Repairing a modern TV is pretty much impossible for a "PROFESSIONAL OF YOUR CHOICE." It's certainly easier for someone who knows how to work a computer and a screw driver to pop open an iPhone, replace the battery then jailbreak it and do whatever he/she wants.
Oh? Do you look at screens while you're talking to yourself while driving? And use your hand as well? Perhaps you stare at yourself in the rear view mirror while using one of your hands for, um, something else. Still sounds dangerous to me.
I'll also dispute the "asynchronous" bit. Most people I know who text are completely useless while sending a text, they're concentrating so hard on where to put their fingers, what they're going to say, spelling, whatever. Rarely do they stop in the middle because they'd lose their place. These same people manage to put their conversations on hold in order to write a text.
Can you elaborate on how you can text safely in a moving vehicle that you are driving?
I agree with your argument about other types of distraction (such as talking on the phone) but it's not a matter of correlation vs. causation. Being distracted causes your risk of being in an accident to increase. That causal link has been shown by experiments, not correlation only studies. You're correct, there are situations, and drivers, in which you're at a low risk of collision anyway and your total risk including distractions remains acceptable. Poor judgement causes you to be distracted in a bad situation, which causes you to be in an accident. The direct cause is still the distraction.
I agree, it would be best to attack the problem at the ultimate cause, not the proximate one, but unless you recall everyone's drivers license and make them take proper training and a real test, discouraging the worst forms of distraction are the only real workable solution.
I don't know the details, nor do I know if it's the same now as it was then, but she was excommunicated. Not threatened. Besides, bishop isn't really that high up. Your local priest could drop off the request at his office in person on his lunch break.
Anyway, it looks like you're wrong. Wikipedia says a latae sententiae excommunication is automatic if you break certain rules. Currently you're automatically excommunicated if you get an abortion or swipe one of the holy crackers. Actually, it looks like you're probably latae sententiae excommunicated if you just drive someone else to the abortion clinic.
The Catholic church has a long history of discouraging condom use, both official and actual. I know several catholic teachers who are told by their school and church administrations that they must not tell students to use condoms. They all do, quietly, but that doesn't excuse the official policy.
Again, nobody said people are simple or stupid. You seem awfully defensive, to the point of imagining insults. Crisis of faith?
Yeah right. When exactly in history do you think the young and self-righteous (or old and cynical for that matter) of any reasonably sizeable society have actually routinely abstained from sex?
Where's the ignorant crap? He said some religions are against condom use. You mentioned one: Catholicism.
True, extramarital sex is also frowned upon by Catholicism, but I didn't see anything about that at all in his post. What happens in the real world is that it's awfully easy to be a "good Catholic" by not wearing a condom, but really hard to do it by not having sex. Hey, might as well not piss off God ALL the way, right? Again, in the real world the anti-condom stance means that kids may not be taught how to use condoms properly, not taught how important it is to use one if you're going to have sex, or a not-so-good Catholic might just not have them around.
There's a huge evolutionary advantage to being able to consider possible consequences and their likelihood before you take an action. If there's some advantage to not causing harm then there's an advantage to being able to judge whether your action is likely to cause harm, without having to try it out and see.
True, and occasionally people actually do that. OOs biggest feature though, is that it forces you to organize your code. You have to think about partitioning functional bits off into different objects and you have to think about the interfaces for those objects. It forces you to design modular code with defined ways for different modules to interact. It's nothing you can't do in a non OO language, but OO forces you to do it.
No, math is not instructions for doing something. If you want a one sentence summary of math it would be more like "a collection of consequences of a set of axioms."
Here's some very simple math:
ax+b = c
Now, what part of that says "a set of instructions" to you?
It's not a particularly good argument against software patents though. It's a good argument against poor software patents. The same argument works just as well against poor patents of any other sort.
The "software is math" argument is silly as well. Software isn't math. Software is a set of instructions for doing something. The BEST patents are sets of instructions for doing something: industrial smelting and refining processes, for example.
"don't just cheapen the tuning - they either make it bigger or don't include all the bands"
I hate to tell you, but very few people look at battery life, or dropped calls before they sign a cell contract, and after that it's just too bad. Someone might check out the service areas, but it's not that likely. Battery life, ditto.
Probably the biggest feature when selling the average person cell service is the phone. Interface, sort of, and form factor. So you don't just make the phone bigger. You drop the extra bands. Which is what the article mentioned: it's difficult to support all the different bands.
There are lots of places in the ocean that are very barren. It's kind of like building a big solar plant - you probably don't want to build it over a rainforest, but so long as you don't cover all the deserts you're probably going to be okay.
Slashdot Mirror
Yeah... he missed kind of a big tech spec anyway. Hint: it starts with "multi" and ends with "touch."
It *IS* a big iPod touch. And, as you point out, that's going to be pretty cool.
Repairing a modern TV is pretty much impossible for a "PROFESSIONAL OF YOUR CHOICE." It's certainly easier for someone who knows how to work a computer and a screw driver to pop open an iPhone, replace the battery then jailbreak it and do whatever he/she wants.
I doubt it. We're much more likely to put blame on technology now.
Oh? Do you look at screens while you're talking to yourself while driving? And use your hand as well? Perhaps you stare at yourself in the rear view mirror while using one of your hands for, um, something else. Still sounds dangerous to me.
I'll also dispute the "asynchronous" bit. Most people I know who text are completely useless while sending a text, they're concentrating so hard on where to put their fingers, what they're going to say, spelling, whatever. Rarely do they stop in the middle because they'd lose their place. These same people manage to put their conversations on hold in order to write a text.
Surely you see the difference between texting and talking on a CB radio? If not, try it sometime. In a simulator.
Can you elaborate on how you can text safely in a moving vehicle that you are driving?
I agree with your argument about other types of distraction (such as talking on the phone) but it's not a matter of correlation vs. causation. Being distracted causes your risk of being in an accident to increase. That causal link has been shown by experiments, not correlation only studies. You're correct, there are situations, and drivers, in which you're at a low risk of collision anyway and your total risk including distractions remains acceptable. Poor judgement causes you to be distracted in a bad situation, which causes you to be in an accident. The direct cause is still the distraction.
I agree, it would be best to attack the problem at the ultimate cause, not the proximate one, but unless you recall everyone's drivers license and make them take proper training and a real test, discouraging the worst forms of distraction are the only real workable solution.
Well, if you take those posters as examples of intelligence, AI should certainly be easier than otherwise.
Like slot machines. Didn't the creator of farmville say the game was designed using casino principles, to be as addictive as possible?
I don't know the details, nor do I know if it's the same now as it was then, but she was excommunicated. Not threatened. Besides, bishop isn't really that high up. Your local priest could drop off the request at his office in person on his lunch break.
Anyway, it looks like you're wrong. Wikipedia says a latae sententiae excommunication is automatic if you break certain rules. Currently you're automatically excommunicated if you get an abortion or swipe one of the holy crackers. Actually, it looks like you're probably latae sententiae excommunicated if you just drive someone else to the abortion clinic.
The Catholic church has a long history of discouraging condom use, both official and actual. I know several catholic teachers who are told by their school and church administrations that they must not tell students to use condoms. They all do, quietly, but that doesn't excuse the official policy.
Again, nobody said people are simple or stupid. You seem awfully defensive, to the point of imagining insults. Crisis of faith?
Yeah right. When exactly in history do you think the young and self-righteous (or old and cynical for that matter) of any reasonably sizeable society have actually routinely abstained from sex?
My grandmother was excommunicated for marrying an Anglican and refusing to leave him when her priest told her she was living in sin.
Apparently the Catholic church has modernized a little since the middle of last century though.
Where's the ignorant crap? He said some religions are against condom use. You mentioned one: Catholicism.
True, extramarital sex is also frowned upon by Catholicism, but I didn't see anything about that at all in his post. What happens in the real world is that it's awfully easy to be a "good Catholic" by not wearing a condom, but really hard to do it by not having sex. Hey, might as well not piss off God ALL the way, right? Again, in the real world the anti-condom stance means that kids may not be taught how to use condoms properly, not taught how important it is to use one if you're going to have sex, or a not-so-good Catholic might just not have them around.
Bravo.
Your nose doesn't know much about stats, hey?
There's a huge evolutionary advantage to being able to consider possible consequences and their likelihood before you take an action. If there's some advantage to not causing harm then there's an advantage to being able to judge whether your action is likely to cause harm, without having to try it out and see.
I put a gun to your head and pull the trigger. It jams. No harm, no foul, right?
True, and occasionally people actually do that. OOs biggest feature though, is that it forces you to organize your code. You have to think about partitioning functional bits off into different objects and you have to think about the interfaces for those objects. It forces you to design modular code with defined ways for different modules to interact. It's nothing you can't do in a non OO language, but OO forces you to do it.
That's the problem. I haven't been cutting off their heads when I beat them. Time to sharpen the sword.
Kids.
Binary files. And you'll like it.
No, math is not instructions for doing something. If you want a one sentence summary of math it would be more like "a collection of consequences of a set of axioms."
Here's some very simple math:
ax+b = c
Now, what part of that says "a set of instructions" to you?
It's not a particularly good argument against software patents though. It's a good argument against poor software patents. The same argument works just as well against poor patents of any other sort.
The "software is math" argument is silly as well. Software isn't math. Software is a set of instructions for doing something. The BEST patents are sets of instructions for doing something: industrial smelting and refining processes, for example.
"don't just cheapen the tuning - they either make it bigger or don't include all the bands"
I hate to tell you, but very few people look at battery life, or dropped calls before they sign a cell contract, and after that it's just too bad. Someone might check out the service areas, but it's not that likely. Battery life, ditto.
Probably the biggest feature when selling the average person cell service is the phone. Interface, sort of, and form factor. So you don't just make the phone bigger. You drop the extra bands. Which is what the article mentioned: it's difficult to support all the different bands.
There are lots of places in the ocean that are very barren. It's kind of like building a big solar plant - you probably don't want to build it over a rainforest, but so long as you don't cover all the deserts you're probably going to be okay.