Is phys-ed important? Music? Of course, but those things are gravy to the meat and potatos of the core curriculum.
I'd personally say that those are meat and potatoes too, myself. Physical exercise of some sort is very good for you, and the idea of it being needed goes back to classicism: mens sana in corpore sano and all that. And I'm somebody who never enjoyed PE in school, being the nerdy non-athletic type that I am, but it was good for me. Music, or Art, or something like that, where creative urges can be expressed, is also needed. Also, as my choir master would always tell us, the skills we were learning in rehersals were often non-musical skills that would translate to other aspects (discipline, hard work, focus on details, listening to the conductor, paying attention and concentrating for periods of time). Yes, you get these skills elsewhere too, but maybe some people get them better in say, a choir, than in class. I agree with you that the core is important, but I think that core should be just a little wider. (Side note: at Univ. of Chicago now, the Core requirement does include basically all those things; I'm studying C.S., but I know I'm doing better intellectually for being in this liberal arts environment, and having done the Core).
However, there are a few excellent mods for Baldur's Gate II that allow homosexual relationships. The first is Chloe: http://forums.fwstudios.net/index.php?showforum=11, a female character who can develop a lesbian relationship either with the protagonist or another female character. The second is Solaufein, who is somewhat less picky (will romance anybody, either gender): http://www.weidu.org/main.html. I have more experience with Chloe than with Sola, since you can get her much earlier in the BG2 storyline, but both seem to be very well done mods, on the level of the Bioware NPCs.
I haven't checked out single-player mods for NWN yet, but I thought someone had ported Sola, and if not I'll bet there's an equivalent to either of these for NWN.
a) create a Folder of Aliases to your Apps (you can also do subfolders), then drag that Folder to your Dock; a right-click reveals the hierarchy; downside: manual adding
Just to add to that, if you're like me and organize your Apps folder itself into subfolders, just drag the Apps folder into the right hand part of the dock. Once again, right click gives you the hierarchical menu, and you don't have to maintain a folder full of aliases - just install to Apps folder like normal.
Yea, Apple never supports standards. Things like Rendezvous (hey, I believe someone wrote Linux stuff for that!), *MPEG4* (which they've spent mucho time helping develop), thiings like using LDAP instead of a cooked up proprietary authentication scheme, etc.
Apple always seems willing to base their stuff on standards, and they usually help develop them, working with other people (everybody working on MPEG). With iTunes, they're deciding to use AAC; with DRM, yes, but how else will they be able to do it? Plus, that support of AAC is giving it the attention it deserves as the succesor of MP3 - and guess what? They couldve used *insert secret format here* and made that popular, but they didn't.
So yes, Apple does act in their own best interests, like all companies. But they seem to realize that often-times, their interests are in open standards, unlike, say MS. You choose.
If you're into Robert Jordan, then I would highly recommend WoTMUD (Wheel of Time MUD). You don't need to have read the books to appreciate it, however. Large player base, plenty of PK (now on two fronts, with the addition of the Seanchan), three races (Human, Trolloc, Seanchan), 4 classes (Rogues, Fighters, Rangers, Channelers (with Male ones different from Female ones, as per books), plus Fades). Clans, quests, smobs, newbie friendly areas, great builders, etc. Sucked away soooo much time in high school. Nothing like the rush of being part of a group of Children raiding into the Blight vs. some Trollocs.
If WMP doesn't play standard MP4 files then MS needs to get their act together. This is industry standard stuff. However, if people keep switching to wmv because WMP won't play MP4, then WMP will never play MP4. The solution? Go with the standard solution and tell people to complain to MS if their standard media player doesn't support industry standards like MP4.
I'm going to second the Deus Ex comment. Most people (I think) play it purely single player, where it is indeed great. However, it does have a multiplayer component, which is tons of fun! You have mastery in all weapons, but at the same time there is a limit on how many weapons you can carry. Plus you choose which augs you want. From my experience (I only got to play 1v1) it seems to be a little slower paced than a traditional FPS; more thinking tactically, less twitching. Give it a try!
The one downside is that it's OS 9 only on the Mac side, but I've been running it in Classic emulation under X (yes, using Classic for a game!) and it's still smooth (800 mHz PBG4).
Seems awfully familiar. Slashdot should look into applying some AI to submissions to see if it shares a high number of key words with a recent submisison.
You could always hook it into a Livejournal client for rabid LJ users - since mood tends to be entered you could have that as a global or something. Set your mood and it adapts accordingly.
Should be an easy change - maybe have mood as a sort of dock icon, and allow it to be queried by all of these applications that would then switch profile.
How about an OS X app that either sits in the Dock or the menubar (up with monitor, airport, iChat, etc) that lets you set your mood; ideally this would be Rendezvous enabled, so you can see the mood of the people around you; maybe have it calculate the average mood of the network?
Then things like music players, desktop background setters, theme engines, etc could query it and make some intelligent choices based on your mood. The question is, should these programs make choices to try and 'improve' your mood, or should they simply respond? I'd go for respond, just because I usually hate trying to be cheered up.
Win2k menus do this too. One of the first things I turned off. Just because a menu item isn't one of the things I haven't looked at today doesn't mean I don't want to see it there today. Intelligent submenu-ing of items into categories accomplishes the same thing, while not 'hiding' choices. Now obviously there can be a problem with this too, but I'm fairly sure that I've had less questions saying "Which submenu is blah in?" (cause it's usually intuitive) and more questions saying "Where did all my menu items go?" (cause those down arrows are not immediately obvious).
So, once again, Windows is not the answer to GUI design. What a surprise.
What I think is the deal with the "small" stuff is that people who use Linux want to get the small stuff right - and that's much harder than it looks.
I actually think a system like Debian has package management down pat - if it's in the version you're using (and unless it's amazingly obscure it usually is) just apt-get install; dependencies satisfied, etc. If not, get some source, and compile it/install into your preffered user-installed directory.
Compare this to Windows/Mac - you download and either run an installer, or uncompress it and install it yourself - and there's nothing that knows where all your installed things are, etc. Windows tries to use the registry, but that backfires - if you install software yourself it's not in there, and if you remove software accidently without uninstalling it sticks around in the registry; ugly.
So, I think that until we can work out good, workable, universal solutions for the "small" stuff, we'll keep seeing what you're talking about.
Going on what you said about the sides, how about a button or touch sensitive area on the side to 'lock' the display, much like a hold button. I would think this would be a requirement anyway, as I'm sure most of us don't keep our hands exactly still while reading.
a $4000 device is seen as a rich man's toy and rich men should be spending their money on social problems such as the homeless problem, not toys.
Just think how you would feel if you were homeless, and some business man came down the street on a $4000-5000 machine, when he could be walking - wouldn't you feel he was throwing money away that you could be living on? And throwing it away on a toy so he doesn't have to walk?
Maybe rich men should be spending their money on the homeless, rather than useless things like a Segway.
Having lived there for a while, my main regret is that the only time I go is when visitors come out and we take them there. Amazing place - engineering, science, often a very nifty special exhibition, and completely hands on. Great geek place.
Also in San Fran, although suspension bridges get kinda old, is the Golden Gate. Lots of fun to walk out and feel it sway underneath you as it literally just hangs there. Plus there's a piece of the cable down by the visitor's center - huge! - amazing. Plus great photo-op of the Bay and the Marin Headlands.
Somebody already pointed out the Stanford Linear Accelerator that runs underneath 280, south of SF.
What about Darwin Streaming Server [apple.com] and Rendezvous [apple.com]? What about OpenPlay [apple.com] and OpenDirectory [apple.com]? Apple is releasing lots of neat projects as open-source. This just doesn't happen to be one of them.
Yes, but it is the foundation upon which you can run all of these things; foundations like that may not be interesting, but they are useful and necessary. Thus, Darwin is a potential way to make an apple-like server without all the GUI stuff - kinda like a linux install without the X (an x-free install, one could say!).
He's not saying that the copying is covered under fair use, nor is he saying that download an mp3 file is legal. He's simply stating (correctly) that he is not actually stealing something from the company - he is making an unauthorized copy - but that's not the same as (say) taking a CD from a record store or (hypothetically) breaking into a record label's servers where they have digital copies of yet-to-come-out music and taking that. Yes, you can claim that he's 'stealing' revenue from the company, but that just doesn't fly.
Just as a matter of interest, could you (or some knowledgable person) post titles to go along with these descriptions of works? Some of them sound really interesting and I'd like to read them!
So if I understand this correctly, you're giving the 'we can think outside the box' argument, correct? And since a formal, axiomatic system cannot add new axioms to itself, AI won't equal/surpass humans.
Consider that you can program in the capability to 'think outside the box'. Of course, this can only be done for a limited set of 'boxes', whatever. So the machine could think outside a few boxes, but eventually it will run up against the 'final box'. Again, what is to say that we, as humans, are not at heart the same? Just because there are many boxes doesn't mean we won't find something we can't go outside of. So, program in a large number of 'boxes' to an AI, and it could be like a human.
Now, of course, this is (much) harder than it sounds. How exactly do you tell it when to go outside the box, or how to do so? But it (may) be possible. This relates to the question of 'where' creativity is.
This also relates to the discussion of the universe, and its nature. If we only have a certain number of 'boxes' to think outside of, then perhaps the universe, too, only has a certain number of 'boxes', thus limiting the amount of knowledge, laws, truthes, etc. But, beyond a certain point, do we care if it's infinite, or just really big?
Let me note that this argument contrasts with my views on the limits of knowledge, so I am in effect playing devil's advocate here. I also adhere to the view that we can 'think outside the box' and so knowledge, the universe, etc is infinite. However, I also think the argument I present here is valid. For a discussion on the limits of knowledge, check out the book 'The End of Science'. Can't remember the author atm, but he interviews many prominent scientists (and some AI people) about their view on the limits of science. I don't agree with his conclusion, but it is interesting reading nonetheless.
This book is still one of my favorites. The teacher of my theoretical computer science course recommended it to me, I devoured it, loved it, re-read it several times since. It is perhaps a little dense on the music front, although I love music anyway. While the Godel part may also be longwinded, it is the main idea behind the book, so he has to treat it clearly and completely. I would recommend it to anybody interested in either Godel, AI, or just philosophy/math/music/art in general.
Ok, so you claim that since machines are, at heart, formal axiomatic systems, by Godel (and others who use that concept) that machines are inherently limited. Fine, I might accept that. But what makes you so sure that humans are not so limited? If they are, does it affect you much, if at all? I can still live my life, doing physics, math, art, whatever, despite the fact that I may be an incomplete formal system, at heart. Now, perhaps AI may never surpass us, by this argument, but I see nothing stopping it from becoming exactly, or almost exactly as intelligent/creative/whatever as we are.
Slashdot Mirror
I found squirrels!
http://xkcd.com/c167.html
>> My friends love using quantifiers on values that can'be given a number:
>> "I have hundreds of luck. HUNDREDS!"
>I'm sorry, that's only three funny.
Apparently, so is your comment.
Not in the stock game, I don't believe.
1 , a female character who can develop a lesbian relationship either with the protagonist or another female character. The second is Solaufein, who is somewhat less picky (will romance anybody, either gender): http://www.weidu.org/main.html. I have more experience with Chloe than with Sola, since you can get her much earlier in the BG2 storyline, but both seem to be very well done mods, on the level of the Bioware NPCs.
However, there are a few excellent mods for Baldur's Gate II that allow homosexual relationships. The first is Chloe: http://forums.fwstudios.net/index.php?showforum=1
I haven't checked out single-player mods for NWN yet, but I thought someone had ported Sola, and if not I'll bet there's an equivalent to either of these for NWN.
Just to add to that, if you're like me and organize your Apps folder itself into subfolders, just drag the Apps folder into the right hand part of the dock. Once again, right click gives you the hierarchical menu, and you don't have to maintain a folder full of aliases - just install to Apps folder like normal.
Yea, Apple never supports standards. Things like Rendezvous (hey, I believe someone wrote Linux stuff for that!), *MPEG4* (which they've spent mucho time helping develop), thiings like using LDAP instead of a cooked up proprietary authentication scheme, etc.
Apple always seems willing to base their stuff on standards, and they usually help develop them, working with other people (everybody working on MPEG). With iTunes, they're deciding to use AAC; with DRM, yes, but how else will they be able to do it? Plus, that support of AAC is giving it the attention it deserves as the succesor of MP3 - and guess what? They couldve used *insert secret format here* and made that popular, but they didn't.
So yes, Apple does act in their own best interests, like all companies. But they seem to realize that often-times, their interests are in open standards, unlike, say MS. You choose.
If you're into Robert Jordan, then I would highly recommend WoTMUD (Wheel of Time MUD). You don't need to have read the books to appreciate it, however. Large player base, plenty of PK (now on two fronts, with the addition of the Seanchan), three races (Human, Trolloc, Seanchan), 4 classes (Rogues, Fighters, Rangers, Channelers (with Male ones different from Female ones, as per books), plus Fades). Clans, quests, smobs, newbie friendly areas, great builders, etc. Sucked away soooo much time in high school. Nothing like the rush of being part of a group of Children raiding into the Blight vs. some Trollocs.
If WMP doesn't play standard MP4 files then MS needs to get their act together. This is industry standard stuff. However, if people keep switching to wmv because WMP won't play MP4, then WMP will never play MP4. The solution? Go with the standard solution and tell people to complain to MS if their standard media player doesn't support industry standards like MP4.
I'm going to second the Deus Ex comment. Most people (I think) play it purely single player, where it is indeed great. However, it does have a multiplayer component, which is tons of fun! You have mastery in all weapons, but at the same time there is a limit on how many weapons you can carry. Plus you choose which augs you want. From my experience (I only got to play 1v1) it seems to be a little slower paced than a traditional FPS; more thinking tactically, less twitching. Give it a try!
The one downside is that it's OS 9 only on the Mac side, but I've been running it in Classic emulation under X (yes, using Classic for a game!) and it's still smooth (800 mHz PBG4).
Seems awfully familiar. Slashdot should look into applying some AI to submissions to see if it shares a high number of key words with a recent submisison.
How about an OS X app that either sits in the Dock or the menubar (up with monitor, airport, iChat, etc) that lets you set your mood; ideally this would be Rendezvous enabled, so you can see the mood of the people around you; maybe have it calculate the average mood of the network?
Then things like music players, desktop background setters, theme engines, etc could query it and make some intelligent choices based on your mood. The question is, should these programs make choices to try and 'improve' your mood, or should they simply respond? I'd go for respond, just because I usually hate trying to be cheered up.
Just another interesting idea.
Win2k menus do this too. One of the first things I turned off. Just because a menu item isn't one of the things I haven't looked at today doesn't mean I don't want to see it there today. Intelligent submenu-ing of items into categories accomplishes the same thing, while not 'hiding' choices. Now obviously there can be a problem with this too, but I'm fairly sure that I've had less questions saying "Which submenu is blah in?" (cause it's usually intuitive) and more questions saying "Where did all my menu items go?" (cause those down arrows are not immediately obvious).
So, once again, Windows is not the answer to GUI design. What a surprise.
What I think is the deal with the "small" stuff is that people who use Linux want to get the small stuff right - and that's much harder than it looks.
I actually think a system like Debian has package management down pat - if it's in the version you're using (and unless it's amazingly obscure it usually is) just apt-get install; dependencies satisfied, etc. If not, get some source, and compile it/install into your preffered user-installed directory.
Compare this to Windows/Mac - you download and either run an installer, or uncompress it and install it yourself - and there's nothing that knows where all your installed things are, etc. Windows tries to use the registry, but that backfires - if you install software yourself it's not in there, and if you remove software accidently without uninstalling it sticks around in the registry; ugly.
So, I think that until we can work out good, workable, universal solutions for the "small" stuff, we'll keep seeing what you're talking about.
Going on what you said about the sides, how about a button or touch sensitive area on the side to 'lock' the display, much like a hold button. I would think this would be a requirement anyway, as I'm sure most of us don't keep our hands exactly still while reading.
Maybe rich men should be spending their money on the homeless, rather than useless things like a Segway.
Having lived there for a while, my main regret is that the only time I go is when visitors come out and we take them there. Amazing place - engineering, science, often a very nifty special exhibition, and completely hands on. Great geek place.
Also in San Fran, although suspension bridges get kinda old, is the Golden Gate. Lots of fun to walk out and feel it sway underneath you as it literally just hangs there. Plus there's a piece of the cable down by the visitor's center - huge! - amazing. Plus great photo-op of the Bay and the Marin Headlands.
Somebody already pointed out the Stanford Linear Accelerator that runs underneath 280, south of SF.
Yes, but it is the foundation upon which you can run all of these things; foundations like that may not be interesting, but they are useful and necessary. Thus, Darwin is a potential way to make an apple-like server without all the GUI stuff - kinda like a linux install without the X (an x-free install, one could say!).
He's not saying that the copying is covered under fair use, nor is he saying that download an mp3 file is legal. He's simply stating (correctly) that he is not actually stealing something from the company - he is making an unauthorized copy - but that's not the same as (say) taking a CD from a record store or (hypothetically) breaking into a record label's servers where they have digital copies of yet-to-come-out music and taking that. Yes, you can claim that he's 'stealing' revenue from the company, but that just doesn't fly.
Just a comment on your sig - the version I know is: Nuke the gay unborn whales - pleases all activist groups! :-)
Just as a matter of interest, could you (or some knowledgable person) post titles to go along with these descriptions of works? Some of them sound really interesting and I'd like to read them!
General Ishmoo
So if I understand this correctly, you're giving the 'we can think outside the box' argument, correct? And since a formal, axiomatic system cannot add new axioms to itself, AI won't equal/surpass humans.
Consider that you can program in the capability to 'think outside the box'. Of course, this can only be done for a limited set of 'boxes', whatever. So the machine could think outside a few boxes, but eventually it will run up against the 'final box'. Again, what is to say that we, as humans, are not at heart the same? Just because there are many boxes doesn't mean we won't find something we can't go outside of. So, program in a large number of 'boxes' to an AI, and it could be like a human.
Now, of course, this is (much) harder than it sounds. How exactly do you tell it when to go outside the box, or how to do so? But it (may) be possible. This relates to the question of 'where' creativity is.
This also relates to the discussion of the universe, and its nature. If we only have a certain number of 'boxes' to think outside of, then perhaps the universe, too, only has a certain number of 'boxes', thus limiting the amount of knowledge, laws, truthes, etc. But, beyond a certain point, do we care if it's infinite, or just really big?
Let me note that this argument contrasts with my views on the limits of knowledge, so I am in effect playing devil's advocate here. I also adhere to the view that we can 'think outside the box' and so knowledge, the universe, etc is infinite. However, I also think the argument I present here is valid. For a discussion on the limits of knowledge, check out the book 'The End of Science'. Can't remember the author atm, but he interviews many prominent scientists (and some AI people) about their view on the limits of science. I don't agree with his conclusion, but it is interesting reading nonetheless.
This book is still one of my favorites. The teacher of my theoretical computer science course recommended it to me, I devoured it, loved it, re-read it several times since. It is perhaps a little dense on the music front, although I love music anyway. While the Godel part may also be longwinded, it is the main idea behind the book, so he has to treat it clearly and completely. I would recommend it to anybody interested in either Godel, AI, or just philosophy/math/music/art in general.
Ok, so you claim that since machines are, at heart, formal axiomatic systems, by Godel (and others who use that concept) that machines are inherently limited. Fine, I might accept that. But what makes you so sure that humans are not so limited? If they are, does it affect you much, if at all? I can still live my life, doing physics, math, art, whatever, despite the fact that I may be an incomplete formal system, at heart. Now, perhaps AI may never surpass us, by this argument, but I see nothing stopping it from becoming exactly, or almost exactly as intelligent/creative/whatever as we are.