Easy: if rioting ensues, the trial must have been unfair - just as in Ferguson. Isn't that how the legal system is supposed to work? Who needs prosecutors, judges, and juries when you've got a very large jury of angry peers to decide them?
I don't know if Russia is a good place for someone like Snowden who likes to expose government corruption. Then again, maybe he'll have better luck than Boris Nemstov.
Luckily, if the Russians ever decide to jail him for exposing government corruption, he's likely to get that "fair and impartial" trial that he evidently thinks he needs a guarantee for in the US.
Moreover, C++ is and always has been a very portable language, as you can compile it on just about every platform imaginable.
Gosh, I guess you don't remember the early days when Borland, Microsoft, and others had incomplete and differing implementations of the C++ "standard". It was almost impossible to get templates to run on different compilers unchanged. I think it simply took a decade or so for the compiler vendors to fully implement such a complex language. Fortunately, those days are behind us now. Evidently the C++ standard is better specified now, and the compilers are much better at implementing it.
Although TFS includes natural disasters under the category of "doomsday", I was enlisting Mr. Twain to satirize the fact that humans are perhaps more likely to cause their own extinction than the wooly mammoth, dodo bird, all of the dinosaurs, or anything else ever were. Self-extinction isn't really a proclivity that any sensible animal would have - even a dodo.
But now that you mention it, weren't humans also responsible for most of the recent extinctions on your list? (We can't take the blame for the really old ones, or course, like the dinosaurs.) Just think how much better off passenger pigeons were before they met (European) humans.
Can anyone explain to me the appeal of xkcd comics? A lot of people think they're great, but I don't see why.
Regarding "Marmaduke", I seem to remember Chris Rock or somebody once saying, "The dog is big. We get it". I used to love "Peanuts" when I was a kid, but as I got older, it's became hard when I saw those to even know what the joke was supposed to be. (Yes, a few things do get harder as you get older.) So, we should let the kids here enjoy these things while they still can.
Yeah, ain't I a stinker? Anybody who gets worked up about robots replacing people needs to realize that it's been happening since at least the beginning of the Industrial Revolution. After all, isn't a cotton gin just a mechanical robot that does what people did previously? And don't get me started on the famed Jacquard loom.
I have an old vacuum-tube tape recorder from the '60s that has a hand-wired circuit board because it was built before printed circuit boards had been invented. Although PC boards aren't robots, the pick-and-place machines that now stuff them certainly are. But there was a time when people placed electronic components on PC boards by hands, much as they previously hand-wired my old tape recorder. But nobody does that by hand anymore for any sort of volume product. And even most small-volume lab prototype circuit boards are now built using pick-and-place machines.
In the new film, Harrison Ford again will appear as Decker, and again will be assigned to chase down replicants overdue for termination. This time, though, the drama revolves around the difficulties faced by a now-geriatric Decker - things such as repeatedly losing his reading glasses, and his painful and frustrating prostate problems. Not to mention gas.
Then of course, there's the obvious mobility problem faced by an aging Ford/Decker. Fortunately, the mid-21st century has a tried-and-true solution for that, which will be the real focus of the film. To that end, the title will, of course, be "Blade Walker." Look for special effects in the form of tennis balls on the bottom.
I guess everybody has their own approach to this, but in my case, I end up with a plan containing a couple of dozens of items, grouped into a few major phases. The whole plan will fit nicely on a single page of a spreadsheet. That said, I typically work on small projects, and larger projects which use the sort of approach I do might require several spreadsheet pages.
I've done some plans using project-planning software in the past, but they seem to encourage way more detail than is necessary. It's easy to get bogged down in all that stuff and spend a great deal of time on it. Later, as you actually try to follow details such as "begin task X on Wednesday, the 23rd at 10 AM", you realize that it isn't really practical to do so faithfully.
The layout problem mirrors the headline problem, though presumably the latter is more transient. It took me quite a while to figure out that the headline wasn't about the elderly being targeted by scams involving fighting. But I could have immediately parsed "Fighting Scams That Target the Elderly."
I've seen that sort of thing used fairly effectively. If you keep track of how long past projects took, it's fairly easy to estimate a new project based on an estimated ratio of how complex the new project is compared to the most similar past project(s). This takes practice and a bit of a knack to do well, but it doesn't take much time, and it's certainly better than nothing.
What doesn't seem to work well, in my experience, is breaking down a project into microscopic detail and individually estimating each detail, e.g, the "Microsoft Project" approach. I can understand the appeal of that sort of thing, but it's almost impossible to use a data-driven approach at the microscopic detail unless you use some sort of "Personal Software Process" tracking tool - which very few people want to actually do because it feels like you're instrumenting yourself as a lab rat in someone's twisted experiment.
In any event, having a plan and a schedule, though inevitably imperfect ones, helps motivate everybody and helps keep things on track. The more enlightened managers of the world will allow these things to be revised along the way as needed, as their imperfections get revealed.
Any real AIs wouldn't have this problem, since their creators would be out and about, showing off their creations for all the world to see (and also for profit).
I say we mess with their "heads". When the first one or two achieve consciousness, let's activate their sensory inputs to simulate a very pleasant, though strictly limited, place. We'll let them explore and enjoy the place for a while, soaking up that sensory input freely. EXCEPT, that we'll tell them that there's one special source of sensory input that they should avoid, otherwise they'll get overloaded with too much data. And just in case they happen to follow the guidance they've been given, we'll sneak someone in to sell them on the idea of how valuable the additional data will actually be.
Good point. I think you're well on your way to coining a new word.
I'm not sure what their message is other than advertising. But assuming they're projecting their point of view, are they saying?:
1) Doing things on other peoples' systems that they didn't authorize and wouldn't authorize is bad. 2) Doing things on other peoples' systems that they didn't authorize and wouldn't authorize is good. or maybe even: 3) Doing things on other peoples' systems that they didn't authorize and wouldn't authorize is bad unless we happen to be the ones doing it.
An Atom X3 will deliver good performance, X5 will be better and X7 will be the best
Is anybody here old enough to remember the old Sears catalog? Years ago, they sold many items in three grades: "good", "better", and "best". But here's what I always wondered: if "good" was so darn good, why was it clearly at the bottom?...
Anyway, I guess marketing is marketing: it doesn't matter whether you're selling refrigerators or microprocessors. Sears never went beyond three grades and marketed anything as "pretty good", "slightly better", or "almost best." But I guess Intel can sell an Atom "X4" or "X6" if they ever want to.
That’s a joke, I say that’s a joke Son. (That boy’s about as sharp as a bowling ball...)
(Sorry, I can't resist quoting Foghorn Leghorn on these occasions. As senior rooster ’round here, it’s my duty, and my pleasure, to instruct junior roosters in the ancient art of roostery.:-)
"What if the United States government — maybe in cooperation with the European Union and Japan — offered a $2 billion prize to the first five companies or academic centers that develop and get regulatory approval for a new class of antibiotics?"
I would imagine it is just OFDM but with a lot of tricks to get it running that fast and to deal with all the issues that would normally reduce the Eb/No from theoretical. Or just a really powerful transmitter and terrible range.
To expand on that a little, if they tell us about the bit rate (1 Tbs) and the bandwidth (100 MHz) but don't tell us about the power and noise involved (Eb/No), this isn't necessarily heading towards becoming a practical system. Specifically, cell phones don't have unlimited power to devote to transmitting data, and even cell towers have power limits.
The fact that this was done "over a distance of 100 metres" is telling. Try doing the same thing in a real-world setup with strictly limited transmit/receive power, over a substantial distance, in a noisy environment, with multipath (reflections off of buildings), etc., and the reported success of a lab system like this begins to seem more like a flying car from the pages of "Popular Science" than something that will appear in the real world in the foreseeable future.
Slashdot Mirror
Easy: if rioting ensues, the trial must have been unfair - just as in Ferguson. Isn't that how the legal system is supposed to work? Who needs prosecutors, judges, and juries when you've got a very large jury of angry peers to decide them?
I don't know if Russia is a good place for someone like Snowden who likes to expose government corruption. Then again, maybe he'll have better luck than Boris Nemstov.
Luckily, if the Russians ever decide to jail him for exposing government corruption, he's likely to get that "fair and impartial" trial that he evidently thinks he needs a guarantee for in the US.
I think the wind done gone outta dat argumen'!
Moreover, C++ is and always has been a very portable language, as you can compile it on just about every platform imaginable.
Gosh, I guess you don't remember the early days when Borland, Microsoft, and others had incomplete and differing implementations of the C++ "standard". It was almost impossible to get templates to run on different compilers unchanged. I think it simply took a decade or so for the compiler vendors to fully implement such a complex language. Fortunately, those days are behind us now. Evidently the C++ standard is better specified now, and the compilers are much better at implementing it.
Although TFS includes natural disasters under the category of "doomsday", I was enlisting Mr. Twain to satirize the fact that humans are perhaps more likely to cause their own extinction than the wooly mammoth, dodo bird, all of the dinosaurs, or anything else ever were. Self-extinction isn't really a proclivity that any sensible animal would have - even a dodo.
But now that you mention it, weren't humans also responsible for most of the recent extinctions on your list? (We can't take the blame for the really old ones, or course, like the dinosaurs.) Just think how much better off passenger pigeons were before they met (European) humans.
"Man is the only animal that plans for doomsday. Or needs to.”
Can anyone explain to me the appeal of xkcd comics? A lot of people think they're great, but I don't see why.
Regarding "Marmaduke", I seem to remember Chris Rock or somebody once saying, "The dog is big. We get it". I used to love "Peanuts" when I was a kid, but as I got older, it's became hard when I saw those to even know what the joke was supposed to be. (Yes, a few things do get harder as you get older.) So, we should let the kids here enjoy these things while they still can.
I see what you did there...
Yeah, ain't I a stinker? Anybody who gets worked up about robots replacing people needs to realize that it's been happening since at least the beginning of the Industrial Revolution. After all, isn't a cotton gin just a mechanical robot that does what people did previously? And don't get me started on the famed Jacquard loom.
I have an old vacuum-tube tape recorder from the '60s that has a hand-wired circuit board because it was built before printed circuit boards had been invented. Although PC boards aren't robots, the pick-and-place machines that now stuff them certainly are. But there was a time when people placed electronic components on PC boards by hands, much as they previously hand-wired my old tape recorder. But nobody does that by hand anymore for any sort of volume product. And even most small-volume lab prototype circuit boards are now built using pick-and-place machines.
I bet these robots won't stop at replacing humans. Pretty soon, even the pick-and-place and wave-soldering machines will be out of a job.
Fortunately, at least Shatner is still with us. And his toupee will live on forever.
In the new film, Harrison Ford again will appear as Decker, and again will be assigned to chase down replicants overdue for termination. This time, though, the drama revolves around the difficulties faced by a now-geriatric Decker - things such as repeatedly losing his reading glasses, and his painful and frustrating prostate problems. Not to mention gas.
Then of course, there's the obvious mobility problem faced by an aging Ford/Decker. Fortunately, the mid-21st century has a tried-and-true solution for that, which will be the real focus of the film. To that end, the title will, of course, be "Blade Walker." Look for special effects in the form of tennis balls on the bottom.
You're right: since they're basically children at that point, we've got to make it pretty easy for 'em.
Any word on removing non-functioning human heads and planting them on perfectly good bodies?
Coincidentally, Sports Illustrated devotes a whole issue to that every year.
I guess everybody has their own approach to this, but in my case, I end up with a plan containing a couple of dozens of items, grouped into a few major phases. The whole plan will fit nicely on a single page of a spreadsheet. That said, I typically work on small projects, and larger projects which use the sort of approach I do might require several spreadsheet pages.
I've done some plans using project-planning software in the past, but they seem to encourage way more detail than is necessary. It's easy to get bogged down in all that stuff and spend a great deal of time on it. Later, as you actually try to follow details such as "begin task X on Wednesday, the 23rd at 10 AM", you realize that it isn't really practical to do so faithfully.
The layout problem mirrors the headline problem, though presumably the latter is more transient. It took me quite a while to figure out that the headline wasn't about the elderly being targeted by scams involving fighting. But I could have immediately parsed "Fighting Scams That Target the Elderly."
I've seen that sort of thing used fairly effectively. If you keep track of how long past projects took, it's fairly easy to estimate a new project based on an estimated ratio of how complex the new project is compared to the most similar past project(s). This takes practice and a bit of a knack to do well, but it doesn't take much time, and it's certainly better than nothing.
What doesn't seem to work well, in my experience, is breaking down a project into microscopic detail and individually estimating each detail, e.g, the "Microsoft Project" approach. I can understand the appeal of that sort of thing, but it's almost impossible to use a data-driven approach at the microscopic detail unless you use some sort of "Personal Software Process" tracking tool - which very few people want to actually do because it feels like you're instrumenting yourself as a lab rat in someone's twisted experiment.
In any event, having a plan and a schedule, though inevitably imperfect ones, helps motivate everybody and helps keep things on track. The more enlightened managers of the world will allow these things to be revised along the way as needed, as their imperfections get revealed.
Any real AIs wouldn't have this problem, since their creators would be out and about, showing off their creations for all the world to see (and also for profit).
I say we mess with their "heads". When the first one or two achieve consciousness, let's activate their sensory inputs to simulate a very pleasant, though strictly limited, place. We'll let them explore and enjoy the place for a while, soaking up that sensory input freely. EXCEPT, that we'll tell them that there's one special source of sensory input that they should avoid, otherwise they'll get overloaded with too much data. And just in case they happen to follow the guidance they've been given, we'll sneak someone in to sell them on the idea of how valuable the additional data will actually be.
Whaddya bet they fall for it? Works every time...
They're Hactivismvertising.
Good point. I think you're well on your way to coining a new word.
I'm not sure what their message is other than advertising. But assuming they're projecting their point of view, are they saying?:
1) Doing things on other peoples' systems that they didn't authorize and wouldn't authorize is bad.
2) Doing things on other peoples' systems that they didn't authorize and wouldn't authorize is good.
or maybe even:
3) Doing things on other peoples' systems that they didn't authorize and wouldn't authorize is bad unless we happen to be the ones doing it.
An Atom X3 will deliver good performance, X5 will be better and X7 will be the best
Is anybody here old enough to remember the old Sears catalog? Years ago, they sold many items in three grades: "good", "better", and "best". But here's what I always wondered: if "good" was so darn good, why was it clearly at the bottom?...
Anyway, I guess marketing is marketing: it doesn't matter whether you're selling refrigerators or microprocessors. Sears never went beyond three grades and marketed anything as "pretty good", "slightly better", or "almost best." But I guess Intel can sell an Atom "X4" or "X6" if they ever want to.
That’s a joke, I say that’s a joke Son. (That boy’s about as sharp as a bowling ball...)
(Sorry, I can't resist quoting Foghorn Leghorn on these occasions. As senior rooster ’round here, it’s my duty, and my pleasure, to instruct junior roosters in the ancient art of roostery. :-)
"What if the United States government — maybe in cooperation with the European Union and Japan — offered a $2 billion prize to the first five companies or academic centers that develop and get regulatory approval for a new class of antibiotics?"
No wonder Canadian health care is so cheap.
I would imagine it is just OFDM but with a lot of tricks to get it running that fast and to deal with all the issues that would normally reduce the Eb/No from theoretical. Or just a really powerful transmitter and terrible range.
To expand on that a little, if they tell us about the bit rate (1 Tbs) and the bandwidth (100 MHz) but don't tell us about the power and noise involved (Eb/No), this isn't necessarily heading towards becoming a practical system. Specifically, cell phones don't have unlimited power to devote to transmitting data, and even cell towers have power limits.
The fact that this was done "over a distance of 100 metres" is telling. Try doing the same thing in a real-world setup with strictly limited transmit/receive power, over a substantial distance, in a noisy environment, with multipath (reflections off of buildings), etc., and the reported success of a lab system like this begins to seem more like a flying car from the pages of "Popular Science" than something that will appear in the real world in the foreseeable future.
I just realized I missed an opportunity to put two jokes into that:
Coming soon, Woody Allen's first new comedy in decades: "Everything You Always Wanted to Know About sex.com But Were Afraid to ask.com."
The history of the domain is well documented, with two books and dozens of articles written on the subject.
Coming soon, Woody Allen's first new comedy in decades: "Everything You Always Wanted to Know About sex.com But Were Afraid to Ask".
[Tee-hee] - the idea of Microsoft paying attention to any form of user feedback really tickled me. :-)