"the researchers found that our learning process was similar to other biological organisms"
Why was this a suprising result? Prior to this they thought what, that people were human-made binary computers in diguise? We have developed computer systems using binary math not because a binary system of logic is necessarily the best, but because binary components can be made easily and cheaply.
Also, figuring out a system of low-level operations such as NAND and XOR is more difficult for other number systems like decimal.
What's with all of you people who are citing Einstein or smart friends of yours as disproving the study? I'm in no position to say whether or not his results are correct, but you can't disprove statistical averages based on anecdotes.
It seems to me he's saying that if you take two random people, the chance X% of A being smarter than B increases if A has a larger brain. Obviously there would have to be other factors, if he's correct at all.
Come on guys, I thought that Slashdot posters were supposed to have a better understanding of science than this.
Am I the only one who thinks that the Star Wars movies aren't really something that a 7-year-old should be seeing? This isn't some crack about the movies' quality, I'm just thinking that some of the scenes in these movies are very dark and scary for a 7-year-old.
Members of a consortium formed 9/28 include Boeing; Cisco Systems; Factiva (Dow Jones and Reuters); General Dynamics; Hewlett-Packard; Honeywell; I.B.M.; Lockheed Martin; Microsoft; Northrop Grumman; Oracle; Raytheon; and Sun Microsystems."
Because Microsoft are the guys you want to talk to when building a totally secure military network...
On the contrary, there are many arguments in favour of creation or design of life. Increasing numbers of scientists are rejecting Darwinian macroevolution due to lack of evidence.
While we have numerous examples of change inside species due to evolution, we have no real evidene to support the proposed theory that one species can evolve into another, especially on the scale of micro-organisms evolving into complex creatures such as ourselves. The problem of irreducible complexity, put forward by scientists many years ago, does not any kind of satisfactory answer. Darwinian macroevolution relies upon the idea that evolutionary changes that separate species occur in small, miniscule steps. "Irreducible complexity" is the discovered problem that many aspects of biology that are observed today (impossible to examine in Darwin's time) could not have been evolved in small steps due to the fact that numerous components, with no individual purpose, simultaneously would have had to appear in the correct patterns. This is far from the only evidence that puts evolution into question; although Darwin claimed his theory's lack of evidence would change as more discoveries were made, there is now less evidence for species-to-species macroevolution now than there was when Darwin proposed the theory, due to new discoveries invalidating some of his original evidence.
On the other hand, evidence for creation, or intelligent design, or whatever you want to call it is increasing. Archaeologists are trying to determine the cause of the Cambrian explosion, or "biological big bang". Rather than fossil evidence showing slow, gradual changes, the fossils of this time period show that in an extremely short period of time, nearly all major animal body types appeared.
If any of you are interested in science for the sake of objectively discovering the truth, get an opposing viewpoint. Try picking up a copy of Lee Strobel's "The Case For A Creator". He briefly goes through about 8 of the major arguments in favour of an intelligent creation of life. He IS biased in favour of creation, but I expect most of you are biased in favour of evolution so it'll work out:).
I suppose this was before the age of Star Trek. Much better than an underground subway between New York and Los Angeles would be a simple door you could walk through that instantly teleported you to the destination.
Just how effective is this filter at cleaning water? If it is cheap enough to be mass produced for soldiers' food, then it would be incredible for humanitarian purposes if it cleans water well. Many parts of the world cannot easily clean their own water.
I think it is more likely that high rotation speed doesn't combine easily with high capacity. If you are spinning the disks more than twice as quickly as standard ATA drives (15k vs. 7200 rpm), then having the same data storage density isn't going to work without new technological developments. In other words, when the disk reading head moves at twice the speed, the bits need to be roughly twice as large. This is why the first CD drives didn't read at 52x: they needed time to develop the technology that allows the reading of that data density at that high of a speed.
I'm not familiar with which mathematical formula is involved, but from this perspective, 150 gb scsi drives operating at twice the speed seems reasonable compared to 300 gb ata drives. I suspect a similar reason is responsible for the low capacity of the 10k WD Raptors (serial ata drives) which have capacities of only 36 or 72 gb!
I hardly think this important. There are some legitimate scientific objections to macroevolutionary theory, but how homo sapiens became bipedal surely isn't one of them. Walking on only two legs is great, but perhaps more effort should be spent on matters such as irreducible complexity.
Don't be silly. For instance, we know there are lots of great features in IIS that could be ported to Apache to improve it, like the ability to be automatically exploited! Internet Explorer has similarly advanced code that Mozilla could make use of;).
Just goes to show that when companies embrace open standards and code, the world doesn't fall apart.
Don't get me wrong, I support open standards/code, but it doesn't show any such thing if this linux client has only just been released. I bet Apple, and others for that matter, will be watching sales of Mac machines for use in clusters. If they drop because everyone starts using linux PCs, then Apple will probably not try this again.
This seems like an incredibly dangerous idea to me. Supposing that the nanotech "programmer" produces a logic error, what's to prevent the thing from simply killing every cell in your body? The distinction, after all, between cancerous and "normal" cells is pretty fine.
Wide-spread use of graphics on the web didn't really take off until jpeg and gif compression became common. Will the easy compression of 3D models allow use of 3D content on the web to take off?
Regarding your first objection, I would suggest that if you don't need to do the more complex graphical operations of OpenGL, then you should take a look at SDL. I'm pretty sure that one of the graphics subsystems it works with is framebuffer, but I would imagine the higher-level abstraction might save you some work and make for cleaner code/APIs.
I don't know much about your setup, but I use both framebuffer consoles and the nvidia 3d drivers for X. My card is a GeForce 5900FX Ultra, on the 1.0.5336-r2 driver, and I use the VESA framebuffer driver on (currently) the 2.6.5-mm6 kernel. The two work fine together; I can use graphical links and mplayer in my 1280x1024x16 bootsplash framebuffer consoles.
With regards to your third objection, you may be referring to the recent change in stack pointer size between 2.6.5 and 2.6.6; there is a fix for this problem. You can change back to the old stack pointer size under the 'kernel hacking' section of the kernel config until nvidia has a new driver to support the smaller stack pointers. This doesn't adversely affect your system.
Also, in response to the question about educational use of copyrighted online materials:
The Green Party will properly fund our educational institutions to allow them to purchase, develop, and produce necessary materials.
In addition, our government will be a full participant in open content projects, like the various GNU Free Documentation License or Creative Commons licensed knowledge bases. Government funding can in some cases be made conditional on the release of research through these "copyleft" licenses.
I'm not associated with the Green Party, but my opinion of them has skyrocketed in the last few minutes:).
Closed protocols, systems, and architectures can play host to deleterious behaviour that is virtually impossible to correct. Open standards and architectures are necessary for any long-lived system.
The government must be able to create, customize, and improve its systems without having to rely on a single supplier. Conversely, the public must be able to verify and critique the architectures that are used to store, transmit, and protect sensitive information.
A Green Party government will only acquire systems are built upon open standards and protocols. If such systems are not available, or do not provide sufficient functionality, the value of creating or improving an open source solution will be weighed against the cost of using the equivalent closed system. A closed system will only be used if the vendor agrees to be liable for migrating to an open architecture within a reasonable time period.
I had been going to vote NDP, but unless they have a similar response I may vote Green instead!
So. if I understand correctly, this only vapourizes the incoming shot once it's most of the way through the armor. What happens when a second shot hits the same location? Alternatively, what if 2-3 shots are fired simultaneously at different locations in an attempt to overload the electrical system? It would be ironic if the electric armor protected the tank against these multiple shots only to kill its electrical system and immobilize it.
Slashdot Mirror
New meaning to "blue screen of death" :(.
"the researchers found that our learning process was similar to other biological organisms"
Why was this a suprising result? Prior to this they thought what, that people were human-made binary computers in diguise? We have developed computer systems using binary math not because a binary system of logic is necessarily the best, but because binary components can be made easily and cheaply.
Also, figuring out a system of low-level operations such as NAND and XOR is more difficult for other number systems like decimal.
What's with all of you people who are citing Einstein or smart friends of yours as disproving the study? I'm in no position to say whether or not his results are correct, but you can't disprove statistical averages based on anecdotes.
It seems to me he's saying that if you take two random people, the chance X% of A being smarter than B increases if A has a larger brain. Obviously there would have to be other factors, if he's correct at all.
Come on guys, I thought that Slashdot posters were supposed to have a better understanding of science than this.
Am I the only one who thinks that the Star Wars movies aren't really something that a 7-year-old should be seeing? This isn't some crack about the movies' quality, I'm just thinking that some of the scenes in these movies are very dark and scary for a 7-year-old.
Cost of 0.75 MW: ~$170K
$/MW: ~$227K
Cost of 1.4 MW: >$600K
$/MW: >$429K
Why the difference?
Members of a consortium formed 9/28 include Boeing; Cisco Systems; Factiva (Dow Jones and Reuters); General Dynamics; Hewlett-Packard; Honeywell; I.B.M.; Lockheed Martin; Microsoft; Northrop Grumman; Oracle; Raytheon; and Sun Microsystems."
Because Microsoft are the guys you want to talk to when building a totally secure military network...
I've seen dupes before, but the previous story for this one is still on the front page!/ 1325241&tid=97&tid=10
http://games.slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=04/10/19
On the contrary, there are many arguments in favour of creation or design of life. Increasing numbers of scientists are rejecting Darwinian macroevolution due to lack of evidence.
While we have numerous examples of change inside species due to evolution, we have no real evidene to support the proposed theory that one species can evolve into another, especially on the scale of micro-organisms evolving into complex creatures such as ourselves. The problem of irreducible complexity, put forward by scientists many years ago, does not any kind of satisfactory answer. Darwinian macroevolution relies upon the idea that evolutionary changes that separate species occur in small, miniscule steps. "Irreducible complexity" is the discovered problem that many aspects of biology that are observed today (impossible to examine in Darwin's time) could not have been evolved in small steps due to the fact that numerous components, with no individual purpose, simultaneously would have had to appear in the correct patterns. This is far from the only evidence that puts evolution into question; although Darwin claimed his theory's lack of evidence would change as more discoveries were made, there is now less evidence for species-to-species macroevolution now than there was when Darwin proposed the theory, due to new discoveries invalidating some of his original evidence.
On the other hand, evidence for creation, or intelligent design, or whatever you want to call it is increasing. Archaeologists are trying to determine the cause of the Cambrian explosion, or "biological big bang". Rather than fossil evidence showing slow, gradual changes, the fossils of this time period show that in an extremely short period of time, nearly all major animal body types appeared.
If any of you are interested in science for the sake of objectively discovering the truth, get an opposing viewpoint. Try picking up a copy of Lee Strobel's "The Case For A Creator". He briefly goes through about 8 of the major arguments in favour of an intelligent creation of life. He IS biased in favour of creation, but I expect most of you are biased in favour of evolution so it'll work out:).
hydroelectric [...] is usually unavailable during the time we need it most, summer
I can tell you're a southerner :).
Come on, linking to 100 screenshots of Doom III in a slashdot blurb? That's just cruel.
Don't forget, they're only selling ~10% of their shares. That puts their total value up around $33.2 billion!
I suppose this was before the age of Star Trek. Much better than an underground subway between New York and Los Angeles would be a simple door you could walk through that instantly teleported you to the destination.
Just how effective is this filter at cleaning water? If it is cheap enough to be mass produced for soldiers' food, then it would be incredible for humanitarian purposes if it cleans water well. Many parts of the world cannot easily clean their own water.
I think it is more likely that high rotation speed doesn't combine easily with high capacity. If you are spinning the disks more than twice as quickly as standard ATA drives (15k vs. 7200 rpm), then having the same data storage density isn't going to work without new technological developments. In other words, when the disk reading head moves at twice the speed, the bits need to be roughly twice as large. This is why the first CD drives didn't read at 52x: they needed time to develop the technology that allows the reading of that data density at that high of a speed.
I'm not familiar with which mathematical formula is involved, but from this perspective, 150 gb scsi drives operating at twice the speed seems reasonable compared to 300 gb ata drives. I suspect a similar reason is responsible for the low capacity of the 10k WD Raptors (serial ata drives) which have capacities of only 36 or 72 gb!
I hardly think this important. There are some legitimate scientific objections to macroevolutionary theory, but how homo sapiens became bipedal surely isn't one of them. Walking on only two legs is great, but perhaps more effort should be spent on matters such as irreducible complexity.
Portage;).
(For any who don't know, portage is Gentoo's awesome application distribution system, which makes it very easy to keep software up to date.)
Don't be silly. For instance, we know there are lots of great features in IIS that could be ported to Apache to improve it, like the ability to be automatically exploited! Internet Explorer has similarly advanced code that Mozilla could make use of;).
Just goes to show that when companies embrace open standards and code, the world doesn't fall apart.
Don't get me wrong, I support open standards/code, but it doesn't show any such thing if this linux client has only just been released. I bet Apple, and others for that matter, will be watching sales of Mac machines for use in clusters. If they drop because everyone starts using linux PCs, then Apple will probably not try this again.
This seems like an incredibly dangerous idea to me. Supposing that the nanotech "programmer" produces a logic error, what's to prevent the thing from simply killing every cell in your body? The distinction, after all, between cancerous and "normal" cells is pretty fine.
Wide-spread use of graphics on the web didn't really take off until jpeg and gif compression became common. Will the easy compression of 3D models allow use of 3D content on the web to take off?
If superior quality software always beat out the competition, Microsoft would not have their current market dominance. Sadly, they do.
Regarding your first objection, I would suggest that if you don't need to do the more complex graphical operations of OpenGL, then you should take a look at SDL. I'm pretty sure that one of the graphics subsystems it works with is framebuffer, but I would imagine the higher-level abstraction might save you some work and make for cleaner code/APIs.
I don't know much about your setup, but I use both framebuffer consoles and the nvidia 3d drivers for X. My card is a GeForce 5900FX Ultra, on the 1.0.5336-r2 driver, and I use the VESA framebuffer driver on (currently) the 2.6.5-mm6 kernel. The two work fine together; I can use graphical links and mplayer in my 1280x1024x16 bootsplash framebuffer consoles.
With regards to your third objection, you may be referring to the recent change in stack pointer size between 2.6.5 and 2.6.6; there is a fix for this problem. You can change back to the old stack pointer size under the 'kernel hacking' section of the kernel config until nvidia has a new driver to support the smaller stack pointers. This doesn't adversely affect your system.
Also, in response to the question about educational use of copyrighted online materials:
The Green Party will properly fund our educational institutions to allow them to purchase, develop, and produce necessary materials.
In addition, our government will be a full participant in open content projects, like the various GNU Free Documentation License or Creative Commons licensed knowledge bases. Government funding can in some cases be made conditional on the release of research through these "copyleft" licenses.
I'm not associated with the Green Party, but my opinion of them has skyrocketed in the last few minutes:).
Link.
Closed protocols, systems, and architectures can play host to deleterious behaviour that is virtually impossible to correct. Open standards and architectures are necessary for any long-lived system.
The government must be able to create, customize, and improve its systems without having to rely on a single supplier. Conversely, the public must be able to verify and critique the architectures that are used to store, transmit, and protect sensitive information.
A Green Party government will only acquire systems are built upon open standards and protocols. If such systems are not available, or do not provide sufficient functionality, the value of creating or improving an open source solution will be weighed against the cost of using the equivalent closed system. A closed system will only be used if the vendor agrees to be liable for migrating to an open architecture within a reasonable time period.
I had been going to vote NDP, but unless they have a similar response I may vote Green instead!
So. if I understand correctly, this only vapourizes the incoming shot once it's most of the way through the armor. What happens when a second shot hits the same location? Alternatively, what if 2-3 shots are fired simultaneously at different locations in an attempt to overload the electrical system? It would be ironic if the electric armor protected the tank against these multiple shots only to kill its electrical system and immobilize it.