Stop calling the xbox a console!! This is an INSULT to every real console out there! Just because the stupid mass thinks it'S one this does nit mean it really is!
And by the way: Can someone stop this nightmare called "microsoft"?
> But, no, I've never never never never in my entire life ever deleted anything that I wasn't 999999% positively absolutely sure that I never wanted to see again under any circumstances.
Let me guess... you're a messie... right?;)))
> But I have (true story) physically beat a piece of hardware to death with my bare hands when it wouldn't stop asking me "ARE YOU SURE?" at every single individual keystroke and mouseclick.
Well.. then lass uns deutsch reden... ou français peut-etre... oder letzebugesch (my native tongue) vläicht?
You can also write in nederlands. But i then will not be able to answer in the same* language.
Of course I'd love to enter a higher level of conversation by using C++, (O')Haskell, Java, and (well, not really a high level;) PHP or Basic. Hasy anyone ever done a conversation in Perl RegExp??
* lol. i accidentidentially typed "lame" instead of "same"... this *must* mean something...;)
> "You can download -ANYTHING- now if you accept the new rights management built into everything."
LOL. Do you REALLY think they would then make downloading "legal"???*
Did you know that right now you already *pay* for making copies. (at least in germany) you pay on pcs, cd/dvd-writers and this special media "for audio" (that nobody with the slightest knowledge would use).
And copies are still "illegal"*. You know that industry has only *one* objective: maximising profit. So if a company wants to have endlessly grow profit (impossible but still their target), we WILL steer to a world where you pay as much as you can for every singe listening, then pay additionally for your "download everything" connection, next you'll pay taxes going directly to the industry (subsitys for ex.), and finally: Any copy (including unauthorized listening [=copy from active speakers with digital DRM to ears]) will still be punished with the electric chair.
And any company not following their rule of maximum profilt WILL go down the hill and be replaced by companies with less scruples...
Try to prove me wrong!
* the problem is that a small group (media industry) still has the money to define (il)legality. so we HAVE to change this.
Wrong. The poeple who transform the materials from basic resources like ore to the final parts and build it only cost less than 1/20th of those in western countries, while still being more hard-working.;P
So you don't have to cut down safety so much...
Besides us-products aren't anymore so well-known for their quality either. (okay... the quality of this scentence could improve too... maybe i'll outsource formulating of scentences to east-asia...;)
The CPUs of a modern mobile phone are the same that are in modern gameboys: ARM9 (or sometimes lower) The only difference are the added chips for multimeda and other stuff in gameboys.
As someone who actually *wrote* a game engine and other apps for mobile phones in java i can tell you that it IS java's fault! The best proof is that apps compiled directly for the chip run at least three times faster without doing anything better. So it can't be the chip. Even with the libs of the phone manufacturer it does not become much better, because additionally to still bein slow as crap it does not run everywhere anymore. Even if you automated the different screen sizes, performances, buttons, and so on... But at least you don't have to stick with the extremely minimal functionality of MIDP 1 or 2.;)
At least for me i can say that I will never write a program for a virtual machine ever again! If you *have* to compile a different version for every phone out there, you at least don't want it to be slow.;)
> With a debit card, once its out of your account its gone. Good luck getting it back.
Nope. Here in germany you can undo debits from your card for 60 days. So if someone tries to do a debit from your account, you simply let it go back, and this "someone" has to pay 3 for it. (Citibank even [illegaly] takes 10, [but they have the power to enforce it])
Troll?? i can't see why? Must be a moderator who thougt he had to mod what HE is.;P
But to get back to parent post: You would simply not use ssl but your own quantum-encryption chip. Then it will be physically impossible to tap your connection without getting caught while still just getting out useless data. (Don't stake me if this is not 100% correct!;)
Besides: I would love nearly zero-power-consumtion chips as i like those displays that already do that.:D
I know that nowadays norton products are mostly crap with near-to-none options, and all non-basic funtionality removed successively in every version, but this recycle bin extension comes from the good days and already saved my ass may times. (every time i typed something like Ctrl-N, Ctrl-S, Enter, and overwrote my just finished huge file with an EMPTY file.)
The direcory it used was not cloakrd in any other way than setting it to "hidden". I don't know if that changed in very recent versions (haven'T RTFA), but last time i used it (system works 2005) i could simply go into the directory and look what's inside it.
So maybe this is a common bug of virus scanners...
I even implemented something like this for my samba-shares. srue someone will come up with the "well, maybe it's a PEBCAK"-argument. but don't tell me you never did such an error and then whished to have the data back?
Could you do the same with a Windows OS at the time? No!!!
Well... up to winME you could... somewhat alike...
You could force windows to not start the gui by not running win.com (easy thing to configure). But then again you would only have some DOS which is not a very decent os nowadays.;)
But this isn't the worst thing. The worst thing is that you won't have much modern apps to run on. (Of course you could still run quake, doom, mechwarrior, and old textmode office apps...;)
> Does anyone honestly consider that a loss of freedom? I mean, freedom != anarchy
the point is that our system of one single state for a group of poeple is hopelessly outdated. If you take a bunch of poeple that agree on a certain set of rules of living together, you can form a traditional country. But nowadays countries tend to rule all and everything. The problem is that if you make too much rules most of the poeple are most of the time annoyed. the same thing happens with too *many* poeple. And with that much poeple in one country (>250 million?) it becomes pretty clear that this *can not* work.
So i think the only solution with a chance would be to let everyone decide for his own what he thinks if good, bad or where he does not care. But it must be impossible to enforce this on others.
Ths of course creates the problem that those poeple can not do anythign together in case their rules have conflicts. To solve this you could simply say: There is only *one* penalty in case someone does not work with your rules: he will no longer be allowed to interact with you (completely or partially).
I know this ideas aren't finished, but i think they are a pretty good start.
Of course you have to follow one ohter major rule: DON'T put humans "on top" to watch for the others (eg. government). Instead put a modifiable ruleset in form of an opensource application on top.
This way you always can create your own "fork" of a country and the governing application.
To explain all this would be too complicated, but i'm planning to create a online simulation in form of game... if i have the time...
> But I do agree French is bad, I mean the whole 'un' and 'une' thing. So wait, this table is feminine (I can't remember so just guessing) so it's 'une table' but this door (again a guess) is masculine so it's 'un porte'. Mind you German has masculine, feminine and... well a third (transgender?).
It's "une porte" by the way...;)
But i totally agree: Why do we must say the gender of everything all the time? And even worse: Why do objects have a gender?
In german we have a third thing that is no gender at all. it's neuter, meaning it is for objects/things.
But i think you could easily cut it down to those rules: gender information is......totally optional and can be used to claify things if needed....a paramter to the word like every other parameter....is defined by letter "e" for female, "r" for male and "i" for things at the end of the radical. (or choose your own letters;)
additionall paramters would include an "s" at the end for plural. and possibly some other letters for other times and states.
to be able to speak bad combinations of these letters you can add a - to be defined - vowel or consonant between two problematic letters.
the cool thing would be that new letters could emerge for things you never thought of. for example they could be useful in the context of specialized vocabularys like in medicine, information technoligy or - god forbid - management.;)
i only see one problem with them: ther could still emerge overlapping of words where you get another word radical when you add letters to their radical crating the confusion you mentioned.
Any solutions there? (besides setting special rules for word radicals to stop overlapping)
By the way, a french example: "Un vert ver dans un verre." ("A green worm in a jar/glass.", in all three cases spoken exactly the same. *wonderful*!;)
> The problem with this, is that you actually have to learn the vocabularies of three other languages in order to be sure you understand what someone is saying.
Nope. I guess you missed the point that we don't take *all* words from the other languages.
> If you can't find a word that means what you want to say, you just borrow one from another language, and if it catches on, it starts appearing in the newspapers and dictionaries.
This is *exactly* what we are doing. The only thing is that 30% of the poeple in luxemburg can only speak french, everyone else understands german perfectly and most poeple understand them both pretty good. Additionally there is just a little spicing of "global" english terms like "bytes" or similar ones.
This does not mean that we have to learn all languages. We only learn the stuff we really need. Of course you have enlish, german and french in school, (and luxemburgish too of course) but come on: you know how much you remember of that stuff.;)
By the way: *Everybody* in government must talk to you on the language you demand, wheter it is french, german, luxemburgish, or english. In cinemas or some shops they even accept portugese and dutch. So if you only speak one language and maybe a few other ones, you never get much problems.:)
> I think English is one of the best languages (in terms of variety of words)
Totally not! My bet goes for german. But whatever, they are all not the optimum.
I pretty much like the approach we take in ma home country luxemburg:
There is a language calles "luxemburgish", but it only has 6000 words. So we take verbs from french, german amd sometimes english, and simply exchange the ending by an ending that sounds luxemburgish. So In fact we have the possibility to speak richer than anybody else.
Because "Sky" "Ciel" and "Himmel" are *not* exactly the same! Theyaare transporting other associations beside one of their meanings.
So we choose the one that gets our though in the best way./me is a perfectionist and *loves* it.;)
i'm sorry, but i had french from 3rd grade school class, german from 1st and enlish from 5th, and i can tell you that with its 13 different times, tons of exceptions and horrible numbering system (at least in france itself where they say - literally translated - four-twenty-ten-nine for 99), french is a pretty complicated language.
English is the easyest of the 3 i learned. But they don't even come close the the cleanness of japanese or turkish. Japanese has nearly no exceptions and turkish even has only ONE verb with an exception. Additionally - if i remember it correctly - they use endings to modify the context where we use pronouns, wich is like a main command, the verb, and several paramters, the modifiers.
By the way: Are there any sites out there containing references for human languages in the same layout as programmign languages. I found the nearly standardized structure of references for programming languages to enable me to learn them extremely quick. If natural language references would be structured the same way, (maybe even in BNF) then i could learn all relevant languages in some months. (of course i still had to train the "standard library" of verbs, but this is okay because i can learn them on-the-fly)
I think everything else is just half-baked, still narrow arm positioning, carpal-tunnel- or shoulder-tendon-killing, unergonomic non-innovation.
And still this thing (in the chair mounted version) is just the most basic thing i would accept as an innovation. More sophisicated systems should read the signals straight from nerve ends (preferably where the nerves are directly below the skin, so you don't have to change your body) or read the changes of the electromagnetic field in our brain (some kind of "telepatic" amplifier with an a/d-converter and a normal usb-connection, using a neuronal network for mattern matching on the driver layer)
Am i the only one who wonders why this isn't avaliabe yet, because all this is already possible for years...?
BTW: If anyone has venture capital: I'm willing to make it reality ASAP!
> Incorrect. When you start counting something, you first initialize whatever variable you are using to 0, to indicate that you have this far counted 0 CDs; before that it is in undefined state, which may or may not be 0/NULL. When you point your finger to the first CD, you increment the variable to 1, then to 2, etc.
I a way, this was what i meant.;) But i saw NULL as a *non-initialized* state of the variable Something like
class Something { public static int x; } int y = Something.x;
in java should set y to NULL because y is NULL.
>Really ? From stddef.h: > #define NULL 0
Of course my code above is an abstraction because in fact a place in memory always has a certain value stored inside. Maybe we see things different because i work mostly with languages where variable states NULL, UNDEFINED, NEGATIVE_INFINITE, POSITIVE_INFINITE are pretty normal even when they do not exist in memory and are defined trough special values or whatever.
I like this level of abstraction pretty much because it makes code cleaner (from my pov of course). So i see NULL as a result of a variable reading output of a uninitialized variable and 0 as a value in an initialized variable.
> Please do not confuse position in array with amount of elements in it.
Did I?
There is a slight but *very* relevant difference between your "When you point your finger _to_ the first CD" and "Then you point your finger _to the top_ of the stack [...] Then you move it _one cd_ down". That is: In my "model" you never point _to_ a cd, but on the position _between_ two cds. This is because when you also can point your finger to 0.5, 0.3 or 0.9 cds (some of your _to_s) then 1.0 cds is clearly at the bottom of the first cd box and at the top of the secons. So for the 0 your finger is on the top of the first cd.
So you count the way that when your finger passes 1.0 you can say "1 cd".
LOL! Finally someone else who gets it! That's why i love slashdot! Inside jokes ROCK! Even more when nobody here thinks that they're inside, but that the rest of the world just is stupid. (wich is pretty much the truth.;)
They're NOT! The point is that 0 is actually a value while NULL is UNDEFINED/NOTHING7N(OT)I(N)L(IST). So if you count a stack of cds you have NULL to start with because you haven't started to count. Then you point your finger to the top of the stack saying "0" which is you *first* POSITION where you can point your finger. Then you move it one cd down and say "1" which is the *second* position.
Of course you can forget those extra states of your "variable" most of the time. But when they are relevant and you forget them you get a mess.
I am no expert in the number theory, but i think the best way is to think "floating point". Then if your finger just started to move down from 0 you get 0.1, then 0.2 and so on. and there is always a value in between two other values, no matter how exact you define them.
So you can even say that 0 is the first element of all values if you don't have a NULL or anythign similar.
I guess the whole thing comes from the variabel pointers. As we all know NULL there means that it does not point anywhere. But when it points somewhere and that value is 0 then it is defined and on its first possible state in the list of possible states.
So much for it... maybe i reapeated a bit too much but better too clear than too blurred.
> Now they are working on much higher yeild FUSION bombs.
WORKING? I read about hydrogen (H-)bombs in the late 80s. Here some quick facts: They...
- have 3600 times the power of the hiroshima bomb - use a nuclear bomb as a fuse (!!!) because nothign else can (or could back then) create so high tempratures that teh reaction can start (some million degrees) - use heavy (somewhat radioactive) water as explosive, working in a similar way as the sun by making helium out of hydrogen. (which is easyer with heavy water because it already has the needed neutrons i guess...) - the usa is not the only country that owns them, but it owns (as usual) the most of them.
And: YES, you can kill a small continent with them.
P.S.: Wait for the first rusty ones to explode in russia in the next 10-20 years...;)
The only reason they don't build nuclear bombs anymore is that they do have so much of them that you could easily destroy the whole planet by breaking it in several parts or at least destroying the whole crust and causing a nuclear winter.
Watch wor them starting again as soon as we find an alien lifeform on some other planet.
By the way: Recently i saw some "oh, the us army/navy/whatever is sooo cool! they rule the world"-tv-reportage, where they said that ONE ship of usa's biggest submarine class has the nuclear power of 3600 hiroshima nuclear bombs! 3600!!! this is enough to destroy a whole continent with every city on it!! Now guess how many of those ships exist, and what else exists.
If this is not the most criminal thing of every lifeform in this solar system, then i don't know...
Oh wait... the most criminal thing is that poeple actually accept it (proven by the fact that it still exists and nearly nothing changes).
> Unfortunately, we need them to recieve radation because if they DON'T, we can't communicate with them.
Sure we can. Put a long *cable* on it, shield the cable too, and ready you are! There is one more plus with this: You can communicate with it even when the robot is inside walls that sheld radiation too.
Another solution would be to only allow a certain frequency range. But this would be harder to do. And because ther is a simple solution avaliable, why get in trouble?
Slashdot Mirror
Stop calling the xbox a console!! This is an INSULT to every real console out there! Just because the stupid mass thinks it'S one this does nit mean it really is!
And by the way: Can someone stop this nightmare called "microsoft"?
> But, no, I've never never never never in my entire life ever deleted anything that I wasn't 999999% positively absolutely sure that I never wanted to see again under any circumstances.
;)))
;))
Let me guess... you're a messie... right?
> But I have (true story) physically beat a piece of hardware to death with my bare hands when it wouldn't stop asking me "ARE YOU SURE?" at every single individual keystroke and mouseclick.
ARE YOU SURE? Because I don't believe this.
... or we simply stop eating the trash that lets us get heart attacks in the first place!
> (bury your "meet me at the pub at 18:30" among the 8GB of data in a DVD movie, and it could be pretty hard to detect!)
But mainly because it will be burned with you (and the recipent) on the great RIAA/MPAA pyre... *sad*
Well.. then lass uns deutsch reden... ou français peut-etre... oder letzebugesch (my native tongue) vläicht?
;) PHP or Basic.
;)
You can also write in nederlands. But i then will not be able to answer in the same* language.
Of course I'd love to enter a higher level of conversation by using C++, (O')Haskell, Java, and (well, not really a high level
Hasy anyone ever done a conversation in Perl RegExp??
* lol. i accidentidentially typed "lame" instead of "same"... this *must* mean something...
> "You can download -ANYTHING- now if you accept the new rights management built into everything."
LOL. Do you REALLY think they would then make downloading "legal"???*
Did you know that right now you already *pay* for making copies. (at least in germany) you pay on pcs, cd/dvd-writers and this special media "for audio" (that nobody with the slightest knowledge would use).
And copies are still "illegal"*.
You know that industry has only *one* objective: maximising profit.
So if a company wants to have endlessly grow profit (impossible but still their target), we WILL steer to a world where you pay as much as you can for every singe listening, then pay additionally for your "download everything" connection, next you'll pay taxes going directly to the industry (subsitys for ex.), and finally:
Any copy (including unauthorized listening [=copy from active speakers with digital DRM to ears]) will still be punished with the electric chair.
And any company not following their rule of maximum profilt WILL go down the hill and be replaced by companies with less scruples...
Try to prove me wrong!
* the problem is that a small group (media industry) still has the money to define (il)legality. so we HAVE to change this.
Wrong. The poeple who transform the materials from basic resources like ore to the final parts and build it only cost less than 1/20th of those in western countries, while still being more hard-working. ;P
;)
So you don't have to cut down safety so much...
Besides us-products aren't anymore so well-known for their quality either. (okay... the quality of this scentence could improve too... maybe i'll outsource formulating of scentences to east-asia...
I'm sorry, but this is plainly wrong!
;)
;)
The CPUs of a modern mobile phone are the same that are in modern gameboys: ARM9 (or sometimes lower)
The only difference are the added chips for multimeda and other stuff in gameboys.
As someone who actually *wrote* a game engine and other apps for mobile phones in java i can tell you that it IS java's fault!
The best proof is that apps compiled directly for the chip run at least three times faster without doing anything better.
So it can't be the chip.
Even with the libs of the phone manufacturer it does not become much better, because additionally to still bein slow as crap it does not run everywhere anymore. Even if you automated the different screen sizes, performances, buttons, and so on...
But at least you don't have to stick with the extremely minimal functionality of MIDP 1 or 2.
At least for me i can say that I will never write a program for a virtual machine ever again!
If you *have* to compile a different version for every phone out there, you at least don't want it to be slow.
> With a debit card, once its out of your account its gone. Good luck getting it back.
Nope. Here in germany you can undo debits from your card for 60 days. So if someone tries to do a debit from your account, you simply let it go back, and this "someone" has to pay 3 for it. (Citibank even [illegaly] takes 10, [but they have the power to enforce it])
Troll?? i can't see why? ;P
;)
:D
Must be a moderator who thougt he had to mod what HE is.
But to get back to parent post: You would simply not use ssl but your own quantum-encryption chip. Then it will be physically impossible to tap your connection without getting caught while still just getting out useless data. (Don't stake me if this is not 100% correct!
Besides: I would love nearly zero-power-consumtion chips as i like those displays that already do that.
...the norton recycle bin extension?
I know that nowadays norton products are mostly crap with near-to-none options, and all non-basic funtionality removed successively in every version, but this recycle bin extension comes from the good days and already saved my ass may times. (every time i typed something like Ctrl-N, Ctrl-S, Enter, and overwrote my just finished huge file with an EMPTY file.)
The direcory it used was not cloakrd in any other way than setting it to "hidden". I don't know if that changed in very recent versions (haven'T RTFA), but last time i used it (system works 2005) i could simply go into the directory and look what's inside it.
So maybe this is a common bug of virus scanners...
I even implemented something like this for my samba-shares. srue someone will come up with the "well, maybe it's a PEBCAK"-argument. but don't tell me you never did such an error and then whished to have the data back?
Could you do the same with a Windows OS at the time? No!!!
;)
;)
Well... up to winME you could... somewhat alike...
You could force windows to not start the gui by not running win.com (easy thing to configure). But then again you would only have some DOS which is not a very decent os nowadays.
But this isn't the worst thing. The worst thing is that you won't have much modern apps to run on. (Of course you could still run quake, doom, mechwarrior, and old textmode office apps...
Humm... isn't it possible that at *that* strong energies even non-magnetic materials like plastic can become magnetic by some special "effect"?
;)
I guess we have to fly naked. Any girl interested of coming with me?
> Does anyone honestly consider that a loss of freedom? I mean, freedom != anarchy
the point is that our system of one single state for a group of poeple is hopelessly outdated. If you take a bunch of poeple that agree on a certain set of rules of living together, you can form a traditional country. But nowadays countries tend to rule all and everything. The problem is that if you make too much rules most of the poeple are most of the time annoyed. the same thing happens with too *many* poeple. And with that much poeple in one country (>250 million?) it becomes pretty clear that this *can not* work.
So i think the only solution with a chance would be to let everyone decide for his own what he thinks if good, bad or where he does not care. But it must be impossible to enforce this on others.
Ths of course creates the problem that those poeple can not do anythign together in case their rules have conflicts. To solve this you could simply say: There is only *one* penalty in case someone does not work with your rules: he will no longer be allowed to interact with you (completely or partially).
I know this ideas aren't finished, but i think they are a pretty good start.
Of course you have to follow one ohter major rule: DON'T put humans "on top" to watch for the others (eg. government).
Instead put a modifiable ruleset in form of an opensource application on top.
This way you always can create your own "fork" of a country and the governing application.
To explain all this would be too complicated, but i'm planning to create a online simulation in form of game... if i have the time...
> But I do agree French is bad, I mean the whole 'un' and 'une' thing. So wait, this table is feminine (I can't remember so just guessing) so it's 'une table' but this door (again a guess) is masculine so it's 'un porte'. Mind you German has masculine, feminine and ... well a third (transgender?).
;)
...totally optional and can be used to claify things if needed. ...a paramter to the word like every other parameter. ...is defined by letter "e" for female, "r" for male and "i" for things at the end of the radical. (or choose your own letters ;)
;)
;)
It's "une porte" by the way...
But i totally agree: Why do we must say the gender of everything all the time? And even worse: Why do objects have a gender?
In german we have a third thing that is no gender at all. it's neuter, meaning it is for objects/things.
But i think you could easily cut it down to those rules: gender information is...
additionall paramters would include an "s" at the end for plural. and possibly some other letters for other times and states.
to be able to speak bad combinations of these letters you can add a - to be defined - vowel or consonant between two problematic letters.
the cool thing would be that new letters could emerge for things you never thought of. for example they could be useful in the context of specialized vocabularys like in medicine, information technoligy or - god forbid - management.
i only see one problem with them: ther could still emerge overlapping of words where you get another word radical when you add letters to their radical crating the confusion you mentioned.
Any solutions there? (besides setting special rules for word radicals to stop overlapping)
By the way, a french example: "Un vert ver dans un verre." ("A green worm in a jar/glass.", in all three cases spoken exactly the same. *wonderful*!
> The problem with this, is that you actually have to learn the vocabularies of three other languages in order to be sure you understand what someone is saying.
;)
:)
Nope. I guess you missed the point that we don't take *all* words from the other languages.
> If you can't find a word that means what you want to say, you just borrow one from another language, and if it catches on, it starts appearing in the newspapers and dictionaries.
This is *exactly* what we are doing. The only thing is that 30% of the poeple in luxemburg can only speak french, everyone else understands german perfectly and most poeple understand them both pretty good. Additionally there is just a little spicing of "global" english terms like "bytes" or similar ones.
This does not mean that we have to learn all languages. We only learn the stuff we really need. Of course you have enlish, german and french in school, (and luxemburgish too of course) but come on: you know how much you remember of that stuff.
By the way: *Everybody* in government must talk to you on the language you demand, wheter it is french, german, luxemburgish, or english. In cinemas or some shops they even accept portugese and dutch. So if you only speak one language and maybe a few other ones, you never get much problems.
> I think English is one of the best languages (in terms of variety of words)
/me is a perfectionist and *loves* it. ;)
Totally not! My bet goes for german. But whatever, they are all not the optimum.
I pretty much like the approach we take in ma home country luxemburg:
There is a language calles "luxemburgish", but it only has 6000 words. So we take verbs from french, german amd sometimes english, and simply exchange the ending by an ending that sounds luxemburgish. So In fact we have the possibility to speak richer than anybody else.
Because "Sky" "Ciel" and "Himmel" are *not* exactly the same! Theyaare transporting other associations beside one of their meanings.
So we choose the one that gets our though in the best way.
> French is even easier,
i'm sorry, but i had french from 3rd grade school class, german from 1st and enlish from 5th, and i can tell you that with its 13 different times, tons of exceptions and horrible numbering system (at least in france itself where they say - literally translated - four-twenty-ten-nine for 99), french is a pretty complicated language.
English is the easyest of the 3 i learned. But they don't even come close the the cleanness of japanese or turkish.
Japanese has nearly no exceptions and turkish even has only ONE verb with an exception. Additionally - if i remember it correctly - they use endings to modify the context where we use pronouns, wich is like a main command, the verb, and several paramters, the modifiers.
By the way: Are there any sites out there containing references for human languages in the same layout as programmign languages. I found the nearly standardized structure of references for programming languages to enable me to learn them extremely quick. If natural language references would be structured the same way, (maybe even in BNF) then i could learn all relevant languages in some months. (of course i still had to train the "standard library" of verbs, but this is okay because i can learn them on-the-fly)
http://www.datahand.com/products/proii.htm
I think everything else is just half-baked, still narrow arm positioning, carpal-tunnel- or shoulder-tendon-killing, unergonomic non-innovation.
And still this thing (in the chair mounted version) is just the most basic thing i would accept as an innovation. More sophisicated systems should read the signals straight from nerve ends (preferably where the nerves are directly below the skin, so you don't have to change your body) or read the changes of the electromagnetic field in our brain (some kind of "telepatic" amplifier with an a/d-converter and a normal usb-connection, using a neuronal network for mattern matching on the driver layer)
Am i the only one who wonders why this isn't avaliabe yet, because all this is already possible for years...?
BTW: If anyone has venture capital: I'm willing to make it reality ASAP!
> Incorrect. When you start counting something, you first initialize whatever variable you are using to 0, to indicate that you have this far counted 0 CDs; before that it is in undefined state, which may or may not be 0/NULL. When you point your finger to the first CD, you increment the variable to 1, then to 2, etc.
;) But i saw NULL as a *non-initialized* state of the variable
;)
I a way, this was what i meant.
Something like
class Something { public static int x; }
int y = Something.x;
in java should set y to NULL because y is NULL.
>Really ? From stddef.h:
> #define NULL 0
Of course my code above is an abstraction because in fact a place in memory always has a certain value stored inside. Maybe we see things different because i work mostly with languages where variable states NULL, UNDEFINED, NEGATIVE_INFINITE, POSITIVE_INFINITE are pretty normal even when they do not exist in memory and are defined trough special values or whatever.
I like this level of abstraction pretty much because it makes code cleaner (from my pov of course).
So i see NULL as a result of a variable reading output of a uninitialized variable and 0 as a value in an initialized variable.
> Please do not confuse position in array with amount of elements in it.
Did I?
There is a slight but *very* relevant difference between your "When you point your finger _to_ the first CD" and "Then you point your finger _to the top_ of the stack [...] Then you move it _one cd_ down".
That is: In my "model" you never point _to_ a cd, but on the position _between_ two cds. This is because when you also can point your finger to 0.5, 0.3 or 0.9 cds (some of your _to_s) then 1.0 cds is clearly at the bottom of the first cd box and at the top of the secons.
So for the 0 your finger is on the top of the first cd.
So you count the way that when your finger passes 1.0 you can say "1 cd".
But whatever... i lost the plot...
By the way: I like to think in http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hyperreal_numbers
LOL! Finally someone else who gets it! That's why i love slashdot! Inside jokes ROCK! Even more when nobody here thinks that they're inside, but that the rest of the world just is stupid. (wich is pretty much the truth. ;)
> No, they're the same thing.
They're NOT! The point is that 0 is actually a value while NULL is UNDEFINED/NOTHING7N(OT)I(N)L(IST). So if you count a stack of cds you have NULL to start with because you haven't started to count. Then you point your finger to the top of the stack saying "0" which is you *first* POSITION where you can point your finger. Then you move it one cd down and say "1" which is the *second* position.
Of course you can forget those extra states of your "variable" most of the time. But when they are relevant and you forget them you get a mess.
I am no expert in the number theory, but i think the best way is to think "floating point". Then if your finger just started to move down from 0 you get 0.1, then 0.2 and so on. and there is always a value in between two other values, no matter how exact you define them.
So you can even say that 0 is the first element of all values if you don't have a NULL or anythign similar.
I guess the whole thing comes from the variabel pointers. As we all know NULL there means that it does not point anywhere. But when it points somewhere and that value is 0 then it is defined and on its first possible state in the list of possible states.
So much for it... maybe i reapeated a bit too much but better too clear than too blurred.
> Now they are working on much higher yeild FUSION bombs.
;)
WORKING? I read about hydrogen (H-)bombs in the late 80s. Here some quick facts: They...
- have 3600 times the power of the hiroshima bomb
- use a nuclear bomb as a fuse (!!!) because nothign else can (or could back then) create so high tempratures that teh reaction can start (some million degrees)
- use heavy (somewhat radioactive) water as explosive, working in a similar way as the sun by making helium out of hydrogen. (which is easyer with heavy water because it already has the needed neutrons i guess...)
- the usa is not the only country that owns them, but it owns (as usual) the most of them.
And: YES, you can kill a small continent with them.
P.S.: Wait for the first rusty ones to explode in russia in the next 10-20 years...
The only reason they don't build nuclear bombs anymore is that they do have so much of them that you could easily destroy the whole planet by breaking it in several parts or at least destroying the whole crust and causing a nuclear winter.
Watch wor them starting again as soon as we find an alien lifeform on some other planet.
By the way: Recently i saw some "oh, the us army/navy/whatever is sooo cool! they rule the world"-tv-reportage, where they said that ONE ship of usa's biggest submarine class has the nuclear power of 3600 hiroshima nuclear bombs!
3600!!! this is enough to destroy a whole continent with every city on it!!
Now guess how many of those ships exist, and what else exists.
If this is not the most criminal thing of every lifeform in this solar system, then i don't know...
Oh wait... the most criminal thing is that poeple actually accept it (proven by the fact that it still exists and nearly nothing changes).
> Unfortunately, we need them to recieve radation because if they DON'T, we can't communicate with them.
Sure we can. Put a long *cable* on it, shield the cable too, and ready you are! There is one more plus with this: You can communicate with it even when the robot is inside walls that sheld radiation too.
Another solution would be to only allow a certain frequency range. But this would be harder to do. And because ther is a simple solution avaliable, why get in trouble?