Vote with your dollar. If its bad, another company CAN move in an take the market, but be careful what you wish for. It seem that competition nowdays doesn't lead to a better product, just more cut corners. But you know that the government wouldn't do any better, name 1 thing they do well, aside from war machine.
In my company (gotta keep the details light...), probably 1 in 3 people have a blackberry, and its been that way for some time. (of course if you buy one and can claim you need it for 'business' the company pays for it, so why shoudln't everyone? but i digress)
Several members of our current management team actualy got hired as result of a decision our CEO made while on a hunting trip with his blackberry. He was out stalking deer, but the offer we made got sent and confirmed within 5 minutes. No waiting till the next week, we sealed the deal immediatly.
The point is that plenty of serious business gets conducted with blackberries, by non-techies. Blackberry is fairly ubiquitous in the corporate culture, and there isnt really anything else (unless you want to count SMS, pfsh)
Thats like saying "Water is used by so many" is marketing hype. Water as opposed to what?
Not explorer. If you try that with explorer, a new explorer window will open, but it will have the same rights as the normal account. It's because explorer is ALWAYS open as the default shell, so the current process just spawns a new window. (you can change the shell and then get elevated rights, but how many people change shells?)
The problem is that it's damned near impossible to change even the simplest of system settings from the command line, you HAVE to open control panel in explorer.
period should be a comma... of course that makes the whole thing a run on, perhaps the submiter thought it the less of two grammatical errors?
but seriously, editors, you can't possibly be reading these submissions. if you are, don't accept a summary that you have to read more than once to understand. is that too much to ask?
Remember Google search on audio materials? (first result)
???... Profit!? Yes. Soon after Google will be inserting voicemail ads based on keywords in your conversation. "Like gay animals having sex? www.beastigoatse.xxx!!!"
The eternal battle on/. of hardliner privacy advocates vs. google groupies will drown out all the Apple vs. M$ vs. Linux vs. A toaster oven debates. Not to mention the 3 dupes a day about "Google goes into your home and listens to you mumble while you sleep" (thank you/. editors) and "Google patents cold fusion and audio indexing."
The difference of course being that, like going up stairs, you can pause, or go up at a more efficient rate, as opposed to trying to jump up to the height of three floors, like we are doing now with the space shuttle...
"Look at motorola when they laid off 11,000 workers. Then the board decided to reward the CEO with a multi million dollar bonus for his hard work."
Lets see, 11,000 employees... Suppose they only make $30k a year... Thats $330 million Minus one CEO bonus...(Of what? 5 million?) =$325 million So they could have kept less than 200 employees for that amount. Not saying they shouldn't have, but for the remaining 10,800, it wouldn't feel much better would it?
Does anyone know if the accelerator gives you the option to omit certain webpages from your accelerating experience...
At the bottom of the preferences page:
Don't Accelerate These Sites Specify sites that should not go through Google Web Accelerator. Put each entry in a separate line. Examples: www.domain.com .domainsuffix.com
Just what sort of bacteria are you thinking of that can survive in space for the amount of time that it takes a probe to get there?
Manned missions, perhaps, though still quite unlikely, but there is no ephing way that an unmaned probe is going to arrive with anything from earth alive.
Except a grad student cant get published on his own. That's why the proffesor takes the credit and puts his/her name first, not because he cares so much about getting credit for the grad student's wonderfully innovative thesis.
NP stands for Nondeterministic Polynomial Time so, yes, in theory, a quantum computer should be able to solve any NP problem in polynomial time, since any NP Complete problem (Im not sure if factoring ala Shor's algorithh is one) will reduce to any other NP problem in P time.
As far as P = NP, a quantum computer would not resolce that, since it is still just a brute force attack on an NP problem. Resolving P v. NP is a theory problem, not a hardware problem.
It might be more acuarate to call it a "non-deterministic" computer. You can currently similate a quantum computer (VERY slowly) on a serial device, and it could, eventualy, solve any NP problem. You actualy wouldn't need the simulation of the QC, but either way "eventualy," in most nontrivial cases, would mean after the sun burns out...
Not random only in the theory sense, its easy enough to generate numbers according to a flat distibution, or in the case of the shuffle, probably a slighltly normal distribution, so that each song gets played atleast once per randomization.
I would guess (IANAiPodEngineer) that they take a clock time or something and hash the songs accordingly and then play in that order.
You actually only get one answer, but all possibilities have been "computed" and the probabiliy that the answer you get is the correct one is atleast above 50%. So, if you need to be certain, you repeat.
It basic computational theory terms, it is a true non-deterministic fintite automata. For example, suppose you want to compute the sortest route covering all the edges on a graph (if you dont understand that, imagine streets as edges, and that you want to travel down every street). This is a classic NP problem, the traveling salesman problem. It is very simple to devise a method of computing a solution, but for a graph of N nodes, the complexity is O(x^n), or exponential growth. In other words, 2 nodes isnt bad, but 10 nodes takes x^8 times as long (x is some constant btw), so for any non trivial TSP, that is quite a long time. A quantum computer, however, can solve it in roughly O(N) time, because it computes all possible paths at once, and then the shortest is "probably" the resulting state. Simple in concept, but implemention is another thing... Google for Shor's algorithm if you want more information.
Indeed, simulations that take into account everything suggested would probably take years to write and longer to run.
Most (useful) simulations are centered around critical events and use statistical data to fill in the majority of environmental factors.
A bit off topic, but one of the things that makes any global warming simulation questionable is the fact that we do not have complete statistical data for a previous global warming trend (ice core data only goes back as far as the continental ice, somewhere in the mesozoic). </offtopic>
Can't anyone see a down side to making your "personal" information your property? Say goodbye to phonebooks and directory assistance. What about arrest records? Will it be illegal for me to know if the guy down the street is a sex offender?
Consider the first amendment issues as well, what if I want to post a list of congressmen's addresses, in an effort to encourage letter writting campaigns (as some have proposed in comments)? Is it illegal for me to reveal that personal information? If I can say someone's phone number or address, can't I also print it? If it's in print, then it will end up in a database.
Ever think about what happens whenever are asked to "verify" your personal information. You give them the last four digits of your SSN. THEY ALWAYS ASK FOR THE LAST FOUR DIGITS!
All I have to do is call you up, say I'm with Visa (because everyone has one) and I need to verify some information, I ask for the last four of your SSN... BAM! I've got you. I can now call almost any financial institution, and do just about whatever I want.
The problem isn't that people are gathering my personal information, it's in the public domain, if I stop them I'll kill our freedoms, it's that bad people know that it takes very little to completly own my life.
David Gosen... lambasted Microsoft for pushing a next generation machine to market in 2005, and even went so far as to question Microsoft's motivation as profit.
Of course it's profit! Is Nintendo not in business to make money? I know some programmers will work for 'shrooms, but honestly...
A vaccine is just a crippled or weak version of the same virus that triggers an immune response; this is quite different.
The article is proposing that a new virus would be intentionaly released into humans that would attack cancer cells.
The FDA would have to be very politicaly sensitive and short sighted to make such a call. It's not as though the FDA doesn't understand disease, after all, yogurt contains active bacterial cultures, but they are good for you, so I don't see how a virus, much less one that has to be sexualy transmitted and has had 80% of its genetic material removed (TFA), would be too big a hurdle.
As long as they arent foolish enough to market it as modified HIV.
To mix this with the strategy of using one strong enemy against another is brilliance!
As others have said, it sounds potentialy dangerous (mutation et al), but the idea of using something bad to treat something else bad is by no means innovative.
A few examples:
chemotherapy - is just poison. it works because the cancer cells absorb the poison much quicker than normal cells.
radiation therapy - again, radiation by itself is bad.
most over the counter acne treatments - are just some form or acid that kills the bacteria on the skin
As for reengineering a virus to take on something else, while facinating, its hardly a new idea.
If you are interested in this sort of thing and haven't read Orson Scott Card's Xenocide (part of the Ender Series), you might check it out.
The point is that in less time, an "unpredictable" chip can get an answer that is very likely to be right. You could devise an algorithm that is always right, but it would take much longer. For a variety of applications (especialy real time systems), any mistake made by an uncertain chip or a randomized algorithm will be absorbed by the majority of correct results.
Rejecting results with a degree of uncertainty is like refusing to fly because planes occasionaly crash. As TFA says, "Live with it," the benefits outway the risks, which are easily mitigated by selective application.
There is already a fair amount of computer science research into this. BPP algorithms make use of randomness to deliver a "pretty good," that is, bounded error, polytime answer to problems that would otherwise take
NP time.
There is already a fair amount of computer science research into this. BPP algorithms make use of randomness to deliver a "pretty good," that is, bounded error, polytime answer to problems that would otherwise take
NP time.
Slashdot Mirror
Vote with your dollar. If its bad, another company CAN move in an take the market, but be careful what you wish for. It seem that competition nowdays doesn't lead to a better product, just more cut corners.
But you know that the government wouldn't do any better, name 1 thing they do well, aside from war machine.
I'm guessing you don't have a corporate job.
In my company (gotta keep the details light...), probably 1 in 3 people have a blackberry, and its been that way for some time. (of course if you buy one and can claim you need it for 'business' the company pays for it, so why shoudln't everyone? but i digress)
Several members of our current management team actualy got hired as result of a decision our CEO made while on a hunting trip with his blackberry. He was out stalking deer, but the offer we made got sent and confirmed within 5 minutes. No waiting till the next week, we sealed the deal immediatly.
The point is that plenty of serious business gets conducted with blackberries, by non-techies. Blackberry is fairly ubiquitous in the corporate culture, and there isnt really anything else (unless you want to count SMS, pfsh)
Thats like saying "Water is used by so many" is marketing hype. Water as opposed to what?
Yea, my apartments show up as a forest...
Not explorer. If you try that with explorer, a new explorer window will open, but it will have the same rights as the normal account. It's because explorer is ALWAYS open as the default shell, so the current process just spawns a new window. (you can change the shell and then get elevated rights, but how many people change shells?)
The problem is that it's damned near impossible to change even the simplest of system settings from the command line, you HAVE to open control panel in explorer.
period should be a comma... of course that makes the whole thing a run on, perhaps the submiter thought it the less of two grammatical errors?
but seriously, editors, you can't possibly be reading these submissions. if you are, don't accept a summary that you have to read more than once to understand. is that too much to ask?
- Google archives/indexes EVERYTHING
- Remember Google search on audio materials? (first result)
- ???
... Profit!? Yes. Soon after Google will be inserting voicemail ads based on keywords in your conversation. "Like gay animals having sex? www.beastigoatse.xxx!!!"
- The eternal battle on
/. of hardliner privacy advocates vs. google groupies will drown out all the Apple vs. M$ vs. Linux vs. A toaster oven debates. Not to mention the 3 dupes a day about "Google goes into your home and listens to you mumble while you sleep" (thank you /. editors) and "Google patents cold fusion and audio indexing."
So, as you can see, we're all doomed.The difference of course being that, like going up stairs, you can pause, or go up at a more efficient rate, as opposed to trying to jump up to the height of three floors, like we are doing now with the space shuttle...
"Look at motorola when they laid off 11,000 workers. Then the board decided to reward the CEO with a multi million dollar bonus for his hard work."
Lets see, 11,000 employees...
Suppose they only make $30k a year...
Thats $330 million
Minus one CEO bonus...(Of what? 5 million?)
=$325 million
So they could have kept less than 200 employees for that amount.
Not saying they shouldn't have, but for the remaining 10,800, it wouldn't feel much better would it?
At the bottom of the preferences page:
So yes.
Manned missions, perhaps, though still quite unlikely, but there is no ephing way that an unmaned probe is going to arrive with anything from earth alive.
Except a grad student cant get published on his own. That's why the proffesor takes the credit and puts his/her name first, not because he cares so much about getting credit for the grad student's wonderfully innovative thesis.
NP stands for Nondeterministic Polynomial Time so, yes, in theory, a quantum computer should be able to solve any NP problem in polynomial time, since any NP Complete problem (Im not sure if factoring ala Shor's algorithh is one) will reduce to any other NP problem in P time. As far as P = NP, a quantum computer would not resolce that, since it is still just a brute force attack on an NP problem. Resolving P v. NP is a theory problem, not a hardware problem. It might be more acuarate to call it a "non-deterministic" computer. You can currently similate a quantum computer (VERY slowly) on a serial device, and it could, eventualy, solve any NP problem. You actualy wouldn't need the simulation of the QC, but either way "eventualy," in most nontrivial cases, would mean after the sun burns out...
"And Tonight at 6, can bees think?
A new study reveals that, no they cannot."
Not random only in the theory sense, its easy enough to generate numbers according to a flat distibution, or in the case of the shuffle, probably a slighltly normal distribution, so that each song gets played atleast once per randomization. I would guess (IANAiPodEngineer) that they take a clock time or something and hash the songs accordingly and then play in that order.
Ummm... the halting problem is PROVEN to be unsolvable. Check any introductory computational theory text.
You actually only get one answer, but all possibilities have been "computed" and the probabiliy that the answer you get is the correct one is atleast above 50%. So, if you need to be certain, you repeat.
It basic computational theory terms, it is a true non-deterministic fintite automata. For example, suppose you want to compute the sortest route covering all the edges on a graph (if you dont understand that, imagine streets as edges, and that you want to travel down every street).
This is a classic NP problem, the traveling salesman problem. It is very simple to devise a method of computing a solution, but for a graph of N nodes, the complexity is O(x^n), or exponential growth. In other words, 2 nodes isnt bad, but 10 nodes takes x^8 times as long (x is some constant btw), so for any non trivial TSP, that is quite a long time.
A quantum computer, however, can solve it in roughly O(N) time, because it computes all possible paths at once, and then the shortest is "probably" the resulting state.
Simple in concept, but implemention is another thing... Google for Shor's algorithm if you want more information.
Indeed, simulations that take into account everything suggested would probably take years to write and longer to run.
Most (useful) simulations are centered around critical events and use statistical data to fill in the majority of environmental factors.
A bit off topic, but one of the things that makes any global warming simulation questionable is the fact that we do not have complete statistical data for a previous global warming trend (ice core data only goes back as far as the continental ice, somewhere in the mesozoic).
</offtopic>
Can't anyone see a down side to making your "personal" information your property? Say goodbye to phonebooks and directory assistance. What about arrest records? Will it be illegal for me to know if the guy down the street is a sex offender?
Consider the first amendment issues as well, what if I want to post a list of congressmen's addresses, in an effort to encourage letter writting campaigns (as some have proposed in comments)? Is it illegal for me to reveal that personal information? If I can say someone's phone number or address, can't I also print it? If it's in print, then it will end up in a database.
Ever think about what happens whenever are asked to "verify" your personal information. You give them the last four digits of your SSN. THEY ALWAYS ASK FOR THE LAST FOUR DIGITS!
All I have to do is call you up, say I'm with Visa (because everyone has one) and I need to verify some information, I ask for the last four of your SSN... BAM! I've got you. I can now call almost any financial institution, and do just about whatever I want.
The problem isn't that people are gathering my personal information, it's in the public domain, if I stop them I'll kill our freedoms, it's that bad people know that it takes very little to completly own my life.
- Release next-gen console ahead of competitors.
- ????
- Profit!
But seriously, Of course it's profit! Is Nintendo not in business to make money? I know some programmers will work for 'shrooms, but honestly...A vaccine is just a crippled or weak version of the same virus that triggers an immune response; this is quite different.
The article is proposing that a new virus would be intentionaly released into humans that would attack cancer cells.
The FDA would have to be very politicaly sensitive and short sighted to make such a call. It's not as though the FDA doesn't understand disease, after all, yogurt contains active bacterial cultures, but they are good for you, so I don't see how a virus, much less one that has to be sexualy transmitted and has had 80% of its genetic material removed (TFA), would be too big a hurdle.
As long as they arent foolish enough to market it as modified HIV.
chemotherapy - is just poison. it works because the cancer cells absorb the poison much quicker than normal cells.
radiation therapy - again, radiation by itself is bad.
most over the counter acne treatments - are just some form or acid that kills the bacteria on the skin
As for reengineering a virus to take on something else, while facinating, its hardly a new idea. If you are interested in this sort of thing and haven't read Orson Scott Card's Xenocide (part of the Ender Series), you might check it out.
The point is that in less time, an "unpredictable" chip can get an answer that is very likely to be right. You could devise an algorithm that is always right, but it would take much longer. For a variety of applications (especialy real time systems), any mistake made by an uncertain chip or a randomized algorithm will be absorbed by the majority of correct results.
Rejecting results with a degree of uncertainty is like refusing to fly because planes occasionaly crash. As TFA says, "Live with it," the benefits outway the risks, which are easily mitigated by selective application.
There is already a fair amount of computer science research into this. BPP algorithms make use of randomness to deliver a "pretty good," that is, bounded error, polytime answer to problems that would otherwise take NP time.
There is already a fair amount of computer science research into this. BPP algorithms make use of randomness to deliver a "pretty good," that is, bounded error, polytime answer to problems that would otherwise take NP time.