The user-level UI stuff (for example, all the frameworks that make Mac OS X way much more than just another Unix) is completely orthogonal to whether an OS is Unix. While these days everybody seems to think that Unix means X11, that's only the . CMU's Andrew project's wm, SunWindows, NeWS, and others (including NeXTStep) all competed with X11 years ago, and they were all Unix - back then, they all tended to even have fairly incompatible sets of system calls (which inspired the creation of Posix compliance).
Mac OS X is Unix. It just happens to be much much more than just Unix, and it's the widest deployed desktop Unix in the world today.
If you knew anything about how the govt works then you would know that the military can NOT be used against the population on our soil. The National Guard is the only branch authorized.
If you'd been paying attention over the last couple of years, you'd know that Posse Comitatus will be changed at the drop of a hat. Yes, the change was repealed - but it will be passed again as soon as there's a compelling "national emergency."
You just want to take without giving back, and it pisses you off that there are legal means to stop you.
You have that exactly backwards.
The GPL-uber-alles crowd believes in giving only if there are strings attached - it's a complex trade of code for subscription to the "sharing" ideology, with an explicit promise to reverse the gift if the recipient doesn't do as the "giver" wishes. You still a proprietary (as in, property - the belief that you have the right to make some demand in exchange for allowing your intellectual property to be used) interest in your code.
When I give my BSD-licensed code away, I truly give it away. It means that once somebody gets my code, they can do anything they like with their copy - I gave it to them.
That is 4.3 thousand miles if they are side to side. The total 'tidal' coastline of the US is about 12 million miles. So if we don't mind completely destroying the ecosystem on 33% of shorelines
This becomes a null question once we can rewrite our own DNA however we please. At that point, biological evolution is obsoleted by simulation in the lab - there really is no inherent advantage to biologically accrued genes, except to know that they were successful survival strategies (or at least, not overwhelmingly deleterious ones) at some point in the past.
I agree, I usually summarized the argument as "I know a bunch of stuff about consciousness and a bunch of stuff about computers and a bunch of stuff about quantum mecahincs, and I don't think it'll work." I like your summary better, I'll be using it from now on;)
You say you have no definition for consciousness, but think you know
it when you see it, and you think you see it in your housepets. So, a dog
looks into your eyes with its big brown ones, tilts its head, lifts an ear
and whines softly, and you feel that there is someone there there. I
suppose, from your published views, that those same actions from a future
robot would meet with a less charitable interpretation. But suppose the
robot also addresses you in a pained voice, saying "Please, Roger, it
bothers me that you don't think of me as a real person. What can I do to
convince you? I am aware of you, and I am aware of myself. And I tell you,
your rejection is almost unbearable".
This is like complaining that "organic food" is no more carbon-based than other kinds of food.
It's not useful to deliberately confuse the natural language sense of a word with a technical word of the same spelling and only somewhat related meaning. Other terms (such as the "brane" that you suggest) are biased towards particular interpretations of the data and are thus not desirable.
I love the way people immediately start whining about things being "old news" without bothering to RTFA.
Pieces of this Cold War tale have been known since the mid-1990s, but more complete details are now coming to light, said Titanic's discoverer, Robert Ballard.
What I wonder is, how much it would cost for a few dozen rovers to be sent to Mars. Weren't they part of the faster/better/cheaper strategy, and shouldn't they be even cheaper to repeat?
You know, I love the attitude of Indiana Jones and everything about the character but I'm going to get tired of it if you keep rehashing it.
Then I think you're missing part of the fun of Indiana Jones.
It's a tribute/reshaping of old pulp-based serials. It's supposed to be rehashing - it's nothing more than a fun, over-the-top ride, and a continual stream of these adventures exactly fits the aesthetic.
Oh, I should say - the "Full set of regenerations" is one I'm less sure of as far as canon- the Master might have been offered a full set at some point, maybe The Five Doctors? It's been too long, and I've been exposed to far too much less-canon-than-TV material. But the Valeyard was a clear canon example.
Obviously, I'm speaking pre-Time War. It seems obvious to me that each Time Lord carried N regenerations around with them, and the High Council could top 'em off again, possibly only by taking them from an earlier version of the Time Lord (eg, The Trial of a Time Lord's Valeyard was an alternate future Doctor at the end of his regenerations, trying to usurp The Doctor's remaining regenerations).
The really big question is whether a newly born Gallifreyan ("Time Tot," - thanks, Romana) would have 12 regenerations available to them, or whether Time Lords had some sort of coming-of-age ceremony that tacked them on. Even spoilerific events so far leave that question open.
We know that the High Council of Gallifrey was capable of granting another full set of regenerations to a Time Lord, so we know it's physically possible.
Mind you, recent events might make one suspect that regeneration might be more bound to genetics than previously thought in the Dr. Who universe. Cryptically stated for the spoiler-averse.
Slashdot Mirror
Right. Because, I hear this is the year that it'll be ready for the desktop.
Then you really don't understand what Unix is.
The user-level UI stuff (for example, all the frameworks that make Mac OS X way much more than just another Unix) is completely orthogonal to whether an OS is Unix. While these days everybody seems to think that Unix means X11, that's only the . CMU's Andrew project's wm, SunWindows, NeWS, and others (including NeXTStep) all competed with X11 years ago, and they were all Unix - back then, they all tended to even have fairly incompatible sets of system calls (which inspired the creation of Posix compliance).
Mac OS X is Unix. It just happens to be much much more than just Unix, and it's the widest deployed desktop Unix in the world today.
If you'd been paying attention over the last couple of years, you'd know that Posse Comitatus will be changed at the drop of a hat. Yes, the change was repealed - but it will be passed again as soon as there's a compelling "national emergency."
Could you not distribute source, and then anybody could make binaries for up to 100 iPhones?
You have that exactly backwards.
The GPL-uber-alles crowd believes in giving only if there are strings attached - it's a complex trade of code for subscription to the "sharing" ideology, with an explicit promise to reverse the gift if the recipient doesn't do as the "giver" wishes. You still a proprietary (as in, property - the belief that you have the right to make some demand in exchange for allowing your intellectual property to be used) interest in your code.
When I give my BSD-licensed code away, I truly give it away. It means that once somebody gets my code, they can do anything they like with their copy - I gave it to them.
That's some seriously fractal coastline.
This becomes a null question once we can rewrite our own DNA however we please. At that point, biological evolution is obsoleted by simulation in the lab - there really is no inherent advantage to biologically accrued genes, except to know that they were successful survival strategies (or at least, not overwhelmingly deleterious ones) at some point in the past.
We're very nearly there.
It's too bad that they didn't supply > and < keys.
That's correct, he isn't a Vegan, he's a Pescetarian. Vegan doesn't refer to a diet, it refers to the philosophy behind the diet.
I'd like to see a study covering the correlation of cell phone use while driving and road rage in other drivers.
I would agree, except that the SproutIt official blog names it as the blogger's favorite article on the topic.
But it's also really worth reading Hans Moravec's letter in response to The Emperor's New Mind:
This is like complaining that "organic food" is no more carbon-based than other kinds of food.
It's not useful to deliberately confuse the natural language sense of a word with a technical word of the same spelling and only somewhat related meaning. Other terms (such as the "brane" that you suggest) are biased towards particular interpretations of the data and are thus not desirable.
What part of "We're very excited to tell you that real-time quotes on NASDAQ securities are now available on Google Finance" was ambiguous?
So in other words, we've come full circle and invented gopher, archie, and WAIS.
What I wonder is, how much it would cost for a few dozen rovers to be sent to Mars. Weren't they part of the faster/better/cheaper strategy, and shouldn't they be even cheaper to repeat?
It's a tribute/reshaping of old pulp-based serials. It's supposed to be rehashing - it's nothing more than a fun, over-the-top ride, and a continual stream of these adventures exactly fits the aesthetic.
Lance Armstrong is in Austin. There's a saying here - Austin isn't so much in Texas as surrounded by Texas.
Oh, I should say - the "Full set of regenerations" is one I'm less sure of as far as canon- the Master might have been offered a full set at some point, maybe The Five Doctors? It's been too long, and I've been exposed to far too much less-canon-than-TV material. But the Valeyard was a clear canon example.
Obviously, I'm speaking pre-Time War. It seems obvious to me that each Time Lord carried N regenerations around with them, and the High Council could top 'em off again, possibly only by taking them from an earlier version of the Time Lord (eg, The Trial of a Time Lord's Valeyard was an alternate future Doctor at the end of his regenerations, trying to usurp The Doctor's remaining regenerations).
The really big question is whether a newly born Gallifreyan ("Time Tot," - thanks, Romana) would have 12 regenerations available to them, or whether Time Lords had some sort of coming-of-age ceremony that tacked them on. Even spoilerific events so far leave that question open.
Can I have my TARDIS-colored beanie now?
We know that the High Council of Gallifrey was capable of granting another full set of regenerations to a Time Lord, so we know it's physically possible.
Mind you, recent events might make one suspect that regeneration might be more bound to genetics than previously thought in the Dr. Who universe. Cryptically stated for the spoiler-averse.