then plummet and the value of the dollar would than tank, and the US economy along with it.
No, the US did not invent the Internet. The US built the ARPAnet - a military network, and this has since been extended by the private sector into the worldwide network that is now called the Internet. Also to most people the Internet is synomynous with the Web, and that particular network application (HTML browser), and underlying protocol (HTTP) was invented by Europeans.
I, for one, am not interested in doing my word processing over the web.
I don't get the impression that anyone, least of all Sun or Google, are suggesting that you do.
The idea presumably would be that you run Java based (& likely Google enhanced) Office applications locally via JRE which would be installed together with Google taskbar.
The difference between this and just downloading/installing Open Office yourself would presumably be that using a "word processor" option on google's taskbar would just work without any user effort, and updates would be automatic.
Google is obviously also in a position to allow the option of storing documents on the net where they can be accessed from any location (maybe using Google's own storage, which can be feeely available to everyone) as well as locally.
In addition to "basic earth orbit" capability (i.e. all the records that Mir holds), the Russians also explored the moon with a series of robotic rovers (google for "lunakhod"), and even retrieved lunar samples back to earth via robotic unmanned missions (call me when NASA achieves this). The Russians are also the only country to have a probe land on Venus and take photos of the searingly hot surface.
Oh yeah, and let's not forget that the Russians are the ones keeping the ISS alive via regular trips by robotic supply craft (a capability the US doesn't have), not to mention that they have a *safe* way to get people there *and* back, and that their costs of doing so are a fraction of the shuttle which despite being an impressive technical achievement is a disaster in terms of meeting it's operational and cost goals. Finally, before you say "yeah, well at least the US can build a shuttle", perhaps you should first google for "buran" - the Russian shuttle that, yet again unmanned, was able to take off, orbit the earth and land without any loss of tiles, before the project was scrapped due to lack of funds.
You seem to be suggesting that in seeking the scientific origins of the universe we may at some point get into an infinite regress, but I doubt that will happen. The universe is theorized to have emerged from an expansion event whereby a transiently existant piece of space-time (in the same way that particles can appear out of nothing in a vaccum - in accordance with quantum theory) became permanent. The question then isn't really what was it created out of, but rather where did the dyanamics/rules that gave rise to it come from, and I expect that we'll eventually discover some fundamental rules which are inevitable in the sense of being the only solution to some set of prior possibilities, and thus end the regress (at least in terms of asking why is it *this* way as opposed to "why is it at all"!).
Phyiscal law and environment obviously constrain what the mechanics of competition & evolution will create, but only in very broad strokes. I don't think you can say, for example, that a carbon-based biochemistry and Earth's environment meant that apes were bound to evolve. Perhaps we can say that the evolutionary/competetive niche of a highly adaptive intelligent non-specialist was bound to eventually get filled, but even that may be over stepping the bounds of speculation.
Anyway, given that the laws of nature can currently be reduced to two (quantum and relativity), soon to be reduced to one, it seems rather unuseful to take this view. If you want to say that God (with supreme foresight, knowing what it would give rise to) designed Shroedringer's wave equation and has then been hands-off ever since allowing the laws of nature to take their effect, then really that makes God rather impotent - entirely powerless to affect your life in any way.
Evolution is both incremental, but also quasi-static due to being driven by the environment. Genetic change builds up in a population over time giving rise to minor varieties none of which likely have an overwhelming advantange. At some point the environment changes - a famine, the arrival of a competitor, a change in temperature, etc, and now in an instant the advantage/disadvantage of these previously benign accumulated varieties/changes becomes apparant, and the evolutionary record shows the population "suddenly" changing. It may well be that a bunch of changes had to occur to arrive at some net change that was beneficial or detrimental, but the point is that these individual steps don't have to themselves confer any advantage/disadvantage - change happens all the time (it's unavoidable) and is undirected (also unavoidable), so you specifically would not expect changes to have any advantage/benefit. It's only when the competetive landscape changes - an environmental change - that these accumulated changes are "put to the test", and maybe evolution will "take a step" as accumulated changes that have advantage/disadvantage in competition and breeding in the new environment play out.
That is why the ID "method" misses the reality of evolution - it assumes that any complex feature was an all or nothing proposition and therefore derives these bogus "feasability" statistics of whether such a set of corrdinated changes could have simulataneously occured. Still, if it makes creationists feel better about their beliefes to "prove" them by ignoring the reality of evolution then so be it. It doesn't change the reality.
Actually what this supports is the rather obvious but profound fact that evolution happens on many levels. Not only are DNA changes that directly support the individual beneficial, but so are changes that support more rapid evolution. If encoding for proteins has evolved into a simple scheme so that changes generate a higher proportion of fucntioning proteins, then evolution is speeded up.
This is why creationist arguments fall flat on their face - because they don't argue against evolution as theory posits that it will occur but rather against their own simplistic and deliberately implausible (or else impossibly naieve) straw men. In this case creationists might put up the straw man that proteins are too complex to have evolved in the time that the evidence indicates they have, while the reality of evolutionary theory is that, as this research proves, encoding mechanisms themselves evolve, and so on up. The only rule of evolution is this: success breeds success. Success in rate of adaption is as important as anything.
Rating your songs has an effect, but having done so it often makes little difference whether you use random vs rating-biased play! It seems the difference between these two options is dominated by rating distribution, not by individual ratings!
Funny all these companies whining about having to compete with Google for top talent, and pay competetive salaries... You'd have thought they could just outsource, or are they maybe actually concerned about the *quality* of the people that Google is hiring, not the cost?
Intel's process size continues to reduce (down to 45nm now), regardless of what they're choosing to do with those transistors or how fast to clock them).
Well, you can bet it won't be a standalone client. It'll be Web based (AJAX), just like GMail and Google Maps. So you'll be able to use Google chat from airport web kiosks etc.
The only question is what they're going to call it - Google Chat, or Gabber (Google Jabber).
Interesting idea. I imagine that Google would have the bandwidth and server capacity to capture and processs this data if browsers were able to make it available.
I quite often find that Amazon's "people who bought this book also bought/viewed..." section turns up useful stuff that a title search doesn't, so I expect the same may be true here too. One could even get a "user interest rating" of pages by how long they viewed them for...
Maybe Mozilla/Firefox could work with Google to implement this type of feedback system...
The Yahoo vs Google page count methodology of counting numbers of pages returned for various high-response queries seems to be completely ignoring the fact that Yahoo *might be* picking up some of the less highly linked-to "dark web" that Google's page rank alogorithm are going to rate lowly, and which their crawler may be ignoring.
This is the portion of the web that I'd like to see - not the commerical portion but the hobbyist and enthusiast sites that may be out there without lots of incoming links that would make them more highly rated and/or visible to Google.
What'd therefore be relevant and interesting to know isn't how many hundreds of pages Google vs Yahoo get for "my job sucks", but rather how many it gets for "my weevil collection".
The Russians already had a clone of the Shuttle - the "Buran" - which successfully took off, orbited the earth, and landed without losing a single heat tile.. all unmanned. The project was then scrapped due to lack of further funding.
If they are copying anything here it's not the shuttle, but the next-gen NASA design which is back to a "lauched on the tip of a rocket" type design... but the timing, if anything, more suggests NASA copying Russia rather than vice versa.
Not really... By making it onto slashdot (as could almost have been predicted), they've made sure that pretty much the entire group of people who would ever want to make furniture out of FedEx boxes has seen it!
Slashdot Mirror
That's what Verizon's FIOS is, internally known as FTTP - Fiber To The Premis.
Verizon is engaged in the staggering task of rewiring (dewiring?) America, or at least that part of it that falls into Verizon's territory. Whole towns are being upgraded to fiber - first down the street, then indeed brought to your home when you order the service.
The fiber carries voice, data (internet) and video into your home, with the voice being ATM based (converted so that you can use your existing phones), although obviously you could choose to use VOIP instead.
Check this video out - solved in 10.95sec
. wmv
http://www.xpert.co.kr/1enjoy/2game/cube/pds/1095
Some amusing well-deserved gleeful cackling at the end!
Link posted in the "chatter" section of Macky's page:
http://cubefreak.hp.infoseek.co.jp/
Actually, if astrology ever did have anything going for it, it certainly hasn't done so for a least the last thousand years or so. It used to be that your star sign was the zodical constellation that the sun was (if plotted against the night sky) in at the time of your birth. The significance of the zodiacal constellations vs any others merely being that they lay on the plane of earth's rotation hence on the path that the sun appears to take through the year... something of significance if you believe the sun and planets to be gods as the Romans did.
What happened well over a thousand years ago is that star signs became divorced from astronomy and instead bcame fixed to months of the year. Thanks to the "precession of the equinoxes" caused by the varying axis of earth's rotation, the two are not fixed, and nowadays your astrological sign is not the same as the constellation you were "born in". In another 25,000 years (it's a 26,000 year axis wobble cycle) we'll be back were the fixed (broken clock) is correct and your modern star sign corresponds with the astrominical reality, for what that's worth (not very much).
Huh? No reason you can't use Intel's compiler for AMD64 it if you like the code it generates (AMD64 supports SSE/SSE2).
/ eng/compilers/clin/220007.htm
Intel themselves even point out that their compiler supports AMD.
http://www.intel.com/cd/software/products/asmo-na
Incidently gcc 4.0 does automatic loop vectorization using SSE/SSE2, so I wouldn't dismiss it too quickly either.
They said mast, not building, and sure enough if you click through the links in the article, there's a picture of it.
c fm?FeatureID=1939
http://www.techworld.com/mobility/features/index.
Presumably any benchmarks (meaningful ones at least) are going to interface with the kernel via core POSIX libraries such as libc and pthreads, which may also differ between the two. On Solaris one could also benchmark Sun libc vs GNU libc, but on the linux kernel that's not an option, nor is there a serious Linux/Solaris kernel-portable implementation of pthreads that I'm aware of.
Well, it may not specifically end up in the gene's of your offspring, but it's likely that evolution will see to it that it does end up in the genes of the future human race.
> Let's see how long the US holds together without the monetary support of the
> rest of the world.
Just a point; if anyone tried to destroy the US monetarily, the effect on the rest of the workl would be easily as bad. The dependency works both ways. Yes, the US is dependent of foreign trade, but most of the nations we trade with are dependent on it as well. Some few nations would just suffer loss of income and products, but many would suffer pains equal to some of the worst natural disasters.
I don't think the original poster was talking about a trade embargo - he was talking about debt... US treasury bonds to be precise.
When Bush spent $200B to invage Iraq, where do you think the money came from? Sadly the answer "US tax payers" is wrong (at least in the short term). The answer is that this was decicit spending - the US didn't have that money available, so they borrowed from other countries by way of issuing US debt instruments (30 yr bonds) which other countries bought (or in simple english - they lent the US the money, at the interest rate payable on the bonds). Of course the US taxpayers will eventually foot the bill as those 30 yr IOUs become payable.
So, other countries don't need to start a trade war to cause the US economy to crash - they just need to stop lending the US the money (i.e. buying US debt) that keep the US economy afloat (at least while it's being run by a profligate spender like Bush Jr or Sr.. Clinton was actually running a budget surplus).
The Oil producing countries could also cause the US economy to tank by the simple measure of choosing to price/sell oil in Euros rather than dollars. The demand for dollars would then plummet and the value of the dollar would than tank, and the US economy along with it.
No, the US did not invent the Internet. The US built the ARPAnet - a military network, and this has since been extended by the private sector into the worldwide network that is now called the Internet. Also to most people the Internet is synomynous with the Web, and that particular network application (HTML browser), and underlying protocol (HTTP) was invented by Europeans.
I, for one, am not interested in doing my word processing over the web.
I don't get the impression that anyone, least of all Sun or Google, are suggesting that you do.
The idea presumably would be that you run Java based (& likely Google enhanced) Office applications locally via JRE which would be installed together with Google taskbar.
The difference between this and just downloading/installing Open Office yourself would presumably be that using a "word processor" option on google's taskbar would just work without any user effort, and updates would be automatic.
Google is obviously also in a position to allow the option of storing documents on the net where they can be accessed from any location (maybe using Google's own storage, which can be feeely available to everyone) as well as locally.
In addition to "basic earth orbit" capability (i.e. all the records that Mir holds), the Russians also explored the moon with a series of robotic rovers (google for "lunakhod"), and even retrieved lunar samples back to earth via robotic unmanned missions (call me when NASA achieves this). The Russians are also the only country to have a probe land on Venus and take photos of the searingly hot surface.
Oh yeah, and let's not forget that the Russians are the ones keeping the ISS alive via regular trips by robotic supply craft (a capability the US doesn't have), not to mention that they have a *safe* way to get people there *and* back, and that their costs of doing so are a fraction of the shuttle which despite being an impressive technical achievement is a disaster in terms of meeting it's operational and cost goals. Finally, before you say "yeah, well at least the US can build a shuttle", perhaps you should first google for "buran" - the Russian shuttle that, yet again unmanned, was able to take off, orbit the earth and land without any loss of tiles, before the project was scrapped due to lack of funds.
No - I don't beleieve in God.
You seem to be suggesting that in seeking the scientific origins of the universe we may at some point get into an infinite regress, but I doubt that will happen. The universe is theorized to have emerged from an expansion event whereby a transiently existant piece of space-time (in the same way that particles can appear out of nothing in a vaccum - in accordance with quantum theory) became permanent. The question then isn't really what was it created out of, but rather where did the dyanamics/rules that gave rise to it come from, and I expect that we'll eventually discover some fundamental rules which are inevitable in the sense of being the only solution to some set of prior possibilities, and thus end the regress (at least in terms of asking why is it *this* way as opposed to "why is it at all"!).
Phyiscal law and environment obviously constrain what the mechanics of competition & evolution will create, but only in very broad strokes. I don't think you can say, for example, that a carbon-based biochemistry and Earth's environment meant that apes were bound to evolve. Perhaps we can say that the evolutionary/competetive niche of a highly adaptive intelligent non-specialist was bound to eventually get filled, but even that may be over stepping the bounds of speculation.
Anyway, given that the laws of nature can currently be reduced to two (quantum and relativity), soon to be reduced to one, it seems rather unuseful to take this view. If you want to say that God (with supreme foresight, knowing what it would give rise to) designed Shroedringer's wave equation and has then been hands-off ever since allowing the laws of nature to take their effect, then really that makes God rather impotent - entirely powerless to affect your life in any way.
Evolution is both incremental, but also quasi-static due to being driven by the environment. Genetic change builds up in a population over time giving rise to minor varieties none of which likely have an overwhelming advantange. At some point the environment changes - a famine, the arrival of a competitor, a change in temperature, etc, and now in an instant the advantage/disadvantage of these previously benign accumulated varieties/changes becomes apparant, and the evolutionary record shows the population "suddenly" changing. It may well be that a bunch of changes had to occur to arrive at some net change that was beneficial or detrimental, but the point is that these individual steps don't have to themselves confer any advantage/disadvantage - change happens all the time (it's unavoidable) and is undirected (also unavoidable), so you specifically would not expect changes to have any advantage/benefit. It's only when the competetive landscape changes - an environmental change - that these accumulated changes are "put to the test", and maybe evolution will "take a step" as accumulated changes that have advantage/disadvantage in competition and breeding in the new environment play out.
That is why the ID "method" misses the reality of evolution - it assumes that any complex feature was an all or nothing proposition and therefore derives these bogus "feasability" statistics of whether such a set of corrdinated changes could have simulataneously occured. Still, if it makes creationists feel better about their beliefes to "prove" them by ignoring the reality of evolution then so be it. It doesn't change the reality.
Actually what this supports is the rather obvious but profound fact that evolution happens on many levels. Not only are DNA changes that directly support the individual beneficial, but so are changes that support more rapid evolution. If encoding for proteins has evolved into a simple scheme so that changes generate a higher proportion of fucntioning proteins, then evolution is speeded up.
This is why creationist arguments fall flat on their face - because they don't argue against evolution as theory posits that it will occur but rather against their own simplistic and deliberately implausible (or else impossibly naieve) straw men. In this case creationists might put up the straw man that proteins are too complex to have evolved in the time that the evidence indicates they have, while the reality of evolutionary theory is that, as this research proves, encoding mechanisms themselves evolve, and so on up. The only rule of evolution is this: success breeds success. Success in rate of adaption is as important as anything.
Ebay's gotta be out of their mind if they think Skype can somehow help as a "Convergent" technology.
Agreed, so the expected synergy is most likely going to be with PayPal (owned by eBay).
But take a look at figure 4...
Rating your songs has an effect, but having done so it often makes little difference whether you use random vs rating-biased play! It seems the difference between these two options is dominated by rating distribution, not by individual ratings!
Funny all these companies whining about having to compete with Google for top talent, and pay competetive salaries... You'd have thought they could just outsource, or are they maybe actually concerned about the *quality* of the people that Google is hiring, not the cost?
Intel's process size continues to reduce (down to 45nm now), regardless of what they're choosing to do with those transistors or how fast to clock them).
Moore's not done yet.
The trick would be releasing a decent client.
Well, you can bet it won't be a standalone client. It'll be Web based (AJAX), just like GMail and Google Maps. So you'll be able to use Google chat from airport web kiosks etc.
The only question is what they're going to call it - Google Chat, or Gabber (Google Jabber).
Interesting idea. I imagine that Google would have the bandwidth and server capacity to capture and processs this data if browsers were able to make it available.
..." section turns up useful stuff that a title search doesn't, so I expect the same may be true here too. One could even get a "user interest rating" of pages by how long they viewed them for...
I quite often find that Amazon's "people who bought this book also bought/viewed
Maybe Mozilla/Firefox could work with Google to implement this type of feedback system...
The Yahoo vs Google page count methodology of counting numbers of pages returned for various high-response queries seems to be completely ignoring the fact that Yahoo *might be* picking up some of the less highly linked-to "dark web" that Google's page rank alogorithm are going to rate lowly, and which their crawler may be ignoring.
This is the portion of the web that I'd like to see - not the commerical portion but the hobbyist and enthusiast sites that may be out there without lots of incoming links that would make them more highly rated and/or visible to Google.
What'd therefore be relevant and interesting to know isn't how many hundreds of pages Google vs Yahoo get for "my job sucks", but rather how many it gets for "my weevil collection".
The Russians already had a clone of the Shuttle - the "Buran" - which successfully took off, orbited the earth, and landed without losing a single heat tile.. all unmanned. The project was then scrapped due to lack of further funding.
c e/energia-buran/page_01.htm
0 153.shtml
If they are copying anything here it's not the shuttle, but the next-gen NASA design which is back to a "lauched on the tip of a rocket" type design... but the timing, if anything, more suggests NASA copying Russia rather than vice versa.
http://www.aeronautics.ru/archive/space/russia/rs
http://www.aerospaceweb.org/question/spacecraft/q
http://liftoff.msfc.nasa.gov/rsa/pics.html
Is the drunken Australian hooligan audio feed available for all TV shows?
Not really... By making it onto slashdot (as could almost have been predicted), they've made sure that pretty much the entire group of people who would ever want to make furniture out of FedEx boxes has seen it!