Totally irrelevant...
A friend of mentioned that GEB was the most unread book in America. I doubt there is any actual evidence to support that but after finishing it I can understand why he thought so. It is really difficult to keep going unless you are genuinely interested in the subject.
As for his motivation, that's easy. He genuinely thinks he's solved everything and he wants to broadcast it as widely as possible.
Not trying to troll but I disagree. ANKOS brings a million different areas in the subject to one text. I like it because of the zillion experiments Wolfram runs and describes which makes ANKOS an encylopedia like reference in the field. (It shouldn't take much to replicate these experiments btw, take a little time programming a couple and you don't really need mathematica for most of the stuff). But in the end it is just that - a lot of expirements with some ineresting conclusions. But what really gets everybody talking (besides the pompous tone in the preface) is the speculation which really needs to be taken with a grain of salt. Ok more than a grain. Wolfram hasn't solved everything and he is smart enough of to know that but he is, IMHO, pointing in the right direction. I believe the book should serve as a great inspiration to people working in the field.
It really depends on the implementation - though I agree that most windows users would be confused. One of the best implementations I've seen is in iTunes or iPhoto but that's on the mac.
I understand what happened to that guy. I'm trying to figure out what could happen in the future (though it doesn't now). I could connect to the internet in Europe, start up iTunes and see all my music vanish. I just hope that the credit card info is the only way they can look up my address and not some fancy IP address to business address lookup.
Then again, as other people have noted here, the poster of this story is probably reading too much in the first para in the license:
Purchases from the iTunes Music Store are available only in the United States and are not available in any other location. You agree not to use or attempt to use the service from outside of the available territory. Apple may use technologies to verify such compliance.
That doesn't really mean they can delete your files. Just that they can take you to court.
I may not want to burn it. I may travel a lot with my computer and not wanting to carry 50 cd's cross-atlantic with me is a reasonable request. If you're trying to get away with something then by all means go ahead and burn; as for me, I don't like vebdors going through my files and deleting them without my express permission.
"The combination is 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5. That's the stupidest combination I've ever heard in my life! That's the kind of thing an idiot would have on his luggage!"
"Did it work? Where's the king?"
"It worked, sir, we have the combination."
"Great! Now we can take every last breath of fresh air from planet Druidia! What's the combination?"
"1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5."
"1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5?"
"Yes."
"That's amazing! I've got the same combination on my luggage!"
I've used JIMI before and it worked like a charm. I used it for basic resizing and cropping.
Keep in mind though that it is outdated. You should probably hack away at JAI until you get it right.
"Its more of that plastic-man, 100% 3D animated crap like SpiderMan and the Star Wars prequel."
Spider man the movie was very true to the comic. The movements of the 3d character were very close to what the comic books portray. The movements, the poses, and the motions of spiderman in the comic are not what you would expect from a real person, they are all highly exaggerated. I think the the movie did a superb job in staying true to the comic.
On the other hand, I think your assessment of the Star Wars prequel is right on. Then again, like somebody already said, I don't think you should judge the effects of this movie from a 45 second clip, if that. Considering most of the movement is done through motion capture, I don't think it will be too unbelievable, unless of course they copy and paste it to a 100 characters -read storm troopers in AOTC- in the same shot.
Assuming he has a background in law or ethics or something relating to this course, I don't see anything wrong with him teaching it. As long as he researches the topic before the semester (and it is a lot of reasrch), it should work out just fine.
My only objection is that he has a relative doing research for him.
Because it was on the BBC, where everybody got there news from (at the time). Which is why their April fools pranks have been the most succesful ones, e.g. #14: Planetary Alignment Decreases Gravity
I saw the video when I was about ten; it is really well made. If I hadn't seen any Spaghetti being made in my kitchen, I would have probably believed it too.
I work mostly with Java but that isn't to say the Forums on Sun's site can't be helpful for a C programmer. They are categorized so if you wanted to, you could limit your search to the Algorithms forum for example. The search engine is actually pretty good. If all else fails, post a question and you should get a reply pretty quick.
Re:Most math writers are terrible writers.
on
Imagining Numbers
·
· Score: 1
The previous reply to your post, though almost a troll, does have a good point; that Mathematicians tend to write for their own community. That isn't to say that some of them have written books for non-Mathematicians. Try Fermat's Enigma. I don't know too many non-mathematicians who haven't loved this book.
"... I have to wonder how many females traverse the glass staircase in skirts or dresses."
You can't walk underneath the saircase. It is blocked. The walkway on the second floor is actually a little scary because of its height (though I can't remember if it is transparent).
In defence of the author, he probably has a hundred criterion he uses to critique stores, most of which he found to be taken care of and so didn't mention them.
However, I'm pretty sure he was thinking of more of a K-Mart type place when he came up with most of these points. That's what seems to be the case with the 5 of 7 points Apple fails in anyway.
I too was very happy to read the post of someone who reacted the same way I did to the article. There is a big difference between the type of architecture the author practices and type Jobs is trying to.
So, as far as I can see, nobody is in charge of the JavaScript api (for browsers that is). If anybody were to take up a project like that, it would have to be W3C (which is exactly what I think they should do).
Of course that means coming up with a standard Window Object Model / WOM (I haven't heard that term before but I will assume it exists). WOM's for one browser implementation will invariably be completely different from another. They will however always share some charecteristics like the window, address bar, back button etc.
IMO W3C should look into creating a base WOM (covering all the features a browser should implement) and a JavaScript api built on this WOM and its own DOM.
I would like to know what/.ers think about this. Is that worth thinking about or is it just the first step to a world of Big Brother 1984 type browsers.
Why is the World Wide Web Consortium (W3C) quiet about all this. A quick search on their website (through google) shows no mention of tabs, not the ones we are thinking of anyway.
If the W3C really wants people to stick to their specifications, they need to be ahead of the curve. I can just see IE 7 with javascript commands like window.tab.new() and Netscape with window.tab.open() etc.
Mathematical proofs follow from logic giving them a certain sense of certainty. If I were to follow the proof, or you, or anyone else, we would all come to the same conclusion.
The skeptecism in using a computer comes up when we let a chip 'think' for us (or rather, just follow the steps). A mathematician may argue that while a human's logical argument is always sound in a formal system (let's just ignore Godel shall we) there is no guarantee that the same will be true in a computer simulation. There is no guarantee that a couple of extra electrons won't pass through some transistor giving me a 2 instead of a 1. There are a lot of things that can go wrong. We can run the program a million times and be reasonably sure we got the right answer, but never a 100% sure.
In reply to sql*kitten:
Computers can be used to prove infinite cases, if the problem is approached in the right way. Look up the proof of the Four-Color Theorem to see what I mean.
Re:I don't find tabs that useful
on
Tabs for Safari
·
· Score: 1
Depends on how you use it.
I like to use a window for every site and tabs within that site/window.
E.g., I go to BBC, browse through articles and open any I find interesting in a new tab. After I've opened up everything I want to see, I go through each tab, closing the ones I've read. Any other way would be just too cluttered and would mix up my bbc windows from my slashdot windows.
For the a-little-above-average joe, I think, it would work well to open up your email tabs in one window, news tabs in another, search results in another etc...
Slashdot Mirror
More women the same way there seem to be more "women" on irc trying to chat with you?
From the article:
But the country's oversight agency now puts that figure at $24 billion
So that's exactly the job of the oversight agency isn't it. Yes, the extra $12 billion, that was an oversight.
Totally irrelevant... A friend of mentioned that GEB was the most unread book in America. I doubt there is any actual evidence to support that but after finishing it I can understand why he thought so. It is really difficult to keep going unless you are genuinely interested in the subject.
As for his motivation, that's easy. He genuinely thinks he's solved everything and he wants to broadcast it as widely as possible.
Not trying to troll but I disagree. ANKOS brings a million different areas in the subject to one text. I like it because of the zillion experiments Wolfram runs and describes which makes ANKOS an encylopedia like reference in the field. (It shouldn't take much to replicate these experiments btw, take a little time programming a couple and you don't really need mathematica for most of the stuff). But in the end it is just that - a lot of expirements with some ineresting conclusions. But what really gets everybody talking (besides the pompous tone in the preface) is the speculation which really needs to be taken with a grain of salt. Ok more than a grain. Wolfram hasn't solved everything and he is smart enough of to know that but he is, IMHO, pointing in the right direction. I believe the book should serve as a great inspiration to people working in the field.
It really depends on the implementation - though I agree that most windows users would be confused. One of the best implementations I've seen is in iTunes or iPhoto but that's on the mac.
More links on BBC and NY times.
They should setup a committee to estimate how much money was lost.
I understand what happened to that guy. I'm trying to figure out what could happen in the future (though it doesn't now). I could connect to the internet in Europe, start up iTunes and see all my music vanish. I just hope that the credit card info is the only way they can look up my address and not some fancy IP address to business address lookup.
Then again, as other people have noted here, the poster of this story is probably reading too much in the first para in the license:
Purchases from the iTunes Music Store are available only in the United States and are not available in any other location. You agree not to use or attempt to use the service from outside of the available territory. Apple may use technologies to verify such compliance.
That doesn't really mean they can delete your files. Just that they can take you to court.
I may not want to burn it. I may travel a lot with my computer and not wanting to carry 50 cd's cross-atlantic with me is a reasonable request. If you're trying to get away with something then by all means go ahead and burn; as for me, I don't like vebdors going through my files and deleting them without my express permission.
Spaceballs Sound Byte
"The combination is 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5. That's the stupidest combination I've ever heard in my life! That's the kind of thing an idiot would have on his luggage!"
"Did it work? Where's the king?"
"It worked, sir, we have the combination."
"Great! Now we can take every last breath of fresh air from planet Druidia! What's the combination?"
"1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5."
"1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5?"
"Yes."
"That's amazing! I've got the same combination on my luggage!"
The current mac version is 3.5
I can't find any link to the contest page or rules so can't really say if the Mac Version 3.5 qualifies. Links to other stories here.
I've used JIMI before and it worked like a charm. I used it for basic resizing and cropping. Keep in mind though that it is outdated. You should probably hack away at JAI until you get it right.
The link.
Wi-fi will be 'next dot.com crash'
As stable(r) as XP is, your one window crash happens on Win98 too. I just tried it. (I could be wrong but it makes me think that it is coded into IE.)
A little off-topic but here goes:
"Its more of that plastic-man, 100% 3D animated crap like SpiderMan and the Star Wars prequel."
Spider man the movie was very true to the comic. The movements of the 3d character were very close to what the comic books portray. The movements, the poses, and the motions of spiderman in the comic are not what you would expect from a real person, they are all highly exaggerated. I think the the movie did a superb job in staying true to the comic.
On the other hand, I think your assessment of the Star Wars prequel is right on. Then again, like somebody already said, I don't think you should judge the effects of this movie from a 45 second clip, if that. Considering most of the movement is done through motion capture, I don't think it will be too unbelievable, unless of course they copy and paste it to a 100 characters -read storm troopers in AOTC- in the same shot.
Assuming he has a background in law or ethics or something relating to this course, I don't see anything wrong with him teaching it. As long as he researches the topic before the semester (and it is a lot of reasrch), it should work out just fine.
My only objection is that he has a relative doing research for him.
Some of your points have also been brought up in several mainstream movies. e.g. Gattaca, AI, 2001: A Space Oddyssey and Blade Runner to name a few.
There are of course countless other books, movies and tv shows that comment on the subject from the old to the new.
Because it was on the BBC, where everybody got there news from (at the time). Which is why their April fools pranks have been the most succesful ones, e.g. #14: Planetary Alignment Decreases Gravity
I saw the video when I was about ten; it is really well made. If I hadn't seen any Spaghetti being made in my kitchen, I would have probably believed it too.
I work mostly with Java but that isn't to say the Forums on Sun's site can't be helpful for a C programmer. They are categorized so if you wanted to, you could limit your search to the Algorithms forum for example. The search engine is actually pretty good. If all else fails, post a question and you should get a reply pretty quick.
The previous reply to your post, though almost a troll, does have a good point; that Mathematicians tend to write for their own community. That isn't to say that some of them have written books for non-Mathematicians. Try Fermat's Enigma. I don't know too many non-mathematicians who haven't loved this book.
"... I have to wonder how many females traverse the glass staircase in skirts or dresses."
You can't walk underneath the saircase. It is blocked. The walkway on the second floor is actually a little scary because of its height (though I can't remember if it is transparent).
In defence of the author, he probably has a hundred criterion he uses to critique stores, most of which he found to be taken care of and so didn't mention them.
However, I'm pretty sure he was thinking of more of a K-Mart type place when he came up with most of these points. That's what seems to be the case with the 5 of 7 points Apple fails in anyway.
I too was very happy to read the post of someone who reacted the same way I did to the article. There is a big difference between the type of architecture the author practices and type Jobs is trying to.
Point taken.
/.ers think about this. Is that worth thinking about or is it just the first step to a world of Big Brother 1984 type browsers.
So, as far as I can see, nobody is in charge of the JavaScript api (for browsers that is). If anybody were to take up a project like that, it would have to be W3C (which is exactly what I think they should do).
Of course that means coming up with a standard Window Object Model / WOM (I haven't heard that term before but I will assume it exists). WOM's for one browser implementation will invariably be completely different from another. They will however always share some charecteristics like the window, address bar, back button etc.
IMO W3C should look into creating a base WOM (covering all the features a browser should implement) and a JavaScript api built on this WOM and its own DOM.
I would like to know what
Why is the World Wide Web Consortium (W3C) quiet about all this. A quick search on their website (through google) shows no mention of tabs, not the ones we are thinking of anyway.
If the W3C really wants people to stick to their specifications, they need to be ahead of the curve. I can just see IE 7 with javascript commands like window.tab.new() and Netscape with window.tab.open() etc.
Mathematical proofs follow from logic giving them a certain sense of certainty. If I were to follow the proof, or you, or anyone else, we would all come to the same conclusion.
The skeptecism in using a computer comes up when we let a chip 'think' for us (or rather, just follow the steps). A mathematician may argue that while a human's logical argument is always sound in a formal system (let's just ignore Godel shall we) there is no guarantee that the same will be true in a computer simulation. There is no guarantee that a couple of extra electrons won't pass through some transistor giving me a 2 instead of a 1. There are a lot of things that can go wrong. We can run the program a million times and be reasonably sure we got the right answer, but never a 100% sure.
In reply to sql*kitten:
Computers can be used to prove infinite cases, if the problem is approached in the right way. Look up the proof of the Four-Color Theorem to see what I mean.
Depends on how you use it.
I like to use a window for every site and tabs within that site/window.
E.g., I go to BBC, browse through articles and open any I find interesting in a new tab. After I've opened up everything I want to see, I go through each tab, closing the ones I've read. Any other way would be just too cluttered and would mix up my bbc windows from my slashdot windows.
For the a-little-above-average joe, I think, it would work well to open up your email tabs in one window, news tabs in another, search results in another etc...