Oh Wow, I never heard of that word before, but it definitely fits what he's doing. He's claiming to have performed a specific action in hopes that other people will imitate him. He's also trying to generate a perception of AMD which would be infectious to other people. An excellent and very cunning ploy to exploit people's imitative natures.
And there's my contribution to the anti-meme. An explanation of what astroturfing is goes further than just saying what its called.
* Lets say the blades are spinning counter clockwise. * The craft is moving forward at a speed X relative to the ambient air. * The air is moving backwards at a speed X relative to the craft and the center of the rotar. * Lets say the the blade is spinning such that its average speed along the length of the blade is Y.
So on the left side of the craft, the speed of the blade on the ambient air is Y-X. Both the air and the blade are moving in the same direction. If the craft is moving forward fast enough such that X > Y then we enter a situation where anti-lift occurs, of the force on the blade is down instead of up.
On the right side of the craft, the speed of the blade on the ambient air is Y+X. So the faster the craft is moving through the air, the stronger the force of the lift.
What happens when you push up on the right and push down on the left? (or don't push up enough on the left) The craft begins to turn head over heals along the left-right access. The wings in this situation are providing resistance to that rotation to some degree, thus allowing the craft to move forward faster without risk of turning over.
In a windows environment, even though your game might be a single thread, are there not also other programs running in the background? Wouldn't those other threads suck up some of the processor cycles?
I would think that having a dual core set up, the game can hog one processor while the rest of the OS and other threads can hog the other processor. When I play games, I leave my chat clients open and there's all the crap running in the system tray. All of that can be running on one processor, while the game could run on its own processor.
Are are you suggesting that its the added functionality of the processor and not how much processing time is available that makes the real difference?
How exactly do you measure the complexity of an idea like "God" or "the Universe" or an "Electron" in order to be able to use Occam's Razor at all? What objective metric or scale are we using here? How many letters are in the word? My emotional reaction to the word? My imagination of what the word means? My personal and individual experience with these entities?
Frankly, Occam's Razor can't be used at all when it comes to entities which are bigger (or smaller) than myself and beyond my personal experience. It is pure vanity for man to think he can know and understand the workings of the universe in its entirety. It is pure vanity for man to claim to know that God doesn't exist. It is pure vanity for man to claim to know anything about God, pro or con.
Actually we do the same thing with a "real" child. How much is our view of a child's limitations based on operating within said perceived limitations and that the "real" child hasn't been exposed to "adult" stimuli. On one hand the child's mind must mature before being able to grasp certain things and on the other they can't grasp anything they haven't been exposed to yet. I think the same feedback loop you point out applies to any and all learning systems. Limiting the exposure to material artificially limits the gainable knowledge and we, being adult humans, take that to mean that children can't handle the concepts at their age. Ah recursion.
Slashdot Mirror
http://dictionary.reference.com/search?q=astroturf ing
Oh Wow, I never heard of that word before, but it definitely fits what he's doing. He's claiming to have performed a specific action in hopes that other people will imitate him. He's also trying to generate a perception of AMD which would be infectious to other people. An excellent and very cunning ploy to exploit people's imitative natures.
And there's my contribution to the anti-meme. An explanation of what astroturfing is goes further than just saying what its called.
Crude Model/Situation.
* Lets say the blades are spinning counter clockwise.
* The craft is moving forward at a speed X relative to the ambient air.
* The air is moving backwards at a speed X relative to the craft and the center of the rotar.
* Lets say the the blade is spinning such that its average speed along the length of the blade is Y.
So on the left side of the craft, the speed of the blade on the ambient air is Y-X. Both the air and the blade are moving in the same direction. If the craft is moving forward fast enough such that X > Y then we enter a situation where anti-lift occurs, of the force on the blade is down instead of up.
On the right side of the craft, the speed of the blade on the ambient air is Y+X. So the faster the craft is moving through the air, the stronger the force of the lift.
What happens when you push up on the right and push down on the left? (or don't push up enough on the left) The craft begins to turn head over heals along the left-right access. The wings in this situation are providing resistance to that rotation to some degree, thus allowing the craft to move forward faster without risk of turning over.
In a windows environment, even though your game might be a single thread, are there not also other programs running in the background? Wouldn't those other threads suck up some of the processor cycles?
I would think that having a dual core set up, the game can hog one processor while the rest of the OS and other threads can hog the other processor. When I play games, I leave my chat clients open and there's all the crap running in the system tray. All of that can be running on one processor, while the game could run on its own processor.
Are are you suggesting that its the added functionality of the processor and not how much processing time is available that makes the real difference?
How exactly do you measure the complexity of an idea like "God" or "the Universe" or an "Electron" in order to be able to use Occam's Razor at all? What objective metric or scale are we using here? How many letters are in the word? My emotional reaction to the word? My imagination of what the word means? My personal and individual experience with these entities?
Frankly, Occam's Razor can't be used at all when it comes to entities which are bigger (or smaller) than myself and beyond my personal experience. It is pure vanity for man to think he can know and understand the workings of the universe in its entirety. It is pure vanity for man to claim to know that God doesn't exist. It is pure vanity for man to claim to know anything about God, pro or con.
Actually we do the same thing with a "real" child. How much is our view of a child's limitations based on operating within said perceived limitations and that the "real" child hasn't been exposed to "adult" stimuli. On one hand the child's mind must mature before being able to grasp certain things and on the other they can't grasp anything they haven't been exposed to yet. I think the same feedback loop you point out applies to any and all learning systems. Limiting the exposure to material artificially limits the gainable knowledge and we, being adult humans, take that to mean that children can't handle the concepts at their age. Ah recursion.