"The president is the winner" != "The winner is the president". The winner is sworn in some two months down the road. "The president is the winner" is okay, but "The winner will be president".
"Basically Heinlein was of the opinion (and I agree) that it is ONLY misfortune that we find funny."
I disagree about the only. I think there are two parts to humor, misfortune and puns. As I paraphrase from the 2000-year-old man, "A hangnail for me is a tragedy. If you fall down a manhole, now that's comedy!" But there are also linguistic jokes that don't necessarily involve tragedy, yet people still find them funny.
I'm not sure if you picked up on this, but low contrast != blurred. I think it would be worthwhile to try out. Of course, you should be able to adjust the level of de-contrasting. A lot of the replies have been about "but I want to read a window below" -- I don't think this would make the window illegible. Probably what you are reading is only going to be one or two levels below the active window anyway.
Objects seen at a distance have less contrast than objects close up. It would be a useful feature of windows if they lost contrast as they receeded to the desktop.
"
Having all that processing power available to do more than just shift pixels makes perfect sense"
Actually I disagree. Human beings have almost half their brain mass devoted to vision. I think as computers become more ubiquitous, the graphics processing and presentation part will approach that ratio.
"
Questions of that form cannot be answered, but it doesn't matter."
I disagree. I this this particular answer can be answered. But I'm not sure yet how to do it.
The problem is, if you don't answer it, then the EM theory does not have any more validity than ET channeling, psychic thought waves, or any other method of communicating with ETs or ETIs.
If you're going to claim some things are universal, while others are cultural, you better have a way of doing it, or you're opening the floodgates of the looney bin.
See, that's my problem. I'd like to go with your EM theory of communication, but I can't find any way of telling whether it's biased. So, how can I tell if what I've picked is subject to bias or not?
OK, quick question. How would you be able to tell whether "our methods for establishing communication do not have a western or human bias"? What if the methodology to determine whether something is universal or culture?
I read another slashdot comment a while ago that makes the point succinctly.
"Chief, of course there cannot be any other beings across the Great Waters. If there were, we would have seen their smoke signals by now. Anyone with a basic understanding of the principles of witchcraft knows this.
This line of thinking is incredibly anachrnostic. It's a relatively modern version of the Great Chain of Being. The GCOB is a western idea of a hierarchy of things, starting at the center of the earth, and radiating out into space. So, at the bottom are rocks and plants, then comes animals, then people, then angels and finally God in the Heavens. In the age of exploration and colonialization, it was thought that there was a linear development from stone tools -> spears -> bow and arrow -> bronze weapons -> steel weapons, finally to European society.
The 50's 'world of tomorrow' thinking is just the updated version of this. Aliens (read: any advanced civilizatoin) are like us, just like God made us in His Image, except for the bad parts. Therefore they are mathematicians and scientists. They use radio waves and other technologies that we use, just like savages in the jungle use spears like ancient Europeans used to.
I think when/if we do come into contact with trulu other life or intelligence, it will totally blow our collective and individuals minds, like way more than LSD.
I have to question why humans are doing the bulk of the editing for project gutenberg. It seems to me that if you have two independent scans and OCRs of a text, then it's highly unlikely they would agree on a mistake. Any discrepancy would be a mistake on the part of one or more of the OCRs, which should then be sent to a human for revision.
Again, I think the likelihood to two independent OCR processes (seperate text, seperate scanners, seperate OCR packages) would both make the same mistake, so it's mostly trustworthy, as long as they're in agreement.
"Would you have interest in working on these types of projects with Microsoft? " Maybe. "If not, what could entice you?" If you worked on some of my open source stuff, or other open source projects that I like. "If so, what would be your motivation?" I just want more crap, including software.
You see, Bill, you and I are very much alike. We just have different means of going about our goals.
It would be nice to find offsite backup partners on some kind of P2P network. If you have 80 gigs to back up, you need to have 80 gigs available on your system to trade off. All encrypted, so it's safe. And if you're extra paranoid, find 2 or more partners!
Slashdot Mirror
"The president is the winner" != "The winner is the president". The winner is sworn in some two months down the road. "The president is the winner" is okay, but "The winner will be president".
I disagree about the only. I think there are two parts to humor, misfortune and puns. As I paraphrase from the 2000-year-old man, "A hangnail for me is a tragedy. If you fall down a manhole, now that's comedy!" But there are also linguistic jokes that don't necessarily involve tragedy, yet people still find them funny.
I'm not sure if you picked up on this, but low contrast != blurred. I think it would be worthwhile to try out. Of course, you should be able to adjust the level of de-contrasting. A lot of the replies have been about "but I want to read a window below" -- I don't think this would make the window illegible. Probably what you are reading is only going to be one or two levels below the active window anyway.
Objects seen at a distance have less contrast than objects close up. It would be a useful feature of windows if they lost contrast as they receeded to the desktop.
Actually I disagree. Human beings have almost half their brain mass devoted to vision. I think as computers become more ubiquitous, the graphics processing and presentation part will approach that ratio.
I disagree. I this this particular answer can be answered. But I'm not sure yet how to do it.
The problem is, if you don't answer it, then the EM theory does not have any more validity than ET channeling, psychic thought waves, or any other method of communicating with ETs or ETIs.
If you're going to claim some things are universal, while others are cultural, you better have a way of doing it, or you're opening the floodgates of the looney bin.
Please spell out how! That's all I'm asking.
Dude, you totally dodged the question. Even after quoting it. Wow.
Nothing per se, but I think you're putting arguments in my thesis that aren't there ;)
Nothing per se, but I think you're putting arguments in my thesis that aren't there ;)
I read another slashdot comment a while ago that makes the point succinctly.
"Chief, of course there cannot be any other beings across the Great Waters. If there were, we would have seen their smoke signals by now. Anyone with a basic understanding of the principles of witchcraft knows this.
The 50's 'world of tomorrow' thinking is just the updated version of this. Aliens (read: any advanced civilizatoin) are like us, just like God made us in His Image, except for the bad parts. Therefore they are mathematicians and scientists. They use radio waves and other technologies that we use, just like savages in the jungle use spears like ancient Europeans used to.
I think when/if we do come into contact with trulu other life or intelligence, it will totally blow our collective and individuals minds, like way more than LSD.
Oh, wait. This slashdot. n/m.
80% + a fair amount + a little = 100%.
You've hit upon a deep philosophical point. All that information is, is the location of things. Computation is moving things around.
In Latin you would say 'octopedae' -- 'pus,'foot' and 'pedae', 'feet'.
However, can you explain how outsourcing is an example of the broken window parable?
Not karma whoring!
Small correction: It's GNU/Linux. And GNU's Not Unix.
What a way with words he has! Between that and 'Let the Eagle Soar', I say we have a strong candidate for the next national poet!
Again, I think the likelihood to two independent OCR processes (seperate text, seperate scanners, seperate OCR packages) would both make the same mistake, so it's mostly trustworthy, as long as they're in agreement.
Contract violation is a civil offense, not a criminal offense. Someone who has broken a contract has not violated the law.
Thanks, Steve.
Maybe.
"If not, what could entice you?"
If you worked on some of my open source stuff, or other open source projects that I like.
"If so, what would be your motivation?"
I just want more crap, including software.
You see, Bill, you and I are very much alike. We just have different means of going about our goals.
What brand/model do you recommend?
It would be nice to find offsite backup partners on some kind of P2P network. If you have 80 gigs to back up, you need to have 80 gigs available on your system to trade off. All encrypted, so it's safe. And if you're extra paranoid, find 2 or more partners!