The most important thing to remember that all these things are extremely personal -- there are so many factors in play, that it hardly makes much sence to expect any guidelines to work for everyone.
When thinking about the way you sit, it is also very important to think of your entire posture. For instance, what you do with your shoulders can be very important in how your wrists feel. In the case of the OP I could imagine that, when using a laptop, he relaxes his shoulders better, which makes for an entirely more relaxed posture.
Still, when comparing the way you use the laptop and ergonomical keyboards, try to find any difference in how you sit -- even if it seems to have no relation with your wrists. It might be a crucial difference for you personally.
If you focus your content on a specific subject (in this case 20th century North American culture and history), you can't call your site 'the Internet Moving Image Archive'. This implies that it is a more complete, and broader oriented collection.
Therefore, I think their name is misleading, and should be changed.
Of course, he can simply take it off his project website.
No sure about that... The GPL forces you to distribute the source-code. If you remove everything from your website, someone who downloaded a binary from it the day before still has a right to obtain the source from you.
Or is this a misinterpretation?
Jan
Re:Chess is inherently solvable
on
Solving Chess?
·
· Score: 1
Your claim is that the chess-game tree is not finite. I think that it is, and here's my reasoning:
There are certain rules in the game that ensure that after a fixed number of moves, something has to be substantially differrent. Since there are only finitelly many states (configurations of the chessboard), there are only finitelly many substantially different states.
If you have the entire tree, you cansolve the game.
Jan
Chess is inherently solvable
on
Solving Chess?
·
· Score: 1
Because it is finite.
You can use very standard game-theoretic strategies to 'solve' the game of chess, by simply assigning a value to all the nodes of the game-tree (valid states of the game), beginning at the end-states and working your way up. The value of a node decides which player (if any) has a winning strategy. So, all you need to know to play a 'perfect' game of chess, is the entire game tree.
This is obviously not possible, but all contemporary chess-playing programs are an approximation of this -- using statistical data, you can predict the value of a node (using both simple rules such as 'a situation where you still have your Queen is usually better than a situation where you don't', and more complex rules such as 'a situation where the chance that in 10 moves you will lose your Queen is greater, is usually not good'). So instead of knowing the value of a node we predict it using simple statistics. This will obviously never result in a program that really 'solves' chess, but will result in programs that are much better than 'mere' humans...
Slashdot Mirror
Yeah, but who decides what the major applications are?
There is only one: minesweep.
jdv
When thinking about the way you sit, it is also very important to think of your entire posture. For instance, what you do with your shoulders can be very important in how your wrists feel. In the case of the OP I could imagine that, when using a laptop, he relaxes his shoulders better, which makes for an entirely more relaxed posture.
Still, when comparing the way you use the laptop and ergonomical keyboards, try to find any difference in how you sit -- even if it seems to have no relation with your wrists. It might be a crucial difference for you personally.
jdv
Err... that would be two words missing....
jdv
If you focus your content on a specific subject (in this case 20th century North American culture and history), you can't call your site 'the Internet Moving Image Archive'. This implies that it is a more complete, and broader oriented collection.
Therefore, I think their name is misleading, and should be changed.
jdv
Of course, he can simply take it off his project website.
No sure about that... The GPL forces you to distribute the source-code. If you remove everything from your website, someone who downloaded a binary from it the day before still has a right to obtain the source from you.
Or is this a misinterpretation?
Jan
Your claim is that the chess-game tree is not finite. I think that it is, and here's my reasoning:
There are certain rules in the game that ensure that after a fixed number of moves, something has to be substantially differrent. Since there are only finitelly many states (configurations of the chessboard), there are only finitelly many substantially different states.
If you have the entire tree, you cansolve the game.
Jan
Because it is finite.
You can use very standard game-theoretic strategies to 'solve' the game of chess, by simply assigning a value to all the nodes of the game-tree (valid states of the game), beginning at the end-states and working your way up. The value of a node decides which player (if any) has a winning strategy. So, all you need to know to play a 'perfect' game of chess, is the entire game tree.
This is obviously not possible, but all contemporary chess-playing programs are an approximation of this -- using statistical data, you can predict the value of a node (using both simple rules such as 'a situation where you still have your Queen is usually better than a situation where you don't', and more complex rules such as 'a situation where the chance that in 10 moves you will lose your Queen is greater, is usually not good'). So instead of knowing the value of a node we predict it using simple statistics. This will obviously never result in a program that really 'solves' chess, but will result in programs that are much better than 'mere' humans...
Jan