The OP is wrong on this, the guy is a JOURNALIST not a scientist. (He may have a science degree but he acts as a journalist).
If a scientist had done this they would be losing their job any minute. Any of the following would be enough to disgrace a practicing scientist (I am one):
1- carrying out research on human subjects without approval of the study by an independent review board 2- asking people to undergo a study that he knew before hand that was not beneficial to the subjects, in fact could likely be the opposite (this would mean he'd never get approval of the study) 3- lying to people about his affiliation and credentials in the paper
There are a lot of other problems with this "study", but it surely was not done by a scientist.
What it does reveal is that people cannot rely on popular press stories about science as journalist pay no attention to the important details of publications and fall for any hype. Unlike what the guy says, journalist can never be "peer" reviewers of any science... their role is different and yet they are not doing it properly.
Good try, but even if this passes the Turing test, it is not AI in any way. Responses are by humans and there is no intelligence in it. So it will be the collective human engine behind it that will pass the test. Not really any big achievement.
The most important question is whether they made a native 64 bit version? [for those of us who don't want to pollute our machines with 32-bit compatibility libraries]
I couldn't care less about "just works". Half of the fun of running Linux laptops is the challenge to set them up to do all those things you want.
The other half is to see the Apple funboys fiddling with their Macbooks to make projectors display their stuff (that is when they find someone who actually has the right widget to plug it in).
I did clearly say that coal is dreadful, and that I do not support the deaths that it causes. It is terrible. However nuclear fission is much worse on a global view, from a risk perspective.
Ask any insurance company if they would even consider insuring a nuclear power plant... that is a huge statement made by market forces. (and they insure some pretty insane stuff, for huge premiums, of course -- but not nuclear)
Plutonium spent fuel has a huge half-life, apply your logarithms to it and check for how long it has to be kept. Strontium, which is extremely toxic as it is absorbed into bones (same chemistry as calcium) has a very long half life too. Even Cesium is 30 years, so it will be around for much longer than that.
This story that coal kills more people than nuclear is rather misleading. The issue is much more complicated than simply counting deaths --- though, of course, coal is no nice energy source at all.
The problem with nuclear disasters like Chernobyl and Fukushima is that they leave large portions of land unusable for millenia. (besides having the risk of killing lots of people too.) The effects are not just to the poor people who work on those plants (just as the poor miners) but that they leave a severe risk of exposure for many generations to come. The cost of maintaining those patches of land unusable are very large. Much larger costs than even those needed to keep an undamaged power plant secure beyond its productive life; this is already so high that no private company wants to do it without support from large government subsidies (besides they are all helped by not being help legally liable for any accident).
So, even though coal has indeed killed many people, that is not to say that nuclear is not a very large problem to society. In my opinion larger than coal. To support this, find out how much it costs to insure a nuclear power plant, versus how much it costs to insure a coal mine.
Before anyone says that we need some form of energy so we must to take up these risks, let me say:
* direct solar source
* increase in efficiency of use
* and please keep the population down.
This is not the only British library that gets all publications, The National Library of Wales (http://www.llgc.org.uk/) also gets all publications that are published in the UK (and there is likely one also in Scotland)
yes, if you don't use it for 3 months (usually), they even cancel your credit (= eat the money you had already paid). This is waived if you have spent more than $100 (at least with T-Mobile, maybe the others are different)
You are right, but there is a timing for an open standard be successful, and skype just managed to get so widespread usage that any open standard will be sidelined as long as skype does not want to play ball. I'm afraid to say that this purchase was a bright move from the Redmond dinosaur, perhaps there are still people there with brains...
Absolutely! It is indeed the very large user-base of skype that makes it so valuable (associated with its protocal closeness). Not only that but also the skype-in service which allows me to be able to answer my calls wherever I am in the world. I didn't see that service in the comparison. Even though there may be similar SIP-based services out there, they are unlikely to have all the characteristics of skype. So for now, a true substitution of skype would consists of several packages.
I use skype for a bunch of things, not just skype-to-skype, but sending SMS, calling out to "real" phones, and last but not least skype-in. The latter feature means that I cannot get a substitute. So for now I keep using skype, if it disappears from Linux I will have to use it on a VM. It is a killer app, and it is worth all the 8.5 billion that MS paid for it (really much more useful than office).
Slashdot Mirror
that's what I did, 2 year lease and 7500miles/year. Really cheap and in 2 years I'll lease a much better model
The OP is wrong on this, the guy is a JOURNALIST not a scientist. (He may have a science degree but he acts as a journalist).
If a scientist had done this they would be losing their job any minute. Any of the following would be enough to disgrace a practicing scientist (I am one):
1- carrying out research on human subjects without approval of the study by an independent review board
2- asking people to undergo a study that he knew before hand that was not beneficial to the subjects, in fact could likely be the opposite (this would mean he'd never get approval of the study)
3- lying to people about his affiliation and credentials in the paper
There are a lot of other problems with this "study", but it surely was not done by a scientist.
What it does reveal is that people cannot rely on popular press stories about science as journalist pay no attention to the important details of publications and fall for any hype. Unlike what the guy says, journalist can never be "peer" reviewers of any science... their role is different and yet they are not doing it properly.
Sure it is, but judges still need to be convinced
If you follow the link on the summary you find an article with title "Artificial Intelligence, Powered by Many Humans"
Good try, but even if this passes the Turing test, it is not AI in any way. Responses are by humans and there is no intelligence in it. So it will be the collective human engine behind it that will pass the test. Not really any big achievement.
hopefully they polished this one well enough...
No, in other words buy an AMD rather than an Intel
Are you sure?
I've downloaded both the static and dynamic versions and they are only 32-bit... where did you find information about a 64-bit version?
Great!
Weird times, though: this puts me in a position of wanting to thank Microsoft...
The most important question is whether they made a native 64 bit version? [for those of us who don't want to pollute our machines with 32-bit compatibility libraries]
anyone trusting the cloud to keep their property safe deserves losing it...
My entire mail store is over 16 Gb. I have single mbox files that are larger than 2 Gb.
This is one of the best things about OSS. Anyone can fork and when there is a strong need, the fork will happen.
I'm spoilt for choice
I pitty the slaves of a their Master's view of computing (yes, fanboys, I mean you)
I couldn't care less about "just works". Half of the fun of running Linux laptops is the challenge to set them up to do all those things you want.
The other half is to see the Apple funboys fiddling with their Macbooks to make projectors display their stuff (that is when they find someone who actually has the right widget to plug it in).
ROFL
> Oh, and keeping your phone in your pocket also circumvents it.
but gives you cancer...
very well argued, much better than I did.
I did clearly say that coal is dreadful, and that I do not support the deaths that it causes. It is terrible. However nuclear fission is much worse on a global view, from a risk perspective.
Ask any insurance company if they would even consider insuring a nuclear power plant... that is a huge statement made by market forces. (and they insure some pretty insane stuff, for huge premiums, of course -- but not nuclear)
Plutonium spent fuel has a huge half-life, apply your logarithms to it and check for how long it has to be kept. Strontium, which is extremely toxic as it is absorbed into bones (same chemistry as calcium) has a very long half life too. Even Cesium is 30 years, so it will be around for much longer than that.
This story that coal kills more people than nuclear is rather misleading. The issue is much more complicated than simply counting deaths --- though, of course, coal is no nice energy source at all.
The problem with nuclear disasters like Chernobyl and Fukushima is that they leave large portions of land unusable for millenia. (besides having the risk of killing lots of people too.) The effects are not just to the poor people who work on those plants (just as the poor miners) but that they leave a severe risk of exposure for many generations to come. The cost of maintaining those patches of land unusable are very large. Much larger costs than even those needed to keep an undamaged power plant secure beyond its productive life; this is already so high that no private company wants to do it without support from large government subsidies (besides they are all helped by not being help legally liable for any accident).
So, even though coal has indeed killed many people, that is not to say that nuclear is not a very large problem to society. In my opinion larger than coal. To support this, find out how much it costs to insure a nuclear power plant, versus how much it costs to insure a coal mine.
Before anyone says that we need some form of energy so we must to take up these risks, let me say:
* direct solar source
* increase in efficiency of use
* and please keep the population down.
Kindle DX and read the articles sideways
This is not the only British library that gets all publications, The National Library of Wales (http://www.llgc.org.uk/) also gets all publications that are published in the UK (and there is likely one also in Scotland)
Why are we still using passwords? They will go away, sooner or later.
> Does this happen in the USA too?
yes, if you don't use it for 3 months (usually), they even cancel your credit (= eat the money you had already paid). This is waived if you have spent more than $100 (at least with T-Mobile, maybe the others are different)
You are right, but there is a timing for an open standard be successful, and skype just managed to get so widespread usage that any open standard will be sidelined as long as skype does not want to play ball. I'm afraid to say that this purchase was a bright move from the Redmond dinosaur, perhaps there are still people there with brains...
Absolutely!
It is indeed the very large user-base of skype that makes it so valuable (associated with its protocal closeness). Not only that but also the skype-in service which allows me to be able to answer my calls wherever I am in the world. I didn't see that service in the comparison. Even though there may be similar SIP-based services out there, they are unlikely to have all the characteristics of skype. So for now, a true substitution of skype would consists of several packages.
I use skype for a bunch of things, not just skype-to-skype, but sending SMS, calling out to "real" phones, and last but not least skype-in. The latter feature means that I cannot get a substitute. So for now I keep using skype, if it disappears from Linux I will have to use it on a VM. It is a killer app, and it is worth all the 8.5 billion that MS paid for it (really much more useful than office).