Algorithms are a branch of mathematics. Any software algorithm can be trivially reduced to a statement in lambda calculus. It's no different from an equation like e = mc^2, it's just a different branch of mathematics.
The same way you patent anything else, and for the same reasons.
Except that you *can't* patent mathematical expressions. That's the whole argument against software patents --- all algorithms are trivially reducible to mathematical expressions in the lambda calculus, and you can't patent those.
If by "handicapped people" (I presume you refer to Shaivo), you mean "vegetables that used to be human", and by "unborn children" (which is an oxymoron in and of itself), you mean "underdeveloped clumps of cells"...
As an aerospace engineer, let me put things this way. The "theories" that govern the flight of a plane are much less fundemental than the "theory" of evolution. We rely a lot on rule of thumb, approximate models, emperical rules, etc. So next time you call evolution "just a theory", think about this: aerodynamics is "just a theory" (well, body of theories) too. Does that stop you from getting on a plane?
I hate how people misunderstand the word "theory". Theory is a large(r) framework of logic. A law is a single statement within a larger framework. The terms don't really refer to how provable the thing is, but how big.
The people you mentioned were Christians, but not conservatives of their time. Galilio was a Christian too, but he still got in big trouble with the conservatives of his time. It's the whole phrase "Christian conservative" that's to blame here, not just "christian" or "conservative".
PS> Isaac Newton also didn't know half the stuff they teach in an undergraduate modern physics class. Why would his views have any relevance to modern biology then?
The problem with the NT security model is that they violate an important principle of security: they aren't simple. Simple security systems are not only more likely to be correct, but they are easier to use. Ever ask *why* so much Windows software doesn't bother using the security mechanism? Ever try to code to it? It's ugly and complicated!
It's actually still Microsoft's fault. There is a principle of writing secure systems: the security has to be easy, or else nobody will use it. This is where NT's security model falls down badly. ACLs and security tokens and all sorts of other features add up to a very powerful system, but one that takes a lot of work to use properly. The UNIX permissions model, though much more limited, is much easier and quicker to use in the "average case".
The K8 architecture is already quite parallel, with 3 FPUs. You get much above that, and you have to use some sophisticated compilers to take advantage of the extra parallelism (as Itanium showed).
While I wouldn't use Wikipedia as a definitive reference, most of it's articles are fairly accurate. Certainly, I'd have no qualms about using it as a starting point for further research, and many of the articles have their own bibliographies that can point you to good books.
No, it really does matter, mainly in color quality and refresh rate. S-IPS is what I'd get these days, for the simple reason that it has good color quality and acceptable refresh for most tasks.
Confidence and respect should not get in the way of pragmatism. To a great degree, the FBI's interests and one's own align. To a lesser degree, they are divergent. This is particularly true in the realm of privacy, where it is in the FBI's interest to violate it, and your own interest to protect it. In cases where interests do not coincide, it is completely rational to not be at least wary.
Re:I would find this useful...
on
IRC On The PSP
·
· Score: 1
The screen on the PSP is a lot stronger than the screen on your average palm. There is a very thick piece of plastic on top of the LCD. Again, under normal usage, you wouldn't be able to cause dead-pixels.
Um, WTF? The "dual" refers not to the number of cores in the system, but the number of cores in each processor. So the 840 is a dual core CPU because there are two cores in each processor.
The fact that you need an external tool to do boiler-plate crap is a weakness of the language. If the language was more expressive, boiler-plate wouldn't be neccessary. To analogize: it's like saying you shouldn't complain if HTML didn't have hyperlinks, but had an easy tool to let you copy in the target. It'd still suck.
Because the screen on the PSP is three times as big:)
Re:I would find this useful...
on
IRC On The PSP
·
· Score: 1
Dead pixels are the result of the transistor matrix behind the screen having defects. You can't create dead pixels by touching the screen, unless you do it so hard as to break it.
I don't see how. The OP claimed that it looked like an OS X copy with a bit of pre XP Windows thrown in. Since OS X didn't exist at the time, how could it be an OS X copy?
What the heck are you talking about? Lot's of desktops reboot only rarely. Fast boot isn't a very important critereon (though it's nice for laptops). Keeping the machine on all the time doesn't waste a lot of energy, because it goes into sleep mode which uses very little power.
BeOS had a fully functioning bash command line. From the perspective of the user, the CLI *was* UNIX. From the perspective of the developer, it was kinda UNIX (basic POSIX, but nothing advanced like AIO, and some missing features like sockets as file descriptors).
Slashdot Mirror
Algorithms are a branch of mathematics. Any software algorithm can be trivially reduced to a statement in lambda calculus. It's no different from an equation like e = mc^2, it's just a different branch of mathematics.
The same way you patent anything else, and for the same reasons.
Except that you *can't* patent mathematical expressions. That's the whole argument against software patents --- all algorithms are trivially reducible to mathematical expressions in the lambda calculus, and you can't patent those.
If by "handicapped people" (I presume you refer to Shaivo), you mean "vegetables that used to be human", and by "unborn children" (which is an oxymoron in and of itself), you mean "underdeveloped clumps of cells"...
As an aerospace engineer, let me put things this way. The "theories" that govern the flight of a plane are much less fundemental than the "theory" of evolution. We rely a lot on rule of thumb, approximate models, emperical rules, etc. So next time you call evolution "just a theory", think about this: aerodynamics is "just a theory" (well, body of theories) too. Does that stop you from getting on a plane?
Scientists never use "theory" in the sense of 6a. In the language of science, a theory is defined as it is in 5.
I hate how people misunderstand the word "theory". Theory is a large(r) framework of logic. A law is a single statement within a larger framework. The terms don't really refer to how provable the thing is, but how big.
The people you mentioned were Christians, but not conservatives of their time. Galilio was a Christian too, but he still got in big trouble with the conservatives of his time. It's the whole phrase "Christian conservative" that's to blame here, not just "christian" or "conservative".
PS> Isaac Newton also didn't know half the stuff they teach in an undergraduate modern physics class. Why would his views have any relevance to modern biology then?
The problem with the NT security model is that they violate an important principle of security: they aren't simple. Simple security systems are not only more likely to be correct, but they are easier to use. Ever ask *why* so much Windows software doesn't bother using the security mechanism? Ever try to code to it? It's ugly and complicated!
It's actually still Microsoft's fault. There is a principle of writing secure systems: the security has to be easy, or else nobody will use it. This is where NT's security model falls down badly. ACLs and security tokens and all sorts of other features add up to a very powerful system, but one that takes a lot of work to use properly. The UNIX permissions model, though much more limited, is much easier and quicker to use in the "average case".
The K8 architecture is already quite parallel, with 3 FPUs. You get much above that, and you have to use some sophisticated compilers to take advantage of the extra parallelism (as Itanium showed).
While I wouldn't use Wikipedia as a definitive reference, most of it's articles are fairly accurate. Certainly, I'd have no qualms about using it as a starting point for further research, and many of the articles have their own bibliographies that can point you to good books.
No, it really does matter, mainly in color quality and refresh rate. S-IPS is what I'd get these days, for the simple reason that it has good color quality and acceptable refresh for most tasks.
Let's try that again. "It is irrational to not be at least wary".
Confidence and respect should not get in the way of pragmatism. To a great degree, the FBI's interests and one's own align. To a lesser degree, they are divergent. This is particularly true in the realm of privacy, where it is in the FBI's interest to violate it, and your own interest to protect it. In cases where interests do not coincide, it is completely rational to not be at least wary.
The screen on the PSP is a lot stronger than the screen on your average palm. There is a very thick piece of plastic on top of the LCD. Again, under normal usage, you wouldn't be able to cause dead-pixels.
Um, WTF? The "dual" refers not to the number of cores in the system, but the number of cores in each processor. So the 840 is a dual core CPU because there are two cores in each processor.
The fact that you need an external tool to do boiler-plate crap is a weakness of the language. If the language was more expressive, boiler-plate wouldn't be neccessary. To analogize: it's like saying you shouldn't complain if HTML didn't have hyperlinks, but had an easy tool to let you copy in the target. It'd still suck.
"Do not try to imagine anything else". I take it you're a Java or C# programmer?
No, it isn't.
Correction: you can't break the thing by writing on it, unless you push so hard that it breaks. I don't see what's hard to understanda bout that.
Because the screen on the PSP is three times as big :)
Dead pixels are the result of the transistor matrix behind the screen having defects. You can't create dead pixels by touching the screen, unless you do it so hard as to break it.
I don't see how. The OP claimed that it looked like an OS X copy with a bit of pre XP Windows thrown in. Since OS X didn't exist at the time, how could it be an OS X copy?
What the heck are you talking about? Lot's of desktops reboot only rarely. Fast boot isn't a very important critereon (though it's nice for laptops). Keeping the machine on all the time doesn't waste a lot of energy, because it goes into sleep mode which uses very little power.
BeOS had a fully functioning bash command line. From the perspective of the user, the CLI *was* UNIX. From the perspective of the developer, it was kinda UNIX (basic POSIX, but nothing advanced like AIO, and some missing features like sockets as file descriptors).