Yeah right. China recently announced they would not only be exploring the Moon, they'd also be exploring Mars. They might as well claim they're going to explore Jupiter or the Kepler belt or Alpha Proxima. Private individuals have paid for trips that went further and stayed longer in space than any Taikonaut.
Maybe you're not aware that every time you hear music on a jukebox, from a DJ, in a karaoke bar, hell, on hold or in an elevator, someone who runs that business has been required to pay a royalty to a recording artists' association.
It's really not. Musicians want to play music all day. There's an over-abundance of musicians, yet they still wanna get paid. So they go to the government and get laws put in place they introduce artifical scarcity. The exact same thing happens in virtual worlds.
The music industry reminds me of the carebear crafters you find in MMORPGs. They spend all day making helmets but when they go to the NPC to sell them they find that he won't give them much for them. So they try to sell them to passers-by but they aint interested in helmets. Everyone's got a helmet already. So they start telling people how great their helmets are and claim all sorts of magical properties that they don't really have, just in the hope that someone will try one of their helmets and see how great they are. Eventually they get bitter and upset. They complain loudly to the live team who suggest 'why don't you make swords?' But they don't want to make swords, they want to make helmets, and damn it, you better force the NPCs to pay a reasonable amount for them and force the players to buy new helmets (perhaps by making the old helmets rust).
Seeing as you replied twice, here's my second reply: heard of Qt#? Most Linux distros won't even bundle mono from irrational fears of microsoft anyway.
The idea of improving GnuStep so it is binary compatible with the OS-X api is so you can run OS-X binaries.
The fact that I can't think of a single OS-X binary I'd want to run for which there isn't a corresponding windows binary might has something to do with why no-one wants to improve GnuStep in this way.
Most of the linux crowd don't know why gtk+ Qt because they believe C > C++. What's funny is that I've heard of Python users who believe this. Last time I looked the PyQt bindings were way cleaner than the PyGtk bindings. Blah, whatever.
Personally, I have no idea why people want to run any proprietary software on their Linux box, except maybe games and "shit you can't live without". Maybe no-one who uses a Mac ever migrates to Linux.:)
I sometimes wonder why this isn't an ongoing project like Wine. I think it's two things: 1) Few developers are interested in both Macs and asm. 2) It's such a narrow target. I mean, what Mac apps would you want to run on Linux that you can't find a windows version to run on Wine or some windows emulator.
The results are clearly open to interpretation. "we observed more neutron counts" does not mean "we observed fusion" but that's what proponents of the technique claim and sceptics of the technique deny.
With a poorly designed experiment you can easily convince yourself that you are seeing in the results whatever it is you want to see. That's what makes it subjective.
I have a layman understanding of physics. This means I can read about advances in the field of physics and sometimes understand what is going on. This does not mean that I can propose new ways of looking at things in the field of physics. Why? Because every physicist has a layman's understanding of physics. Anything that you can come up with, they've already thought of it.
Thankfully this doesn't happen in computer science very often. It does happen though. I remember having a long conversation with a guy who thought he had a great idea for a replacement for floppy disks (this was pre-USB). His idea was that the monitor could read the data from a device people carry around. At first I thought I misheard him. Then I calmly explained to him that monitors are output devices, not input devices. Then he asked what the difference was. Eventually he turned red and asked how you could do it. We had a discussion about flash memory and interface standards and then he got bored and went away.
Which is typically the flow of these conversations, so excuse me for not entertaining your brilliant idea.
No, the results you get are dependant on who does the experiment, therefore the experiment is subjective. Maybe you could make a new experiment that wasn't subjective but then that'd be a different experiment.
It's just annoying when people say "oh, if you program a computer to be friendly then it might think you want it to do [xyz] which is really unfriendly". We're talking about superintelligence here. If it can't understand the concept of 'friendly' then it's not very intelligent is it?
Think harder. If you have super intelligence it's only a matter of time before it develops ultratechnology (like nanotech) and can physically alter the basis of reality. So no, I wouldn't expect there to be a police force roaming around saying "don't hit your brother", I'd expect any attempt to hit someone would just instantly become inneffectual.
Yeah, that's what I ment too. Here in Australia every 16 yo school kid has a 3G phone so they can have video sex with their girlfriend. Old people (like me) don't have em cause they don't see the point, but the next generation has adopted em.
Slashdot Mirror
Yeah right. China recently announced they would not only be exploring the Moon, they'd also be exploring Mars. They might as well claim they're going to explore Jupiter or the Kepler belt or Alpha Proxima. Private individuals have paid for trips that went further and stayed longer in space than any Taikonaut.
Wouldn't that be great. I really like this new administrator.
Maybe you're not aware that every time you hear music on a jukebox, from a DJ, in a karaoke bar, hell, on hold or in an elevator, someone who runs that business has been required to pay a royalty to a recording artists' association.
It's really not. Musicians want to play music all day. There's an over-abundance of musicians, yet they still wanna get paid. So they go to the government and get laws put in place they introduce artifical scarcity. The exact same thing happens in virtual worlds.
The music industry reminds me of the carebear crafters you find in MMORPGs. They spend all day making helmets but when they go to the NPC to sell them they find that he won't give them much for them. So they try to sell them to passers-by but they aint interested in helmets. Everyone's got a helmet already. So they start telling people how great their helmets are and claim all sorts of magical properties that they don't really have, just in the hope that someone will try one of their helmets and see how great they are. Eventually they get bitter and upset. They complain loudly to the live team who suggest 'why don't you make swords?' But they don't want to make swords, they want to make helmets, and damn it, you better force the NPCs to pay a reasonable amount for them and force the players to buy new helmets (perhaps by making the old helmets rust).
"Bundle" does not mean "make available to download", it means "put on the install CD".
Seeing as you replied twice, here's my second reply: heard of Qt#? Most Linux distros won't even bundle mono from irrational fears of microsoft anyway.
You can wrap a turd in tin foil but you'll never make a jewel.
No, see, the reason why Qt owns over gtk+ is simply the fact that Qt is internally a work of art, and gtk+ is internally a dog's breakfast.
The idea of improving GnuStep so it is binary compatible with the OS-X api is so you can run OS-X binaries.
The fact that I can't think of a single OS-X binary I'd want to run for which there isn't a corresponding windows binary might has something to do with why no-one wants to improve GnuStep in this way.
Most of the linux crowd don't know why gtk+ Qt because they believe C > C++. What's funny is that I've heard of Python users who believe this. Last time I looked the PyQt bindings were way cleaner than the PyGtk bindings. Blah, whatever.
:)
Personally, I have no idea why people want to run any proprietary software on their Linux box, except maybe games and "shit you can't live without". Maybe no-one who uses a Mac ever migrates to Linux.
I sometimes wonder why this isn't an ongoing project like Wine. I think it's two things: 1) Few developers are interested in both Macs and asm. 2) It's such a narrow target. I mean, what Mac apps would you want to run on Linux that you can't find a windows version to run on Wine or some windows emulator.
I work on slashdot by day and mySQL by night, can you tell?
(I don't really, it's a joke).
The results are clearly open to interpretation. "we observed more neutron counts" does not mean "we observed fusion" but that's what proponents of the technique claim and sceptics of the technique deny.
Einstein was 1) a genius, and 2) already an expert in the field.
With a poorly designed experiment you can easily convince yourself that you are seeing in the results whatever it is you want to see. That's what makes it subjective.
I have a layman understanding of physics. This means I can read about advances in the field of physics and sometimes understand what is going on. This does not mean that I can propose new ways of looking at things in the field of physics. Why? Because every physicist has a layman's understanding of physics. Anything that you can come up with, they've already thought of it.
Thankfully this doesn't happen in computer science very often. It does happen though. I remember having a long conversation with a guy who thought he had a great idea for a replacement for floppy disks (this was pre-USB). His idea was that the monitor could read the data from a device people carry around. At first I thought I misheard him. Then I calmly explained to him that monitors are output devices, not input devices. Then he asked what the difference was. Eventually he turned red and asked how you could do it. We had a discussion about flash memory and interface standards and then he got bored and went away.
Which is typically the flow of these conversations, so excuse me for not entertaining your brilliant idea.
No, the results you get are dependant on who does the experiment, therefore the experiment is subjective. Maybe you could make a new experiment that wasn't subjective but then that'd be a different experiment.
Yes, that's what subjective means.
i.e., the results are subjective.
They were just trying to make cheap hydrogen.
How can you not know what sonoluminescence is? Silly question: do you even know what fusion is?
It's just annoying when people say "oh, if you program a computer to be friendly then it might think you want it to do [xyz] which is really unfriendly". We're talking about superintelligence here. If it can't understand the concept of 'friendly' then it's not very intelligent is it?
Think harder. If you have super intelligence it's only a matter of time before it develops ultratechnology (like nanotech) and can physically alter the basis of reality. So no, I wouldn't expect there to be a police force roaming around saying "don't hit your brother", I'd expect any attempt to hit someone would just instantly become inneffectual.
Yeah, that's what I ment too. Here in Australia every 16 yo school kid has a 3G phone so they can have video sex with their girlfriend. Old people (like me) don't have em cause they don't see the point, but the next generation has adopted em.