Would such a system be more open to being hacked? There are reports that the outlawed Falun Gong religion hijacked a satellite and there's the Captain Midnight HBO escapade. So theoretically how open to attack would such systems be? I'm not well versed in missle systems but I've always understood chain of command and redundancy in personell kept a Dr. Strangelove type scenario from developing. Would this be the case with weapons in space probably reliant on satellite systems?
Informed consent as practised by my two physicians seems to underscore knowledge and concern on their part. While there are processes of informed consent that detail a patient's understanding and consent, there is also, a modus operandi on the part of concerned practioners that brings with it an effort to make sure a patient is well informed and consentual before a course of medication is undertaken. My experience is, if your physicians talks of informed consent and walks you through a process of understanding, then, it's likely you're in a position to reach an informed decision. If OTOH your physician merely says, to the effect, I prescribing X, take it, then, I'd look for another doctor.
" Didn't Artie Shaw give up playing the clarinet for many years because he was obsessed with perfection, and realised he'd never be able to attain it?"
He did give up playing for many years, IIRC he quit playing sometime around the 50's, then, when he did come back it was more as a front man. He was very interested in writing and wrote a couple of books about being a side man, and his interest in writiing, along with an interest in math and precision shooting took up his time after he quit playing. I can't say that I remember his having quit playing because of an obsession with unattainable perfection. As I recall from the series of interviews his reason for quitting had more to do with his contemmpt for his audience. He thought the crowds who bought records and propelled pop icons were senseless and unable to appreciate music.
Not to take anything away from Gary Kildall's accomplishments but the issue of his being out flying his plane while IBM came to call has never seemed to be adequately explained
"Another key decision was software. In July, members of the task force went to visit Digital Research to ask the firm to port its CP/M operating system to the 8086 architecture. Legend has it that founder Gary Kildall was flying his plane at the time. Whatever the reason, Kildall's wife, Dorothy, and DR's attorneys didn't sign the nondisclosure agreement IBM presented. So the IBM team left and flew north to Seattle to meet with Microsoft, from which they had hoped to obtain a version of BASIC.
I can't speak for Lucas but I did hear a similar sentiment from jazz clarinetist Artie Shaw. I'm a jazz fan and picked up on Artie Shaw in a history of jazz program, then later heard an extended series of interviews with him. He spoke of the right to fail as a prerequisite to great playing. He was of the opinion that people who play it safe and play to a known recipe aren't able to make great music. He went on to say his best playing always contained errors because he was reaching beyond his present abilities in an attempt to conquer new heights (my loose paraphrase). I think Lucas means something similar when he talks of the right to fail as the right to go beyond the status quo ante and break new ground even if in the attempt he is seen to fail.
Maybe the majority of scientists of Dr. Suzuki's age no longer "do" science. Einstein spent his latter years fruitlessly seeking to disprove the idea God plays at dice. One of the exceptions may have been Paul Erdos but generally scientists of an age become a repository for the status quo ante, or, like Dr. Suzuki, political animals. The Nature of Things is doing a series on The Emotional Brain. Having read A. Damasio's book The Feeling of What Happens I intend to watch Suzuki's take on the subject matter. It's especially interesting because Damasio, a neurobiologist, inter alia, makes a strong case that emotion is necessary to decision making. He highlights case histories wherein patients who have suffered injuries that inhibit their emotional response in decision making tend to go into loops incesstantly reviewing the logic behind alternative possible decisions, but unable to arrive at a decision.
Somewhere, perhaps in a paper from the Santa Fe Institute, I read an exchange between a physicist and an economist. The economist derided the physicist saying that a career in physics did not last much beyond the physicist's 30th year. The economist went on to ask the physicist what he'll do after his 30th birthday. The physicist replied he'd likely become an economist
I agree with your opinion that "people who know better have a duty to call them on it". But there's vaule in setting the venue for debate and a little imaginative flight never hurt anyone. Consider the recent articles on vedic math. Arguing the value of a figurative transformation of a body of work from hard science is a tricky undertaking, but I think such works have a value if no more than calling on the more informed to critique them.
Worthless to whom? Certainly to a physicist such works are worthless, but the days of the polymath are long past. I read somewhere that Goethe is considered to be the last polymath who was thought to be in command of all and everything as it was understood in his time. Today we are in need of informed and adventurous popularizers who can at least attempt to bring the latests discoveries of science to the public. David Suzuki is an example.
Last summer I read a clutch of books attempting to define life. After reading Sex and the Origins of Death by W.C. Clark, I decided to restrict my readings to authors born in the 1930's. I did this because people of this generation seemed to be in a position to sum up a lifetime of scientific investigations in their respective field. Sir R. Penrose is coeval with people of this age group and I suspect his book represents a unique opportunity to review Physics as his generation came to know it. Younger authors, like Lee Smolin might better present the bleeding edge.
The term inform and, hence informed, suggest the imparting of information. The term information isn't necessary in terms of our exchange and it's tricky. The term informative suggests a definition closer to what you have used in your point that a question can be informed. Informative suggests instruction and I think a question, well formed, is instructive. Therefore I think a question is, in our context, better defined in terms of being informative than informed. A question could be said to have implicit within it's structure an informative nature.
I was raised hunting and fishing. Coming from pioneer stock on both sides I was taught to hunt from a very early age and had alot of lore, and, firearms handed down to me. Killing for food is different from trophy hunting, but either way, if you're going to kill; do it cleanly and well, preferrably with one shot from a weapon matched to take down the game you intend to kill.
I no longer own guns or hunt. I do hike wilderness areas with a camera and nothing but a K-bar for defense and utillity. What is missing from hunting is the incredible experience of facing large predators, (cougars, wolves, bears in my experience) and letting oneanother pass with respect and knowledge. Facing a 200 lb cat and walking away to leave it to it's ecosystem is an experience that diminishes hunting to a coward's game.
I assume you mean: ship us off to the Gulag, a Stalinist prison camp for dissidents. The Galapagos islands were made famous by Darwin and are a hotbed of evolutionary development. Sending us off to the Galapagos would hasten our evolution.
The asking of informed questions underlies science. A question presupposes the assumptions made in asking the question and, therefore, dictates the elements of the answer. A question is nothing if not informative.
Perhaps the core argument of intelligent design derives from the idea of The Great Chain of Being, (more at: http://www.louisville.edu/a-s/english/haymarket/ja sonz/zahrchain.html. The idea was best summed up by Arthur Oncken Lovejoy in his seminal book, The Great Chain of Being: A Study of the History of an Idea, while the book investigates the concept from Plato, through the neoplatonists, and on through history, I think the argument as applied to intelligent design centers around the idea of our species as being more perfect than other "more lowly", species. This argument was used to legitimize slavery, as Africans were seen to be subhuman; there is, of course, the obvious connection with Nazism and the idea of a super race.
Stephen Jay Gould in his book The Structure of Evolutionary Theory, 1400 hundred pages of Gould at his best, forwarded an argument that goes to the heart of the idea of intelligent design when he described evolution as a random walk, wherein the idea of contingency, might preclude the evolution of our species were the "tape" of evolution to be played over again. The idea of intelligent design is founded on hubris and chavunism. As a Christian belief there is an interesting tie in with 42, ancient numerology and the Greek idea of Logos. There is also a tie in to the patriarchical aspects of Christianity, the subjugation of women and a strange development of Christianity as a spritually, homosexual system of belief, but that would be another post.
IIRC first posts were first mentioned by CmdTaco in a now deleted post to the FAQ on how/. came to be. In that post he spoke of a time when geeks would aimlessly scribble First Post in the sand. The FAQ now mentions First Posts as... ""First Post" comments are one of those odd little memetic hiccups that come out of nowhere and run amok. Basically, people with altogether far too much spare time sit and reload Slashdot, hoping that they will get the "First Post" in a discussion. This is one of those things that the moderation system was designed to clean up, and for the most part, it works. "First Post" comments usually get moderated down as off-topic almost instantly." Hey times change shit happens. I still try for a First Post, when logged in, cuz it's fun.
What I don't get is why, when the moderation system and filters available allow for you to screen for almost anything, people seem to read a -1 then rant about First Posts and trolls, but hey, that's just me.
I'm a/. fanboy, I like/. warts and all. I see it as a the net's agora. Like any open gathering place you should take what you value with a grain of salt, until you've been able to substantiate it. Reading/. at +4 gives results equal to the best techno sites, but it's up to the reader to validate the information.
I liked/. best before it was sold, but think, that to date, it was at it's best about 3 years ago when the post grad ratio was at it's highest and the best and the brightest seemed to post. But again that's just me; I don't subscribe, not because I don't want to support/., but because I get alot of value out of the ads and think they're germane.
I lifted this from Cosma Shalizi's notebook pages on Joseph Campbell.
"This is not exactly news. (Cf. Kurt Vonnegut's description of the basic story, which he calls ``Man in a Hole'': ``Somebody gets into trouble and gets out of it. People never get tired of this.'')"
K. Vonnegut's "Man in Hole" quasi ideogram well describes storylines as we like them. The idea is older than Aristotle, whose definition of catharsis has propelled everything Hollywood has done and probably all of pulp fiction. Dvorak is just showing his dismal lack of even a basic knowledge of The Western Canon and showing his age.
This seems to recall the principle of the lampost. You know, guy looses his keys on a walk home; looks for them under the lampost, not because he thinks that's where he lost them, but because it's brighter there. E. Coli is one of the most intensely studied organisms and, a lampost, of sorts.
"The Nobel Prizes earned by Francois Jacob and
Jacques Monod are but two of the dozen that by my
account are affiliated with E. coli. The overall scientific
literature alluding to E. coli now encompasses over
100,000 publications; Google reports almost 3 million
hits with 'coli'on the World Wide Web."
J. Monod's book Chance and Necessity is an eye opening read, perhaps dated now, but stimulating in terms of the philosophy of science coming out or genetic research.
Another deeply studied life form Drosophila melanogaster, like e.coli, carries with it such a huge body of work that it, likewise, probably tends to attract and disseminate novel research.
Sorry my bad. There's no excuse so after I post this I'll just slink away and nurse my ego. I took my info from reading Pinker's book How the Mind Works wherein he does take Chomsky to task on some essential points. He quotes Chomsky and relates the issue in some detail. I read the book late last year, but I don't have a copy at hand. I've read Chomsky's book Language and Mind and reviewed some of his earlier writings, especially as it dealt with the Port-Royalists. The Chomsky/Skinner debate referrence came out of researching Chomsky's work. I've only scanned some of Skinner work, basically taking away some idea of his take on behaviorism. While I've read The Edge repository on Pinker. I didn't adequately read the link I posted to the Chomsky/Pinker debate. I was in a hurry and gave it too quick of a read. For the issues I'll have to go back to Pinker's book: How the Mind Works. Either way I screwed up in not reading the link.
Chomsky, who originally debated/antagonized B.F. Skinner, is now locked in debate with Steve Pinker, also of MIT, and, also a theorist attacking the problem of language learning.
Slashdot Mirror
Would such a system be more open to being hacked? There are reports that the outlawed Falun Gong religion hijacked a satellite and there's the Captain Midnight HBO escapade. So theoretically how open to attack would such systems be? I'm not well versed in missle systems but I've always understood chain of command and redundancy in personell kept a Dr. Strangelove type scenario from developing. Would this be the case with weapons in space probably reliant on satellite systems?
J.P. Morgan said it long ago... "Canada is a very nice country and we intend to keep it that way."
Informed consent as practised by my two physicians seems to underscore knowledge and concern on their part. While there are processes of informed consent that detail a patient's understanding and consent, there is also, a modus operandi on the part of concerned practioners that brings with it an effort to make sure a patient is well informed and consentual before a course of medication is undertaken. My experience is, if your physicians talks of informed consent and walks you through a process of understanding, then, it's likely you're in a position to reach an informed decision. If OTOH your physician merely says, to the effect, I prescribing X, take it, then, I'd look for another doctor.
He did give up playing for many years, IIRC he quit playing sometime around the 50's, then, when he did come back it was more as a front man. He was very interested in writing and wrote a couple of books about being a side man, and his interest in writiing, along with an interest in math and precision shooting took up his time after he quit playing. I can't say that I remember his having quit playing because of an obsession with unattainable perfection. As I recall from the series of interviews his reason for quitting had more to do with his contemmpt for his audience. He thought the crowds who bought records and propelled pop icons were senseless and unable to appreciate music.
The following is from a pcmag article:
"Another key decision was software. In July, members of the task force went to visit Digital Research to ask the firm to port its CP/M operating system to the 8086 architecture. Legend has it that founder Gary Kildall was flying his plane at the time. Whatever the reason, Kildall's wife, Dorothy, and DR's attorneys didn't sign the nondisclosure agreement IBM presented. So the IBM team left and flew north to Seattle to meet with Microsoft, from which they had hoped to obtain a version of BASIC.
I can't speak for Lucas but I did hear a similar sentiment from jazz clarinetist Artie Shaw. I'm a jazz fan and picked up on Artie Shaw in a history of jazz program, then later heard an extended series of interviews with him. He spoke of the right to fail as a prerequisite to great playing. He was of the opinion that people who play it safe and play to a known recipe aren't able to make great music. He went on to say his best playing always contained errors because he was reaching beyond his present abilities in an attempt to conquer new heights (my loose paraphrase). I think Lucas means something similar when he talks of the right to fail as the right to go beyond the status quo ante and break new ground even if in the attempt he is seen to fail.
cheers
The Reg has an article that points out a soft spot in the supposed anonymity provided by Freenet.
Somewhere, perhaps in a paper from the Santa Fe Institute, I read an exchange between a physicist and an economist. The economist derided the physicist saying that a career in physics did not last much beyond the physicist's 30th year. The economist went on to ask the physicist what he'll do after his 30th birthday. The physicist replied he'd likely become an economist
cheers
Worthless to whom? Certainly to a physicist such works are worthless, but the days of the polymath are long past. I read somewhere that Goethe is considered to be the last polymath who was thought to be in command of all and everything as it was understood in his time. Today we are in need of informed and adventurous popularizers who can at least attempt to bring the latests discoveries of science to the public. David Suzuki is an example.
Last summer I read a clutch of books attempting to define life. After reading Sex and the Origins of Death by W.C. Clark, I decided to restrict my readings to authors born in the 1930's. I did this because people of this generation seemed to be in a position to sum up a lifetime of scientific investigations in their respective field. Sir R. Penrose is coeval with people of this age group and I suspect his book represents a unique opportunity to review Physics as his generation came to know it. Younger authors, like Lee Smolin might better present the bleeding edge.
The Tao of Physics by FRITJOF CAPRA, which, I think, predates The Dancing Wu Li Masters.
The BSOD, download the screensaver from sysinternals it'll bring back that sick to the pit of your stomach feeling.
The term inform and, hence informed, suggest the imparting of information. The term information isn't necessary in terms of our exchange and it's tricky. The term informative suggests a definition closer to what you have used in your point that a question can be informed. Informative suggests instruction and I think a question, well formed, is instructive. Therefore I think a question is, in our context, better defined in terms of being informative than informed. A question could be said to have implicit within it's structure an informative nature.
I no longer own guns or hunt. I do hike wilderness areas with a camera and nothing but a K-bar for defense and utillity. What is missing from hunting is the incredible experience of facing large predators, (cougars, wolves, bears in my experience) and letting oneanother pass with respect and knowledge. Facing a 200 lb cat and walking away to leave it to it's ecosystem is an experience that diminishes hunting to a coward's game.
I assume you mean: ship us off to the Gulag, a Stalinist prison camp for dissidents. The Galapagos islands were made famous by Darwin and are a hotbed of evolutionary development. Sending us off to the Galapagos would hasten our evolution.
The asking of informed questions underlies science. A question presupposes the assumptions made in asking the question and, therefore, dictates the elements of the answer. A question is nothing if not informative.
Stephen Jay Gould in his book The Structure of Evolutionary Theory, 1400 hundred pages of Gould at his best, forwarded an argument that goes to the heart of the idea of intelligent design when he described evolution as a random walk, wherein the idea of contingency, might preclude the evolution of our species were the "tape" of evolution to be played over again. The idea of intelligent design is founded on hubris and chavunism. As a Christian belief there is an interesting tie in with 42, ancient numerology and the Greek idea of Logos. There is also a tie in to the patriarchical aspects of Christianity, the subjugation of women and a strange development of Christianity as a spritually, homosexual system of belief, but that would be another post.
cheers
What I don't get is why, when the moderation system and filters available allow for you to screen for almost anything, people seem to read a -1 then rant about First Posts and trolls, but hey, that's just me.
I'm a /. fanboy, I like /. warts and all. I see it as a the net's agora. Like any open gathering place you should take what you value with a grain of salt, until you've been able to substantiate it. Reading /. at +4 gives results equal to the best techno sites, but it's up to the reader to validate the information.
I liked /. best before it was sold, but think, that to date, it was at it's best about 3 years ago when the post grad ratio was at it's highest and the best and the brightest seemed to post. But again that's just me; I don't subscribe, not because I don't want to support /., but because I get alot of value out of the ads and think they're germane.
cheers
"This is not exactly news. (Cf. Kurt Vonnegut's description of the basic story, which he calls ``Man in a Hole'': ``Somebody gets into trouble and gets out of it. People never get tired of this.'')"
K. Vonnegut's "Man in Hole" quasi ideogram well describes storylines as we like them. The idea is older than Aristotle, whose definition of catharsis has propelled everything Hollywood has done and probably all of pulp fiction. Dvorak is just showing his dismal lack of even a basic knowledge of The Western Canon and showing his age.
Run windows, miss the BSOD, download the screensaver from sysinternals. It's dejavu all over again.
"The Nobel Prizes earned by Francois Jacob and Jacques Monod are but two of the dozen that by my account are affiliated with E. coli. The overall scientific literature alluding to E. coli now encompasses over 100,000 publications; Google reports almost 3 million hits with 'coli'on the World Wide Web."
J. Monod's book Chance and Necessity is an eye opening read, perhaps dated now, but stimulating in terms of the philosophy of science coming out or genetic research.
Another deeply studied life form Drosophila melanogaster, like e.coli, carries with it such a huge body of work that it, likewise, probably tends to attract and disseminate novel research.
Sorry my bad. There's no excuse so after I post this I'll just slink away and nurse my ego. I took my info from reading Pinker's book How the Mind Works wherein he does take Chomsky to task on some essential points. He quotes Chomsky and relates the issue in some detail. I read the book late last year, but I don't have a copy at hand. I've read Chomsky's book Language and Mind and reviewed some of his earlier writings, especially as it dealt with the Port-Royalists. The Chomsky/Skinner debate referrence came out of researching Chomsky's work. I've only scanned some of Skinner work, basically taking away some idea of his take on behaviorism. While I've read The Edge repository on Pinker. I didn't adequately read the link I posted to the Chomsky/Pinker debate. I was in a hurry and gave it too quick of a read. For the issues I'll have to go back to Pinker's book: How the Mind Works. Either way I screwed up in not reading the link.
Chomsky, who originally debated/antagonized B.F. Skinner, is now locked in debate with Steve Pinker, also of MIT, and, also a theorist attacking the problem of language learning.
Per Bak the author of How Nature Works gave a good overview of the theory of , Self Organized Criticality as he developed it using his famous sand pile, and how it applies to gridlock, inter alia.