... are both great guys. I was Xavi's roommate for a couple of years (before he went to Belgium), and see Kuzyk almost every day (my office is just down the hall from his, and across the hall from the Nonlinear Optics group's labs). I remember when Xavi was first starting his calculations, he'd say "this is crap!" and then *almost* invariably become convinced of Kuzyk's calculations. But he did find these second-order effects can actually become extremely important, and even (when the nonlinearities become significant and the concept of what's first-order can become muddled) dominate some of the interactions in certain regimes. Kudos to them! The work was a LOT of sum-rules, and Xavi would end up doing a lot of it in Mathematica, but also had to write it all out by hand to get an idea of the terms' meanings.
In addition, Kuzyk's other students are doing some pretty important stuff with "twisted light" and some chaotic tunneling of light energy in optical fiber bundles, and self-healing chromophores, etc.
What I think is amusing, though, is all the positing of how immediately important this stuff will be to the industries involved. Yes, it might show up in technologies in fifteen years, but no one has very concrete ideas of what to do with it yet. It's *extremely* interesting from a basic science standpoint, but so is a lot of what people are doing in academic research settings. It's funny that this particular story got picked up and blown all over the 'net in the last couple of days.
Since you mentioned AI, I think a perfect selection function is that interview questions should not form a turing test of the interviewee. After all, if you can't tell whether you're interviewing a smart human who can do the job and an intelligent AI that can do the job, you clearly aren't discriminating based on any protected information.
Sweet. I, for one, welcome our silicon-based, monotone Hooters waitresses!
Sometimes I take the one-eyed trouser-snake for a helmet-polishing expedition. It's always looking forward to a spelunking expedition, but the cave just isn't available at times. So the self-abuse is more of a mental thing.
Humans have terrible long range vision and generally very poor video recording devices. Most people probably can't identify something 1 mile in front of them on the ground.
Pfft. Even if you can't hear him, Rush Limbaugh leaves little to the imagination at a mile.
Because Javascript does some neat things, despite it's bad rep.
Agreed.
And it's the only client side scripting language that you can count the client having.
No. No it's not. That's not to say that I can count on a client having other scripting language, but that Javascript is NOT ubiquitous, and certainly not guaranteed to be updated if it IS present.
The OED has "hallow" (the noun form) meaning one of the following:
1. A saint, a god of the heathens, or something belonging thereto (like a relic);
2. A loud shout or cry, to get dogs to chase, or to draw attention;
3. The parts of a hare given to hounds as a reward or encouragement after a chase. (I really hope it's this meaning that Rowling has in mind!)
I asked him just how smart they really were and he said VERY smart. I asked how many commands they knew, and he said 300-400, which is really very amazing.
Unfortunately, it maxes-out around 300-400, depending on how much time the whales want to spend on training the people.
Does "[The researcher]" have a name? Has this work been published in a peer reviewed article of repute?
If you'd read the article, the answers would become clear:
1) Yes: Gunnar Dolling;
2) Dunno. He has many peer-reviewed articles in Science and comparable journals; this one first showed up in June 2006 on xarchiv, but is published in the Journal of Optical Networking, Jan 2007: https://www.osa-jon.org/abstract.cfm?id=119886
These metamaterials have a long and interesting history (many posts here on slashdot and elsewhere) -- long because they were predicted a while ago by Veselago, and interesting because of the recent interest due to Pendry's production of workable devices in electromagnetic fields. There are even meta-materials being produced for acoustics problems, too.
However, what I'm really looking forward to is a Somebody Else's Problem device -- this will make all of the other foophraw unnecessary.
What if intelligent design and evolution are both correct? Intelligent design could have been the beginning of evolution. If a simple entity was created and designed to evolve, both theories would be right.
Yep. But, again, this seems to sidestep any criterion of testability or falsifiability. So it doesn't get around the problem that anti-ID people have with ID in the first place. It just shoves the whole creation bit to an earlier, murkier time.
Slashdot Mirror
the fact remains that most of the living creatures on the planet have sex, including most humans. We are built for it and driven to it.
You're new here, aren't you?
If you think perfectness is without holes, you're not dating much.
Topologically, what you're talking about isn't a hole, it's just an invagination. Oh, wait -- you mean *those* holes. OK, then I agree.
... are both great guys. I was Xavi's roommate for a couple of years (before he went to Belgium), and see Kuzyk almost every day (my office is just down the hall from his, and across the hall from the Nonlinear Optics group's labs). I remember when Xavi was first starting his calculations, he'd say "this is crap!" and then *almost* invariably become convinced of Kuzyk's calculations. But he did find these second-order effects can actually become extremely important, and even (when the nonlinearities become significant and the concept of what's first-order can become muddled) dominate some of the interactions in certain regimes. Kudos to them! The work was a LOT of sum-rules, and Xavi would end up doing a lot of it in Mathematica, but also had to write it all out by hand to get an idea of the terms' meanings.
In addition, Kuzyk's other students are doing some pretty important stuff with "twisted light" and some chaotic tunneling of light energy in optical fiber bundles, and self-healing chromophores, etc.
What I think is amusing, though, is all the positing of how immediately important this stuff will be to the industries involved. Yes, it might show up in technologies in fifteen years, but no one has very concrete ideas of what to do with it yet. It's *extremely* interesting from a basic science standpoint, but so is a lot of what people are doing in academic research settings. It's funny that this particular story got picked up and blown all over the 'net in the last couple of days.
No, but if you do it twice your charisma and dexterity go up and you can cast one more magic missile.
... We should have one called "Why FOX News Sucks". Not that I ever watch the stuff, of course.
Since you mentioned AI, I think a perfect selection function is that interview questions should not form a turing test of the interviewee. After all, if you can't tell whether you're interviewing a smart human who can do the job and an intelligent AI that can do the job, you clearly aren't discriminating based on any protected information.
..
Sweet. I, for one, welcome our silicon-based, monotone Hooters waitresses!
Oh, wait. .
Sometimes I take the one-eyed trouser-snake for a helmet-polishing expedition. It's always looking forward to a spelunking expedition, but the cave just isn't available at times. So the self-abuse is more of a mental thing.
Do you feel guilty when you masturbate?
Do you enjoy harming animals?
Huh. I must be really efficient. Killing two birds with one stone, no beating around the bush. Er... as it were!
Humans have terrible long range vision and generally very poor video recording devices. Most people probably can't identify something 1 mile in front of them on the ground.
Pfft. Even if you can't hear him, Rush Limbaugh leaves little to the imagination at a mile.
Bols, I don't get it: are you actually saying there's NOT ENOUGH randomness out there?
Here, have some of mine: ldjaofp9 bpm ]ak e]-07
Huh. Somehow I *knew* you'd write that.
I may have been too catty with my last response:
http://lcamtuf.coredump.cx/catty.shtml
Even when it wasn't explictly designed to do that, Google still wins it. Hmm... I wonder if you could design a google-based chatbot...
e fox-a&rls=org.debian%3Aen-US%3Aunofficial&hs=cfN&q =%22could+you+design+a+google-based+chatbot%3F%22& btnG=Search
http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&lr=&client=fir
Because Javascript does some neat things, despite it's bad rep.
Agreed.
And it's the only client side scripting language that you can count the client having.
No. No it's not. That's not to say that I can count on a client having other scripting language, but that Javascript is NOT ubiquitous, and certainly not guaranteed to be updated if it IS present.
why do all the neat websites require JavaScript?
Death-Hallow File System, natch.
The OED has "hallow" (the noun form) meaning one of the following:
1. A saint, a god of the heathens, or something belonging thereto (like a relic);
2. A loud shout or cry, to get dogs to chase, or to draw attention;
3. The parts of a hare given to hounds as a reward or encouragement after a chase. (I really hope it's this meaning that Rowling has in mind!)
Especially after seeing the photo of a sketch of some cartoon character at the story.
I use Icedove, you insensitive clods!
Don't forget about Mushu, the educated whale who thinks he's better than you!
And here I thought that Mushu was a pork product. Thanks!
I asked him just how smart they really were and he said VERY smart. I asked how many commands they knew, and he said 300-400, which is really very amazing.
Unfortunately, it maxes-out around 300-400, depending on how much time the whales want to spend on training the people.
Does "[The researcher]" have a name? Has this work been published in a peer reviewed article of repute?
If you'd read the article, the answers would become clear:
1) Yes: Gunnar Dolling;
2) Dunno. He has many peer-reviewed articles in Science and comparable journals; this one first showed up in June 2006 on xarchiv, but is published in the Journal of Optical Networking, Jan 2007: https://www.osa-jon.org/abstract.cfm?id=119886
These metamaterials have a long and interesting history (many posts here on slashdot and elsewhere) -- long because they were predicted a while ago by Veselago, and interesting because of the recent interest due to Pendry's production of workable devices in electromagnetic fields. There are even meta-materials being produced for acoustics problems, too.
However, what I'm really looking forward to is a Somebody Else's Problem device -- this will make all of the other foophraw unnecessary.
Did it happen when somebody sneezed? Was it all covered with cheese? Was there a floor and a door? Give us testable hypotheses, man!
What if intelligent design and evolution are both correct? Intelligent design could have been the beginning of evolution. If a simple entity was created and designed to evolve, both theories would be right.
Yep. But, again, this seems to sidestep any criterion of testability or falsifiability. So it doesn't get around the problem that anti-ID people have with ID in the first place. It just shoves the whole creation bit to an earlier, murkier time.
My bank account takes those little remainders and puts them into another account. It's just like taking pennies from the tray.
The tray for the crippled children?!?