Heck, one of the Soviet rovers even drove around for a few months!!!
"Lunokhod 2 operated for about 4 months, covered 37 km (23 miles) of terrain, including hilly upland areas and rilles, and sent back 86 panoramic images and over 80,000 TV pictures."
- http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lunokhod_2
>There are repeated bitstreams in everything. a 64bit string has a finite number of patterns. I don't know how small >they chunk it up, but it's beliveable.
This is the naive foolishness that leads people into believing ridiculous compression claims, buying into them again and again. This sort of "just magically see the repeats" nonsense has been debunked a trillion times, so I'm not going to point it out.
I've actually seen either Diligent's or someone-else's similar presentation before, while looking for Virtual Tape Libraries. (maybe Avamar? http://www.avamar.com/products4.asp )
I was actually quite impressed with the product. I think they use huge hash index tables to do the block comparisons quickly. Avamar's site mentions they use 12k chunks. It was just damn expensive.
In any case, the 25x number I'm sure is an average they've found. Keep in mind this is for backups. So, they are saying if you backup 1000 PCs with Windows, 98% of the OS never changes from machine-to-machine, and you only have to backup those blocks once.
If you are interested in learning techniques on how to appreciate the moment, here's a book I read once that is still in print:
The Miracle of Mindfulness by Thich Nhat Hanh
He is a famous Zen master, who teaches the practical aspects of Buddhism and meditation but doesn't preach about it. The book focuses on everyday things and how to get the most out of them, such as: washing the dishes, eating, etc. I wish I had it in front of me to quote, but it's packed away somewhere because I recently moved.
But irreducibly complex structures are not a theory, they are evidence, i.e. "facts" (or at least they would be if they in fact existed).
Ok. I never said the structures were theories. They are facts on which the theory of ID was based. (all of which were micro-biological, if I remember right) [read it 8+ years ago]
This shows such a fundamental misunderstanding of science I'm sure I can't correct it here. Let's just suffice to say that if you postulate any kind of intelligent designer you are NOT "involving" either modern genetics or natural selection--you are misinterpretting and bastardizing them for your own ends.
Um, I think you mistake me with an idiot. Remember, Behe is a microbiologist and a professor, and his whole book is in that context. His argument is that Darwin's basic observations were correct, he just didn't have all the low-level facts. Today (with modern biology) we do have the ability to break cells down to the atomic level. Which, is where some structures become impossible to steadily evolve and not be removed by natural selection.
eg.: Why the heck would a bacteria have a flagellum that is missing the few cells to make it move? It would be a waste of tissue and be discarded by natural selection. And why would it, inversely, have spinning cells unless there was a flagellum to spin?
Either Newton or Einstein is right about gravity; it can't be both and it can't be piecemeal.
Of course they can....oh wait...I get it...that's why you can't comprehend my argument. My argument is evolution and intelligent design can both be true.
Evolution and intelligent design are NOT mutually exclusive.
You can yell all you want, but you obviously don't understand what you're shouting about.
I wasn't yelling. Was highlighting my main point.
You mistake everyone who believes in ID to be a fundamentialist fool. I have degrees in both science and world religion from a major engineering school. I know that the first chapter of Genesis conflicts with the second. I know it was writen by at least 4 sets of people and can explain why, in detail. However, I find Behe's arguments scientifically convincing, and until he is proved wrong scientifically, I agree with them.
No, what ID says is that species we see today were designed into their current shape by an intelligent force. This is functionally the same message as Genesis, and about as far from modern theories of genetics and natural selection as you can get. The only thing ID has in common with real biological science is one slice of the data set--current life. ID proponents don't even recognize the validity of the fossil record.
This is, of course, incorrect.:)
I'm tired of people arguing that ID is the same as creationism. It's not.
In the book Darwin's Black Box which started much of the current debate over ID, Michael Behe, a molecular biologist, agrees with many of Darwin's evolution threads, including natural selection, except for one. Behe sees various mechanical and biological systems as irreducibly complex.
Evolution and intelligent design are NOT mutually exclusive.
ID only says that some systems, such as blood cloting, cannot evolve in small steps with modern understanding and must have been evolved in a unexplainable "leap" to it's current state.
Behe says there must be some intelligence behind how these systems came to be. (He actually didn't discuss God. It could have easily been the Architect in the Matrix. Or highly improbable chance.)
True ID involves modern genetics, natural selection, and yes, fossils. It even allows evolution of modern humans over the ages. There are only a few systems affected by this irreducible complexity. Other than that, it has no issues or differences with evolution and modern science.
It has nothing to do with creationism or fundamentialism, and it frustrates me that so much of the current brewhaha breaks the argument into "creationism vs. evolution" and lumps ID in with the 1st. Even the fundamentialists now seem to think it's something they created to slip creationism by. When, if anyone actually read the source, they would see that goes against what is presented in the exclusive modern scientific argument.
I'm glad the Vatican came down on the side of evolution. And it's interesting that in the article, ID is only mentioned as an editorial and not actually mentioned by the cardinal.
Ahh, I did something similar for my Cognitive Science senior project almost 6 years ago now.
I used something I called Intention-Based Reasoning to build a goal stack to build complex patterns using simple declaritive logic trees focused on overcoming failures, interestingly.
Old hat nowadays, I'm guessing.
I modified TinyMudd so I could add AI modules for NPCs.
Unfortunately, I waited to the last week of the year to start, of course.:) By the end of a week, I had a NPC that realized when it was hungry, could find food and get through unlocked doors by finding keys. It didn't have any location memory, so it took a while to get through a door when the key was in a different room, but it was pretty cool for a week's worth of work.
I did write plans for an improved engine and still come up with ideas and write them down. But I haven't implemented anything since that week. Makes me wonder what it could have done with more time. Now I'm stuck in the real world cycle as a Unix admin and don't want touch computers at night.
Damn laziness, maybe I should have went to grad school....
Good luck, working with text adventures is a great way to build intelligence models into an already existing world you don't have to waste your time programming from scratch. It's a good testbed for AIs that could be then moved to real world tasks.
I'm glad someone else is going down this path. I'd like to get back into AI someday. Maybe when I'm laid off.:)
- The documentation doesn't tell you this, but if you choose to have quick backups,then you get very slow restores.
Um, I just flipped through the manual for about 15 seconds and found at least one example:
"However, when you use multiplexing, expected reduced performance on restores...."
- Our restore rate was about 1 megabyte per second.
That sounds like a network or hardware or architecture bottleneck. Software has nothing to do with the tape speed writing to the disk you're restoring to.
- Veritas would crash after restoring only a few gigabytes, requiring us to restart
where we left off, only for it to crash again after a few gigabytes. This resulted in a
few gaps in the restore.
Never saw that. Just restored a 100Gig Filesystem last week.
- Veritas uses some proprietary format on tape, making it impossible for us to get at the data some other way so that we could write scripts to check what was restored and what was not.
They use GNU tar, I think. You're only problem is finding which file number on the tape your data is. (You might not be able to restore a multiplexed image by hand) I've recently restored some files on a tape with "tar" I didn't want to import from another backup server.
- Veritas support is prohibitively expensive.
Well, they are.:) But sometimes you get what you pay for.
- We were down for a week because of this horrible software.
"Tis a poor workman who blames his tools."
That's not to say Netbackup is perfect, it's not. But, you're being kind of unfair blaming a product. Backup speeds are always a tradeoff in respect to restores.
I'll assume there is some way to update the no-fly zones for the plane. (Important buildings of the week)
If you look at it from the inverse, what if everything was defined as a "Soft Wall" except for one path? If someone were able to inject their own list of soft walls, they could "channel" the plane to a target of their choice. They might not even need to be on the plane.
It's just another tool that can be used improperly in the wrong hands.
We Americans use the name "America" interchangably: for either the 2 continents (North and South); or for a shorter way of saying "United States of America." Which is much too long to use in everyday speech. It's not that we consider ourselves the only important people in the hemisphere, it's just a short form of USofA.
So, when we say "Columbus discovered America," we mean he discovered all the American continents collectively. (a.k.a. this hemisphere)
Did Columbus even reach Florida? I thought he just made a few trips to the Caribbean islands anyway, and maybe Venezuela...
Slashdot Mirror
Even that is pre-dated by Fonthill and the Mercer Museum. Built around 1910.
Some of the furniture inside is even poured into place:
"It is an early example of poured-in-place concrete and features 42 rooms, 200 windows, 18 fireplaces and 10 bathrooms."
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fonthill_(house)
"Lunokhod 2 operated for about 4 months, covered 37 km (23 miles) of terrain, including hilly upland areas and rilles, and sent back 86 panoramic images and over 80,000 TV pictures."
- http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lunokhod_2
This is the naive foolishness that leads people into believing ridiculous compression claims, buying into them again and again. This sort of "just magically see the repeats" nonsense has been debunked a trillion times, so I'm not going to point it out.
I've actually seen either Diligent's or someone-else's similar presentation before, while looking for Virtual Tape Libraries. (maybe Avamar? http://www.avamar.com/products4.asp )
I was actually quite impressed with the product. I think they use huge hash index tables to do the block comparisons quickly. Avamar's site mentions they use 12k chunks. It was just damn expensive.
In any case, the 25x number I'm sure is an average they've found. Keep in mind this is for backups. So, they are saying if you backup 1000 PCs with Windows, 98% of the OS never changes from machine-to-machine, and you only have to backup those blocks once.
The Miracle of Mindfulness by Thich Nhat Hanh
He is a famous Zen master, who teaches the practical aspects of Buddhism and meditation but doesn't preach about it. The book focuses on everyday things and how to get the most out of them, such as: washing the dishes, eating, etc. I wish I had it in front of me to quote, but it's packed away somewhere because I recently moved.
eg.: Why the heck would a bacteria have a flagellum that is missing the few cells to make it move? It would be a waste of tissue and be discarded by natural selection. And why would it, inversely, have spinning cells unless there was a flagellum to spin?
Of course they can....oh wait...I get it...that's why you can't comprehend my argument. My argument is evolution and intelligent design can both be true. I wasn't yelling. Was highlighting my main point.You mistake everyone who believes in ID to be a fundamentialist fool. I have degrees in both science and world religion from a major engineering school. I know that the first chapter of Genesis conflicts with the second. I know it was writen by at least 4 sets of people and can explain why, in detail. However, I find Behe's arguments scientifically convincing, and until he is proved wrong scientifically, I agree with them.
I'm tired of people arguing that ID is the same as creationism. It's not. In the book Darwin's Black Box which started much of the current debate over ID, Michael Behe, a molecular biologist, agrees with many of Darwin's evolution threads, including natural selection, except for one. Behe sees various mechanical and biological systems as irreducibly complex.
Evolution and intelligent design are NOT mutually exclusive.
ID only says that some systems, such as blood cloting, cannot evolve in small steps with modern understanding and must have been evolved in a unexplainable "leap" to it's current state.
Behe says there must be some intelligence behind how these systems came to be. (He actually didn't discuss God. It could have easily been the Architect in the Matrix. Or highly improbable chance.)
True ID involves modern genetics, natural selection, and yes, fossils. It even allows evolution of modern humans over the ages. There are only a few systems affected by this irreducible complexity. Other than that, it has no issues or differences with evolution and modern science.
It has nothing to do with creationism or fundamentialism, and it frustrates me that so much of the current brewhaha breaks the argument into "creationism vs. evolution" and lumps ID in with the 1st. Even the fundamentialists now seem to think it's something they created to slip creationism by. When, if anyone actually read the source, they would see that goes against what is presented in the exclusive modern scientific argument.
I'm glad the Vatican came down on the side of evolution. And it's interesting that in the article, ID is only mentioned as an editorial and not actually mentioned by the cardinal.
It comes down to justification.
Murder is causing an unjustified death.
However outlawing murder still allows for killing people:
- in war
- as punishment
- etc...
I modified TinyMudd so I could add AI modules for NPCs.
Unfortunately, I waited to the last week of the year to start, of course. :) By the end of a week, I had a NPC that realized when it was hungry, could find food and get through unlocked doors by finding keys. It didn't have any location memory, so it took a while to get through a door when the key was in a different room, but it was pretty cool for a week's worth of work.
I did write plans for an improved engine and still come up with ideas and write them down. But I haven't implemented anything since that week. Makes me wonder what it could have done with more time. Now I'm stuck in the real world cycle as a Unix admin and don't want touch computers at night.
Damn laziness, maybe I should have went to grad school....
Good luck, working with text adventures is a great way to build intelligence models into an already existing world you don't have to waste your time programming from scratch. It's a good testbed for AIs that could be then moved to real world tasks.
I'm glad someone else is going down this path. I'd like to get back into AI someday. Maybe when I'm laid off. :)
-Mike
- The documentation doesn't tell you this, but if you choose to have quick backups,then you get very slow restores.
Um, I just flipped through the manual for about 15 seconds and found at least one example: "However, when you use multiplexing, expected reduced performance on restores...."
- Our restore rate was about 1 megabyte per second.
That sounds like a network or hardware or architecture bottleneck. Software has nothing to do with the tape speed writing to the disk you're restoring to.
- Veritas would crash after restoring only a few gigabytes, requiring us to restart where we left off, only for it to crash again after a few gigabytes. This resulted in a few gaps in the restore.
Never saw that. Just restored a 100Gig Filesystem last week.
- Veritas uses some proprietary format on tape, making it impossible for us to get at the data some other way so that we could write scripts to check what was restored and what was not.
They use GNU tar, I think. You're only problem is finding which file number on the tape your data is. (You might not be able to restore a multiplexed image by hand) I've recently restored some files on a tape with "tar" I didn't want to import from another backup server.
- Veritas support is prohibitively expensive.
Well, they are. :) But sometimes you get what you pay for.
- We were down for a week because of this horrible software.
"Tis a poor workman who blames his tools."
That's not to say Netbackup is perfect, it's not. But, you're being kind of unfair blaming a product. Backup speeds are always a tradeoff in respect to restores.
I'll assume there is some way to update the no-fly zones for the plane. (Important buildings of the week)
If you look at it from the inverse, what if everything was defined as a "Soft Wall" except for one path? If someone were able to inject their own list of soft walls, they could "channel" the plane to a target of their choice. They might not even need to be on the plane.
It's just another tool that can be used improperly in the wrong hands.
We Americans use the name "America" interchangably: for either the 2 continents (North and South); or for a shorter way of saying "United States of America." Which is much too long to use in everyday speech. It's not that we consider ourselves the only important people in the hemisphere, it's just a short form of USofA.
So, when we say "Columbus discovered America," we mean he discovered all the American continents collectively. (a.k.a. this hemisphere)
Did Columbus even reach Florida? I thought he just made a few trips to the Caribbean islands anyway, and maybe Venezuela...