AFAIK this is also done for power lines. It's just that the dimensions are that large that you don't immediatly see it. If you follow a power line, then sometimes you'll see an exchange of the wires.
However the frequency of electricity is 50 or 60 Hz (depending on the part of the world you live in), and therefore the wavelength of the emitted radiation is 50 to 60 kilometers, so the eventual exchange of wires every now and then suffices here. Broadband connections will need much higher frequencies, and therefore the radiation will have much lower wavelength. The "long range twisting" of the power lines is surely not enough for that.
How un-geeky. The glasses should change their tone automatically according to present need using some light sensors, controlled by electronics, with the possibility to customize the darkness-tone curve.
But digital bytes never get old or need to be routinely checked by some paid worker.
Of course digital bytes get old. They are structures in physical media and as such will generally survive only a certain time.
But the process usually called "bit rot" is not this physical process, but the process of digital data getting "unusable" due to a changing environment. This includes not only files in obsolete formats, executables for obsolete processors or needing obsolete and no longer available libraries, or programs which don't compile with current versions of a compiler, but also anti-virus software with virus signature collections which are outdated enough to not any more fulfil their role of sufficiently securing the computer.
Yes, only silly people believe in the internet. After all, there's no indication that the internet exists. I never connect to the internet. I connect to a provider (which calls himself internet provider, but then, that's certainly just a buzzword) through my phone line through an electronic device named modem, and that provider just allows me to exchange data with other computers (like web servers). I know that the data is passed through things like routers, firewalls etc, which are also just computers. Those are connected with old-fashioned wires just as a telephone, or with just as old fashioned electromagnetic waves (like TV), also maybe through opical fibres, but I still cannot see an internet. So it's quite obvious that all this internet stuff is just made up, because whereever I look, I just find computers, electronic devices, cables, antennas and the like, but in the whole process there's obviously no internet involved. Therefore it's proven: The internet is a myth!
And tomorrow we prove that image manipulation software cannot manipulate images.
It helped me find a girlfriend! Thank you Google Desktop Search!
Which means you already had the girlfriend on your desktop. Finding someone sitting on the top of your desk doesn't look like a difficult task to me:-)
Isn't this the way the terrorist organisation works? The actual attackers totally lose (they lose even their life), and their masters profit from it. The experiment shows that tit for tat isn't a good strategy against this.
But if it were illegal to distribute binaries... how would you get the compiler to compile your source code with? Well, of course as source, which you would compile... how?
Perhaps if you didn't rely on a software patent as your primary source of income, you would be more critical of them.
Of course if your income depends on something, you'll be automatically biased. But the fact that you rely on it doesn't mean you should.
To make an extreme example: Say, in some country there was passed a law. This law states that you can get a killer license (which are sold in a limited amount by the state), and after aquiring that license, you are allowed to kill about everyone you like (with some exceptions for government members and similar). Some people bought those licenses and now legally make a living as professional killer. Of course there are people against this law, but the killers just say: "If your income depended on killing other people, you wouldn't be so critical about it." Now, would this killer convince you?
Note that I don't equate software patents with killing people (while pharmaceutic patents indeed can cause the death of people in some cases), but this is just to demonstrate that the fact that you rely on it as primary source of income doesn't tell anything about if it is right or wrong to have it.
No, because despite having the source, you may not just use it due to the patent (after all you wouldn't even be allowed to use it if you had written it yourself). Therefore for the duration of the patent, it eliminates the benefit of open source. Of course after the end of the patent period it will recover the OSS advantages - unless at that time it's obsolete anyway.
I'm pretty sure the atoms have to be in vacuum (except for the atoms and the laser beam, of course). Even an inert gas would interact with the cesium atoms (not through chemical reactions, but by conventional mechanical collision and van-der-Waals interaction), and every interaction causes decoherence, that is, destruction of the quantum superposition.
Yes, cats are made of atoms, but they are macroscopic, and therefore it's practically impossible to completely isolate it from the surrounding (and BTW, if you would manage that, you'd definitely not get a half-dead cat, but a full-dead one). The interaction with the environment destroys the quantum superposition (this is called decoherence and is one of the main problems in building a quantum computer even on the atomic scale),
Re:I code C# for a living
on
Java 1.5 vs C#
·
· Score: 1
I'm all for tuple support. All I wanted to say it's not entirely an either-or, because there's a semantic difference.
Well, with 5 Caesium atoms, you'll not get much of an explosion. Even with 10^13 caesium atoms (which would be about a quantum-terabyte) the explosion would probably not be noticable at all. Also, in that amount the toxicity is probably negligible either.
No, the O(sqrt(N)) is for the database search problem. Shor's algorithm is O((log N)^3) if N denotes the number to factorize. So doubling the number of bits means you just have to run the algorithm 8 times as long.
Except that you can't control which operating system comes up: That will be completely random. If you are unlucky, you'll get the desired operating system only after a lot of boot cycles.
So for quantum computers, an USV is much more important than for classical computers. With a classical computer, you may lose your data on power outage. With a quantum computer, you lose your computer on power outage.
Slashdot Mirror
The (average) acceleration is DeltaV/DeltaT. You don't want to tell us that always DeltaT=1, do you?
Well, maybe they now can be used for a trip to Saturn?
Actually, how far would one get with this in a reasonable time (while still being able to come back, of course)?
I didn't RTFA because it's already slashdotted.
AFAIK this is also done for power lines. It's just that the dimensions are that large that you don't immediatly see it. If you follow a power line, then sometimes you'll see an exchange of the wires.
However the frequency of electricity is 50 or 60 Hz (depending on the part of the world you live in), and therefore the wavelength of the emitted radiation is 50 to 60 kilometers, so the eventual exchange of wires every now and then suffices here. Broadband connections will need much higher frequencies, and therefore the radiation will have much lower wavelength. The "long range twisting" of the power lines is surely not enough for that.
How un-geeky. The glasses should change their tone automatically according to present need using some light sensors, controlled by electronics, with the possibility to customize the darkness-tone curve.
The Apache is there to protect the key: If anyone who isn't allowed to tries to get the key, he'll be shot down with arrows, then scalped.
Of course digital bytes get old. They are structures in physical media and as such will generally survive only a certain time.
But the process usually called "bit rot" is not this physical process, but the process of digital data getting "unusable" due to a changing environment. This includes not only files in obsolete formats, executables for obsolete processors or needing obsolete and no longer available libraries, or programs which don't compile with current versions of a compiler, but also anti-virus software with virus signature collections which are outdated enough to not any more fulfil their role of sufficiently securing the computer.
Yes, only silly people believe in the internet. After all, there's no indication that the internet exists. I never connect to the internet. I connect to a provider (which calls himself internet provider, but then, that's certainly just a buzzword) through my phone line through an electronic device named modem, and that provider just allows me to exchange data with other computers (like web servers). I know that the data is passed through things like routers, firewalls etc, which are also just computers. Those are connected with old-fashioned wires just as a telephone, or with just as old fashioned electromagnetic waves (like TV), also maybe through opical fibres, but I still cannot see an internet. So it's quite obvious that all this internet stuff is just made up, because whereever I look, I just find computers, electronic devices, cables, antennas and the like, but in the whole process there's obviously no internet involved. Therefore it's proven: The internet is a myth!
And tomorrow we prove that image manipulation software cannot manipulate images.
Which means you already had the girlfriend on your desktop. Finding someone sitting on the top of your desk doesn't look like a difficult task to me
Isn't this the way the terrorist organisation works? The actual attackers totally lose (they lose even their life), and their masters profit from it. The experiment shows that tit for tat isn't a good strategy against this.
But if it were illegal to distribute binaries ... how would you get the compiler to compile your source code with? Well, of course as source, which you would compile ... how?
Perhaps if you didn't rely on a software patent as your primary source of income, you would be more critical of them.
Of course if your income depends on something, you'll be automatically biased. But the fact that you rely on it doesn't mean you should.
To make an extreme example: Say, in some country there was passed a law. This law states that you can get a killer license (which are sold in a limited amount by the state), and after aquiring that license, you are allowed to kill about everyone you like (with some exceptions for government members and similar). Some people bought those licenses and now legally make a living as professional killer. Of course there are people against this law, but the killers just say: "If your income depended on killing other people, you wouldn't be so critical about it." Now, would this killer convince you?
Note that I don't equate software patents with killing people (while pharmaceutic patents indeed can cause the death of people in some cases), but this is just to demonstrate that the fact that you rely on it as primary source of income doesn't tell anything about if it is right or wrong to have it.
No, because despite having the source, you may not just use it due to the patent (after all you wouldn't even be allowed to use it if you had written it yourself). Therefore for the duration of the patent, it eliminates the benefit of open source. Of course after the end of the patent period it will recover the OSS advantages - unless at that time it's obsolete anyway.
Except that if it means "unknown" it should never behave as TRUE of FALSE, not in ANDs and not in ORs.
x and unknown is
* false, if x is false
* unknown (not true) otherwise
x or unknown is
* true, if x is true
* unknown (not false) otherwise
So if NULL behaves like TRUE with AND and like FALSE in OR, then it's inherently broken.
I'm pretty sure the atoms have to be in vacuum (except for the atoms and the laser beam, of course). Even an inert gas would interact with the cesium atoms (not through chemical reactions, but by conventional mechanical collision and van-der-Waals interaction), and every interaction causes decoherence, that is, destruction of the quantum superposition.
Yes, cats are made of atoms, but they are macroscopic, and therefore it's practically impossible to completely isolate it from the surrounding (and BTW, if you would manage that, you'd definitely not get a half-dead cat, but a full-dead one). The interaction with the environment destroys the quantum superposition (this is called decoherence and is one of the main problems in building a quantum computer even on the atomic scale),
I'm all for tuple support. All I wanted to say it's not entirely an either-or, because there's a semantic difference.
3 states? Where did you get that?
Actually a qubit can have infinitely many states, but only two of them can be read out reliably.
Well, with 5 Caesium atoms, you'll not get much of an explosion. Even with 10^13 caesium atoms (which would be about a quantum-terabyte) the explosion would probably not be noticable at all. Also, in that amount the toxicity is probably negligible either.
No, the O(sqrt(N)) is for the database search problem. Shor's algorithm is O((log N)^3) if N denotes the number to factorize. So doubling the number of bits means you just have to run the algorithm 8 times as long.
More than 100 posts, and still not:
Imagine a Beowulf cluster of those!
Except that you can't control which operating system comes up: That will be completely random. If you are unlucky, you'll get the desired operating system only after a lot of boot cycles.
Power of two, I guess?
And there is a world market for about five quantum computers.
So for quantum computers, an USV is much more important than for classical computers. With a classical computer, you may lose your data on power outage. With a quantum computer, you lose your computer on power outage.
Yes and no