> I see a lot of swamps and deserts being > inaccessible for these things due to the high > weight on small footprint.
Point taken. Let's make sure they include in the design a very low-tech metal "snowshoe".
> 2) The second major weakness is the four hour duration.
Four hours now, eight hours in a few years, all day in a decade...
> 3) Logistics - both supplies and maintenance.
You have extras to hand out for broken ones. As for supply, well that will change as the power situation improves. It is probably quite a ways from normal field use, I agree with you there.
However, a machine that, under heavy use, lasted four hours, well that's four hours of 40 mph running, leaping fences, and hauling around Serious Sam's Gatling gun. Is it worth it for modern, urban, special forces warefare? Sure is.
A walking aircraft carrier would last about two seconds against a Mech Elemental In Reality. Then there's missles, daisy cutters, etc.
In the Gulf War 10 years ago they had bombs that could punch through 30 feet of steel-reinforced concrete, THEN explode. I hesitate to guess what they're slamming into the caves over there.
I always have to laugh at the mech stuff, knowing those things and a dollar would buy you a cup of coffee somewhere in a real war against the current US, much less the technology of the future.
I recall them doing a laser measurement just this way on a PBS show 10 years ago, maybe an Alan Alda-hosted thing, can't remember.
At the time, they said the accuracy of the measurement was +/-5 inches. How did they improve this? Of course, if it's truly randomly +/55 inches, many measurements averaged would give you the right answer, but still...
Who wants to see the first coupla seasons anyway?
on
Star Trek TNG DVDs
·
· Score: 1
Aside from Q, the first season was a waste, as was Dr. Pulaski. The story didn't pick up until the return of Hot Red, the enbearding of Riker, and when it became the Data-n-Picard show.
It would be pretty hard to exceed 1.5GB, much less 2, unless you did run a giant filesharing folder.
I used to stay up all night in my younger days, playing 12+ hours per day of Quake CTF, and I'd run up about 250MB of download per session. That x 6 is your 1.5GB.
Of course, if you just HADDA download Lesbians Showering.mpg at over 100MB, and did things like that 10 times a night every night, you would crush it, too.
> Thus any programming task has an associated
> algorithmic complexity -- the length of the
> shortest program that will produce the table
> that maps the project's data inputs to
> their outputs.
This shows how ludicrous the fantasy world of the university is compared to the real world.
Very little time is devoted or needed to implement an internal data processing routine.
In other words, core implementation = 10%, making robust = 90%. When the user clicks on this, then on that, then alt-tab's to something else, then deletes the file the program was trying to save as it is trying to save it, does your program handle it gracefully, or does it crash, crying like a big fat baby, because you're a dumb programmer who has no concept of the real world? Do you view vi as a sophisticated programming job, or as a bunch of cave scrawlings interesting only because of its historical archaeological existance?
Mapping "a series of inputs to outputs" completely negates the difficulty of finding the real inputs and outputs. These are, among other things, mostly, not partly, the complex interactions I've described above.
I just came off a project that wasted a great deal of time doing asinine use cases for stupid things like "user pushes this button, that happens."
Well, duh.
That covers 10% of the work. No use case handles the strange cases because, for the most part, no one can think of them ahead of time. The latest versions of Netscape still hang and have for many versions, back to 3 at least, eyes open but nobody is home, if I do too many "open link in other window"'s and alt-tab between them. Ctrl-alt-del is needed to kill off the Netscape process as some thread is in some kind of furious polling loop sucking CPU and refusing to allow clicking on links. That is the world of programming, where stuff like this takes up most of the time, if it is taken care of at all.
That has nothing to do whatsoever with an academic method of estimating some data processing algorithm.
Let's not forget that when the people are swayed by ads, the people are stupid because they didn't vote the way we think they should, damnit, we know how they should live, and thus how they should vote, so it's no longer democracy since they didn't vote our way.
In Germany, you can't advertise your superior product by contrasting it to your competition's demonstrably inferior one.
In many countries, if your political opponent is a thief with a criminal record, has sex with dogs, and finds 8 year old boys attractive, you can't talk about that. (Unless they have a plank of not having sex with 8 year old boys or dogs, and even that's iffy.)
> How many more innocent people in the world will
> be forced to endure american style 'freedom' in
> the coming years.
Let's hope every damned one.
If anything, allowing a coalition of former thugs to reign is stupid. We should go in there and ram a real constitution with protected freedoms down their throat.
It's an appeals thing, too. At the very bottom we see this choice sentence:
> For the foregoing reasons, this court AFFIRMS
> Robert and Carleen Thomas' convictions and
> sentences.
Page after page of posturing, hot air, sophistry, and arguments to emotion to simply declare that free, consenting adults should not be free, even behind closed doors. That ancient religious beliefs based on non-existant gods can be whitewashed by a relabeling and still forced down people's throats! Even that requires requires the irrational belief, held by self-styled advanced thinkers, that as long as it ain't religious, it's fair game. Get out the tamping rod, hold open his throat, and start ramming!
And each poor country opened to trade has better lives for its poor -- as defined by those very poor.
Bzzt! Thanks for playing. A powerful economy has always fed the hungry, housed the homless, and provided for better public health and education than a bunch of ivory tower intellectuals fantasizing about micromanaging lives ever has.
Where do you think the food to feed the poor in those countries comes from? Do you think showering food on them will raise them up faster than corporations opening factories there will?
> Assuming they catch you, they can order the
> revocation of your license.
Notice that said license was sold as a bill of goods to create an orderly use of bandwidth to prevent collisions among broadcasters, yet in fact is used to prevent free speech, which is to say, speech that harms those behind the gun, or harms the feelings of the idiot masses who vote for those in power.
Yes, the ability to sniff dog shit is a highly attractive feature to attract paying members to elitism.
Actually, so many around here believe stuff like this, then with the other side of their mouth, decry elitism and talk about "haves" and "have-nots" (with a faux-reality worldview heavy on the lazy haves stealing or tricking the hard working have-nots.)
> Likewise, an art website I frequent
> [deviantart.com] has recently opened up a
> subscription service (ostensibly to pay for
> bandwidth costs) on top of the basic free
> membership. As there is no tangible 'punishment'
> for non-paying members, the only real incentive
> to shell out the cash. I have no plans
> to do so myself, and according to this study it
> is exactly that mentality that kills voluntarily
> cooperative ventures.
Yes, but the solution isn't to pull out a gun and force your neighbor to pay for it.
Note that if mandatory payments occur, people won't go there because they have to pay, and it dies out. Without payments (mandatory or otherwise) it also dies out, or at least just crawls along on the goodwill of the promoter.
"I know!" sayeth the wise person doomed to repeat history, "Let's force everyone to pay whether they go there or not!"
"If only I had lots of other peoples' money, I could make this a great world! If only I could tell people how to live, I could make this a great world!"
Nah, I'll stick with freedom, thanks. You guys do your goofy thing, I'll do mine. History shows I come out far ahead.
As technology advances due to capitalism, why in god's name does communism seem more and more attractive?
You seek to take all the benefits of capitalism and free markets and freedom itself, intellectually sever it from those roots, and claim a massive command and control system plopped down on top of that technology will make lives better?!?!?!?
At any point in time, past, present, or distant future, you will stagnate growth by applying communism. And that's just the pure economic theory. If you think capitalism lets pigs run amok, what do you think a society where there is exactly one source of power will do?
You have a big pot of money, you invest it, make things happen, reap the rewards. If that's being a "freeloader", then I'd hate to live in a world without them. Much of the world still does, and anti-capitalist "anti-freeloaderism" is no friend of humanity.
Fehr and his colleague Simon Gachter, of the University of St
Gallen, devised an economic game where four anonymous
participants had to decide how much to invest in a common
pot. Returns were balanced so that the 'rational' strategy was
to invest nothing and reap the benefits of other's
contributions. But by investing a lot, the whole group could
gain.
Ayn Rand would be rolling over in her grave over this. It was precisely because the rational investor would see that by investing, they'd succeed, that every rational investor would succeed.
It is when punishment is applied that people don't invest or take part. In areas heavily tested, punishment causes slacking off.
What economic advancement there is is largely due to those risk takers who do invest and drag the rest of us neanderthals along with them, kicking and screaming, into higher productivity worlds where more and more goods are available at cheaper costs.
Slashdot Mirror
In a real war against more than bullets, that's a 500 foot tall coffin saying "kill me, now."
> I see a lot of swamps and deserts being > inaccessible for these things due to the high > weight on small footprint.
Point taken. Let's make sure they include in the design a very low-tech metal "snowshoe".
> 2) The second major weakness is the four hour duration.
Four hours now, eight hours in a few years, all day in a decade...
> 3) Logistics - both supplies and maintenance.
You have extras to hand out for broken ones. As for supply, well that will change as the power situation improves. It is probably quite a ways from normal field use, I agree with you there.
However, a machine that, under heavy use, lasted four hours, well that's four hours of 40 mph running, leaping fences, and hauling around Serious Sam's Gatling gun. Is it worth it for modern, urban, special forces warefare? Sure is.
A walking aircraft carrier would last about two seconds against a Mech Elemental In Reality. Then there's missles, daisy cutters, etc.
In the Gulf War 10 years ago they had bombs that could punch through 30 feet of steel-reinforced concrete, THEN explode. I hesitate to guess what they're slamming into the caves over there.
I always have to laugh at the mech stuff, knowing those things and a dollar would buy you a cup of coffee somewhere in a real war against the current US, much less the technology of the future.
Ok, then you just disengage your legs from the robot legs and sit there in a fold-out, cushioned seat as the robot does the running.
God gave birth to metamoderation. If anyone happens to stumble across that moderation...
Your little body certainly does pull the entire mass of earth down onto it, just a little bit.
What % of your weight is the earth attracting you and what % is you attracting the earth?
I recall them doing a laser measurement just this way on a PBS show 10 years ago, maybe an Alan Alda-hosted thing, can't remember.
At the time, they said the accuracy of the measurement was +/-5 inches. How did they improve this? Of course, if it's truly randomly +/55 inches, many measurements averaged would give you the right answer, but still...
No, he created a light-gravity illusion.
David Blaine created the Anti-Gravity Illusion (about halfway down.)
A method to induce narcosis in recalcitrant neonates via the application of manual pressure spikes to the posterior glutei maximi.
You're an ass.
Aside from Q, the first season was a waste, as was Dr. Pulaski. The story didn't pick up until the return of Hot Red, the enbearding of Riker, and when it became the Data-n-Picard show.
It would be pretty hard to exceed 1.5GB, much less 2, unless you did run a giant filesharing folder.
I used to stay up all night in my younger days, playing 12+ hours per day of Quake CTF, and I'd run up about 250MB of download per session. That x 6 is your 1.5GB.
Of course, if you just HADDA download Lesbians Showering.mpg at over 100MB, and did things like that 10 times a night every night, you would crush it, too.
> Thus any programming task has an associated
> algorithmic complexity -- the length of the
> shortest program that will produce the table
> that maps the project's data inputs to
> their outputs.
This shows how ludicrous the fantasy world of the university is compared to the real world.
Very little time is devoted or needed to implement an internal data processing routine.
In other words, core implementation = 10%, making robust = 90%. When the user clicks on this, then on that, then alt-tab's to something else, then deletes the file the program was trying to save as it is trying to save it, does your program handle it gracefully, or does it crash, crying like a big fat baby, because you're a dumb programmer who has no concept of the real world? Do you view vi as a sophisticated programming job, or as a bunch of cave scrawlings interesting only because of its historical archaeological existance?
Mapping "a series of inputs to outputs" completely negates the difficulty of finding the real inputs and outputs. These are, among other things, mostly, not partly, the complex interactions I've described above.
I just came off a project that wasted a great deal of time doing asinine use cases for stupid things like "user pushes this button, that happens."
Well, duh.
That covers 10% of the work. No use case handles the strange cases because, for the most part, no one can think of them ahead of time. The latest versions of Netscape still hang and have for many versions, back to 3 at least, eyes open but nobody is home, if I do too many "open link in other window"'s and alt-tab between them. Ctrl-alt-del is needed to kill off the Netscape process as some thread is in some kind of furious polling loop sucking CPU and refusing to allow clicking on links. That is the world of programming, where stuff like this takes up most of the time, if it is taken care of at all.
That has nothing to do whatsoever with an academic method of estimating some data processing algorithm.
Let's not forget that when the people are swayed by ads, the people are stupid because they didn't vote the way we think they should, damnit, we know how they should live, and thus how they should vote, so it's no longer democracy since they didn't vote our way.
Blowing someone up is, generally speaking, illegal in both countries.
Talking about the joys of Nazis, or how many digits of a hand can go inside a vagina before a picture of it becomes illegal are not.
It's a lot more than that.
In Germany, you can't advertise your superior product by contrasting it to your competition's demonstrably inferior one.
In many countries, if your political opponent is a thief with a criminal record, has sex with dogs, and finds 8 year old boys attractive, you can't talk about that. (Unless they have a plank of not having sex with 8 year old boys or dogs, and even that's iffy.)
> How many more innocent people in the world will
> be forced to endure american style 'freedom' in
> the coming years.
Let's hope every damned one.
If anything, allowing a coalition of former thugs to reign is stupid. We should go in there and ram a real constitution with protected freedoms down their throat.
That'd be here.
It's an appeals thing, too. At the very bottom we see this choice sentence:
> For the foregoing reasons, this court AFFIRMS
> Robert and Carleen Thomas' convictions and
> sentences.
Page after page of posturing, hot air, sophistry, and arguments to emotion to simply declare that free, consenting adults should not be free, even behind closed doors. That ancient religious beliefs based on non-existant gods can be whitewashed by a relabeling and still forced down people's throats! Even that requires requires the irrational belief, held by self-styled advanced thinkers, that as long as it ain't religious, it's fair game. Get out the tamping rod, hold open his throat, and start ramming!
And each poor country opened to trade has better lives for its poor -- as defined by those very poor.
Bzzt! Thanks for playing. A powerful economy has always fed the hungry, housed the homless, and provided for better public health and education than a bunch of ivory tower intellectuals fantasizing about micromanaging lives ever has.
Where do you think the food to feed the poor in those countries comes from? Do you think showering food on them will raise them up faster than corporations opening factories there will?
> Assuming they catch you, they can order the
> revocation of your license.
Notice that said license was sold as a bill of goods to create an orderly use of bandwidth to prevent collisions among broadcasters, yet in fact is used to prevent free speech, which is to say, speech that harms those behind the gun, or harms the feelings of the idiot masses who vote for those in power.
> 1) Ability to read invisible posts (posts rated below 1).
Yes, the ability to sniff dog shit is a highly attractive feature to attract paying members to elitism.
Actually, so many around here believe stuff like this, then with the other side of their mouth, decry elitism and talk about "haves" and "have-nots" (with a faux-reality worldview heavy on the lazy haves stealing or tricking the hard working have-nots.)
> Likewise, an art website I frequent
> [deviantart.com] has recently opened up a
> subscription service (ostensibly to pay for
> bandwidth costs) on top of the basic free
> membership. As there is no tangible 'punishment'
> for non-paying members, the only real incentive
> to shell out the cash. I have no plans
> to do so myself, and according to this study it
> is exactly that mentality that kills voluntarily
> cooperative ventures.
Yes, but the solution isn't to pull out a gun and force your neighbor to pay for it.
Note that if mandatory payments occur, people won't go there because they have to pay, and it dies out. Without payments (mandatory or otherwise) it also dies out, or at least just crawls along on the goodwill of the promoter.
"I know!" sayeth the wise person doomed to repeat history, "Let's force everyone to pay whether they go there or not!"
"If only I had lots of other peoples' money, I could make this a great world! If only I could tell people how to live, I could make this a great world!"
Nah, I'll stick with freedom, thanks. You guys do your goofy thing, I'll do mine. History shows I come out far ahead.
As technology advances due to capitalism, why in god's name does communism seem more and more attractive?
You seek to take all the benefits of capitalism and free markets and freedom itself, intellectually sever it from those roots, and claim a massive command and control system plopped down on top of that technology will make lives better?!?!?!?
At any point in time, past, present, or distant future, you will stagnate growth by applying communism. And that's just the pure economic theory. If you think capitalism lets pigs run amok, what do you think a society where there is exactly one source of power will do?
Capitalism isn't about freeloaders, either.
You have a big pot of money, you invest it, make things happen, reap the rewards. If that's being a "freeloader", then I'd hate to live in a world without them. Much of the world still does, and anti-capitalist "anti-freeloaderism" is no friend of humanity.
Ayn Rand would be rolling over in her grave over this. It was precisely because the rational investor would see that by investing, they'd succeed, that every rational investor would succeed.
It is when punishment is applied that people don't invest or take part. In areas heavily tested, punishment causes slacking off.
What economic advancement there is is largely due to those risk takers who do invest and drag the rest of us neanderthals along with them, kicking and screaming, into higher productivity worlds where more and more goods are available at cheaper costs.