"That's the thing about technology - it serves all masters."
No, it doesn't. Every technology has a social bias, no technology is neutral. And the Internet is biased into making the life of the revolting people easier, and the life of the government harder.
Why don't you want to reduce the conductive area (channel and poly sizes) while you increase the thicknes oxide layer? That would recude capacitance and leak rate at the same time, wouldn't it?
But I guess it would be a bicth to manufacture... Thick and smal layers of oxide, those must be quite hard to corrode at the right shape.
The paper was rejected because they didn't explain the how the machine is made nor showed the data they adquided from running it. In short, the paper had no information at all.
They say the machines produce cupper and zinc. Also, they hint about the nuclear reactions happening, and say they have evidence that those reactions are indeed happening. What they don't present is any kind of actual data (and somehow they say they didn't get gamma radiation, while their reactions imply they should).
Now, fusion of heavy elements and fission of light elements are endothermic, as fission of heavy elements and fusion of light ones are endothermic. You can't make it oscilate, so the universe is safe.
You are free to block the content, as the GP is free to block your ads. Now you can't show your ads, and the GP can't get the content, you may quite as well negotiate that. For example, he may want to disable his tools for your site if it is valuable enough, or you may want to close a deal with some ad provider that isn't that intrusive if your content is not that valuabe (as most of it isn't).
That's semantic game. Without government there can't be corporations, because what created that entity called "corportaion" is the Law. Without government the things that have the same characteristics of a corporation are called gerrilhas, or gangs.
Microsoft supports it too (at least, they promissed they will). It is just that they also support the competition. The only party not supporting WebM is Apple.
Sharepoint solves the wrong problem, but MS marketing makes people trink they want that problem solved. So we get at the worst possible situation, where we get a worse than useless software that is actualy well done (if you don't look to the backend), and your manager wants it. You can't tell him he shouldn't want it, and you can't tell him any competitor is better.
On a related point, have anybody ever seen a sucessfull Exchange deployment?
As was already said, it is polynomial time, not linear. Now just proving that P=NP may not make an algorithm appear out of thin air, but it is quite likely that any proof of that will be done by creating such algorithm. And, by the way, that is the case here, the proposed proof is in the form of an algorithm.
Yep, that is very important. If P=NP chip designing becomes a solved problem. Fabs are actualy more expensive than 10mil, but anybody can contract them...
In a related news, expect all cars and planes to change into the optimal aerodynamics shape in no time.
The one problem that all other are deduced from is SAT. 3-SAT is a friendlier version of it, that was proved to be NP-Complete by mapping SAT into it.
But, yeah, most people try to map 3-SAT into their problems before trying with SAT. That is because 3-SAT is easier to think about, and somebody already proved it is NP-Complete.
And, by the way, there are bare proofs about NP-Completeness of other problems, without reducing them. People don't like to use them because they are messier than simply mapping 3-SAT into your problem.
A small correction. The NP-Complete problem is "Is there any input for what it evaluates to true?". NP problems are exclusively yes/no ones.
Now, if you solve the SAT problem, you can derive an algorithm for calculating the solution space. It will probably take exponential time. You can also derive an algorithm for finding an input that evaluates to true in polynomial time.
I wonder what impact encrypted command and control would have on a virus on a computer that has an air gap from the Internet. I mean, if somebody ever discovers your channels (encrypted or not), you've already lost.
Slashdot Mirror
No, it doesn't. Every technology has a social bias, no technology is neutral. And the Internet is biased into making the life of the revolting people easier, and the life of the government harder.
North Corea isn't a normal XX century dictatorship rulled by a president. It is an oldstyle communist dictatorship.
Why don't you want to reduce the conductive area (channel and poly sizes) while you increase the thicknes oxide layer? That would recude capacitance and leak rate at the same time, wouldn't it?
But I guess it would be a bicth to manufacture... Thick and smal layers of oxide, those must be quite hard to corrode at the right shape.
It certanly has a reset pin...
You still don't want to plug your core memory into a hight latency DMA controlled bus.
The paper was rejected because they didn't explain the how the machine is made nor showed the data they adquided from running it. In short, the paper had no information at all.
They said they'll ship the machine soon. Ok, I'm not holding my breath, but they didn't ask for money, they made an ad.
They say the machines produce cupper and zinc. Also, they hint about the nuclear reactions happening, and say they have evidence that those reactions are indeed happening. What they don't present is any kind of actual data (and somehow they say they didn't get gamma radiation, while their reactions imply they should).
Now, fusion of heavy elements and fission of light elements are endothermic, as fission of heavy elements and fusion of light ones are endothermic. You can't make it oscilate, so the universe is safe.
You are free to block the content, as the GP is free to block your ads. Now you can't show your ads, and the GP can't get the content, you may quite as well negotiate that. For example, he may want to disable his tools for your site if it is valuable enough, or you may want to close a deal with some ad provider that isn't that intrusive if your content is not that valuabe (as most of it isn't).
That's semantic game. Without government there can't be corporations, because what created that entity called "corportaion" is the Law. Without government the things that have the same characteristics of a corporation are called gerrilhas, or gangs.
That depends, are you counting the tactical support or only direct shooting? (From those IBM and Exxon have quite a strong history.)
A partneship with MS can only lead to one outcome... I won't miss HP a lot, except for not finding ink for my printer anymore.
Microsoft supports it too (at least, they promissed they will). It is just that they also support the competition. The only party not supporting WebM is Apple.
Sharepoint solves the wrong problem, but MS marketing makes people trink they want that problem solved. So we get at the worst possible situation, where we get a worse than useless software that is actualy well done (if you don't look to the backend), and your manager wants it. You can't tell him he shouldn't want it, and you can't tell him any competitor is better.
On a related point, have anybody ever seen a sucessfull Exchange deployment?
As was already said, it is polynomial time, not linear. Now just proving that P=NP may not make an algorithm appear out of thin air, but it is quite likely that any proof of that will be done by creating such algorithm. And, by the way, that is the case here, the proposed proof is in the form of an algorithm.
That is wrong. In all cases where F(x) is CONTINUOUS near x0 the limit of f(x) when x -> x0 is equal to f(x0).
Ok, let's go off-topic here. What is the difference (really, subtract) between 0,9999... and 1?
Yep, that is very important. If P=NP chip designing becomes a solved problem. Fabs are actualy more expensive than 10mil, but anybody can contract them...
In a related news, expect all cars and planes to change into the optimal aerodynamics shape in no time.
The one problem that all other are deduced from is SAT. 3-SAT is a friendlier version of it, that was proved to be NP-Complete by mapping SAT into it.
But, yeah, most people try to map 3-SAT into their problems before trying with SAT. That is because 3-SAT is easier to think about, and somebody already proved it is NP-Complete.
And, by the way, there are bare proofs about NP-Completeness of other problems, without reducing them. People don't like to use them because they are messier than simply mapping 3-SAT into your problem.
A small correction. The NP-Complete problem is "Is there any input for what it evaluates to true?". NP problems are exclusively yes/no ones.
Now, if you solve the SAT problem, you can derive an algorithm for calculating the solution space. It will probably take exponential time. You can also derive an algorithm for finding an input that evaluates to true in polynomial time.
I'd arguee that being a computer geek requires that you understand what the (possibly) biggest discovery about computing of the decade is.
Yeah?!? And what about COBOL?
I wonder what impact encrypted command and control would have on a virus on a computer that has an air gap from the Internet. I mean, if somebody ever discovers your channels (encrypted or not), you've already lost.
That is not that amusing. Nothing can conform to OOXML, it is a mathematical impossibility.
Except that Microsoft doesn't have a lot of debt. You could make better use of that "tax" if it was sent to your government instead.