That depends. The water molecule isn't round, it is larger on some dimensions than in other ones, and while interacting with the empty electronic states of graphene is may quite well get smaller than helium on some directions.
I don't think self destruction is compelling at all. Besides nuclear war I have a hard time getting into a scenario where it happens and we don't leave any kind of descendents*. And Nuclear war is quite iffy on that. There is always the possibility of some technology completely differente from what we know, but it must also not leave any trace that we could detect from a telescope...
And remember, if life is common that self destruct mode must have killed hundreds of thousands of civilizations on the Milk Way already, with no one of them escaping from destruction. That happening at the relatively small window between our technological level and the level needed for interplanetary colonization... And remember, we don't really know that interplanetary colonization is impossible at our technological level.
* Forget about things like grey goo, or a malevolent AI killing us. The AI or the goo would likely continue what we started and colonize the galaxy.
Half of the Sun-like (later generation ones, borned from a planetary nebula with a big concentration of heavy elements) stars on our galaxy have a 2 billion or more headstart compared to us. That is roughly half of the time it took for technological life to appear here. lots of them had an entire 4 billions years of headstart already, and are at the end of their lifes.
If it takes so much time for developping a technological civilization that the life cycle of a star is too short, the Earth is rare.
If there is some technological civilization out there that is a bit more advanced than we are, they probably already know that there is an unexplainable amount of oxygen and methane in our athmosphere. That means, yes, life like us is detectable from a distance, and we even know how to do that.
The only reason that we aren't trying yet to detect it is because we aren't in space yet. If we start building things in space, that becomes trivial.
Motie-hood is not the only solution to a trapped species. It is not even the most common. The most common solution is either some kind of predation to appear or to that species reproduce slower, stabilizing the population.
Now, don't ask me about what mechanism makes evolution select individuals that reproduce slowly on top predators. I'm quite amazed they do that.
Well, we are still here. I mean, during those 4 billions of years of Earth's history, nobody strip-mined it into a wasteland.
Thus we can conclude that if some species similar to us is out there, either it is growing way too slowly (slower than we could grow with fission powered rockets if we decide to make them), it is a very recent species (like we), or we got extemely (or, should I say astronomicaly) lucky. Anyway that goes, it is an argument for rare Earth, just not as rare as stating that we are alone on the galaxy, but still very rare.
Otherwise, we can also postulate that any civilization that goes into space is more interested on something else and wouldn't even think about going into a planet like ours. Seems even more likely than postulating that they all self destroy at some point.
Not everyone has the aptitude or desire to learn how to program, and a majority probably don't need to
Always that shortsighted bias. More's law holding*, in 30 years computers will have more processing capacity than our brains. That means, a kid today will, during his productive life, be able to command an entire army of "workers" just by virtue of writting software. He won't live in a world similar to ours.
What you saying is akin to saying "Not everyone has the aptitude and desire to read" by the ancient times, when reading was the characteristic that confered all the power to the religious emperours (why do you think Greece was all that powerfull? Lots of greeks could read). Or akin to saying "Not everyone has the aptitude or desire to understanding our world" by the modern age (oh wait, we are still saying that), when all the powerfull people get there by exploiting less known details of either Nature or Human Nature.
* I don't expect More's law to hold for more 30 years, but that does not negate the trend, just delays the outcome.
s/unrelevant/irrelevant/ (I'm not a good grammar nazi, but this one error I can spot)
Now, about actual content... I'd say that if a language has a fancy IDE you should already drop it upfront, unless you are doing entreprize software with a huge team. If your computer can assist you on writting your software, your language is not powerfull enough.
The role of an IDE is to autocompile and show errors (for some languages even that isn't possible), put a nice interface in front of those several text files and a debuger. If it can generate code, help you refactor it, etc, there is something wrong.
Thanks. I was just refreshing the page, allowing more javascript each time, refusing to belive that an article about a couple of pics didn't have the pics...
And of course they have no plans to bring this business model to the North America or the EU precisely because such practices are outlawed in these countries.
Getting a person's call list is illegal at Brazil to,.nNo difference. They may get around that by not releasing any number with the data, but I'm not sure if that is actualy legal.
Hell you often can't even get your own phone records from the carriers without a huge argument, a letter from law enforcement, or threat of lawyer, etc
Again, no difference here. Except that it is illegal for the carriers to not send you the list of the numbers they are biling when you ask for it. They won't send anyway.
I don't know what is the impression you have out there, but most people at Brazil are as stuck in debt as anybody at the US. The main differece is that interest here is highter, thus people get bankrupt earlier.
Yes, people do not take credit at banks, instead, they take credit at the stores, and those stores take credit at the banks. That is how people can be in debt without a relationship with a bank.
1 - In Brazil that's quite easy. 2 - Yep, you either pay up front, or have a credit card. 3 - Our companies are making it hard to buy a ticket without a credit card, but there is no TSA here to be concerned about.
About buyer protection, if there is fraudulent activit with your debit card at Brazil, and the bank does not advances you the disputed value, you can call our central bank and odds are somebody will go to jail because of that. Few things work around here, that is one of those.
How weard is it for somebody to claim that the hardware it not important, the important thing is the software, and go on talking on how they'll create a product with the same software everybody else uses.
Yeah, the hardware is not important... I'll belive it when you stop using Android.
There are some keywords at TFA that give a hint. The computer is "measurement based", what I'll understand as "the computer only does measurements", also, "without knowing the original states, nobody can decode the output".
Turns out that are infinite ways (normaly over a finite continuum space) to encode your original bits, and if your computer only does measurements, the answer will be encoded the same way you encoded the data. If the computer operators don't know your encoding, they won't be able to read your data.
The hard thing is getting those phothons already encoded through the world into the computer, and getting the results back. Also, the above assumes that you can't discover the encoding, but it doesn't survive known plaintext attacks.
Slashdot Mirror
That depends. The water molecule isn't round, it is larger on some dimensions than in other ones, and while interacting with the empty electronic states of graphene is may quite well get smaller than helium on some directions.
You're right. I can't be sure.
Yet, none of those events compare in intensity to what we are currently making with Earth, so I can be suspicious... But not sure.
I don't think self destruction is compelling at all. Besides nuclear war I have a hard time getting into a scenario where it happens and we don't leave any kind of descendents*. And Nuclear war is quite iffy on that. There is always the possibility of some technology completely differente from what we know, but it must also not leave any trace that we could detect from a telescope...
And remember, if life is common that self destruct mode must have killed hundreds of thousands of civilizations on the Milk Way already, with no one of them escaping from destruction. That happening at the relatively small window between our technological level and the level needed for interplanetary colonization... And remember, we don't really know that interplanetary colonization is impossible at our technological level.
* Forget about things like grey goo, or a malevolent AI killing us. The AI or the goo would likely continue what we started and colonize the galaxy.
Half of the Sun-like (later generation ones, borned from a planetary nebula with a big concentration of heavy elements) stars on our galaxy have a 2 billion or more headstart compared to us. That is roughly half of the time it took for technological life to appear here. lots of them had an entire 4 billions years of headstart already, and are at the end of their lifes.
If it takes so much time for developping a technological civilization that the life cycle of a star is too short, the Earth is rare.
If there is some technological civilization out there that is a bit more advanced than we are, they probably already know that there is an unexplainable amount of oxygen and methane in our athmosphere. That means, yes, life like us is detectable from a distance, and we even know how to do that.
The only reason that we aren't trying yet to detect it is because we aren't in space yet. If we start building things in space, that becomes trivial.
Motie-hood is not the only solution to a trapped species. It is not even the most common. The most common solution is either some kind of predation to appear or to that species reproduce slower, stabilizing the population.
Now, don't ask me about what mechanism makes evolution select individuals that reproduce slowly on top predators. I'm quite amazed they do that.
Well, we are still here. I mean, during those 4 billions of years of Earth's history, nobody strip-mined it into a wasteland.
Thus we can conclude that if some species similar to us is out there, either it is growing way too slowly (slower than we could grow with fission powered rockets if we decide to make them), it is a very recent species (like we), or we got extemely (or, should I say astronomicaly) lucky. Anyway that goes, it is an argument for rare Earth, just not as rare as stating that we are alone on the galaxy, but still very rare.
Otherwise, we can also postulate that any civilization that goes into space is more interested on something else and wouldn't even think about going into a planet like ours. Seems even more likely than postulating that they all self destroy at some point.
Always that shortsighted bias. More's law holding*, in 30 years computers will have more processing capacity than our brains. That means, a kid today will, during his productive life, be able to command an entire army of "workers" just by virtue of writting software. He won't live in a world similar to ours.
What you saying is akin to saying "Not everyone has the aptitude and desire to read" by the ancient times, when reading was the characteristic that confered all the power to the religious emperours (why do you think Greece was all that powerfull? Lots of greeks could read). Or akin to saying "Not everyone has the aptitude or desire to understanding our world" by the modern age (oh wait, we are still saying that), when all the powerfull people get there by exploiting less known details of either Nature or Human Nature.
* I don't expect More's law to hold for more 30 years, but that does not negate the trend, just delays the outcome.
s/unrelevant/irrelevant/ (I'm not a good grammar nazi, but this one error I can spot)
Now, about actual content... I'd say that if a language has a fancy IDE you should already drop it upfront, unless you are doing entreprize software with a huge team. If your computer can assist you on writting your software, your language is not powerfull enough.
The role of an IDE is to autocompile and show errors (for some languages even that isn't possible), put a nice interface in front of those several text files and a debuger. If it can generate code, help you refactor it, etc, there is something wrong.
That is not politicaly correct.
Thanks. I was just refreshing the page, allowing more javascript each time, refusing to belive that an article about a couple of pics didn't have the pics...
The GP was way over the mark here. Would you pay $5? That is a more viable amount.
Around here government can't just take your property if you stop paying the tax. I don't know how it is on other countries.
But, anyway, in practice, even if one should consider property taxes a form of rent, it is a cheap rent. You won't get homeless because of taxes.
I'm arguing they don't belive on what they are saying. Or, in other words that they are lying.
I don't know if they are right or wrong. If I had to guess, I'd guess they are right, but that is only a guess.
Owning your home gives you the ability to lose your job and not be a homeless.
But, of course, if you have a mortage, you won't have that ability either. I said owning it, not renting it from the bank.
Getting a person's call list is illegal at Brazil to,.nNo difference. They may get around that by not releasing any number with the data, but I'm not sure if that is actualy legal.
Again, no difference here. Except that it is illegal for the carriers to not send you the list of the numbers they are biling when you ask for it. They won't send anyway.
I don't know what is the impression you have out there, but most people at Brazil are as stuck in debt as anybody at the US. The main differece is that interest here is highter, thus people get bankrupt earlier.
Yes, people do not take credit at banks, instead, they take credit at the stores, and those stores take credit at the banks. That is how people can be in debt without a relationship with a bank.
1 - In Brazil that's quite easy.
2 - Yep, you either pay up front, or have a credit card.
3 - Our companies are making it hard to buy a ticket without a credit card, but there is no TSA here to be concerned about.
About buyer protection, if there is fraudulent activit with your debit card at Brazil, and the bank does not advances you the disputed value, you can call our central bank and odds are somebody will go to jail because of that. Few things work around here, that is one of those.
It is worse than that.
Now, if somebody wants to create a datacenter that actualy employs people, he'd have to compete with this one, that doesn't pay as much in taxes.
How weard is it for somebody to claim that the hardware it not important, the important thing is the software, and go on talking on how they'll create a product with the same software everybody else uses.
Yeah, the hardware is not important... I'll belive it when you stop using Android.
No. He was conducting electromagnetic waves through the athmosphere. Electric conductivity is a completely diffferent thing.
You can't even have the same material conducting both electromagnetic waves and electricity.
It does. And the smaler ones also do.
Does that mean the Earth is electric?
There are real working quantum computers out there. They are just not powerfull enough to be usefull.
Also, "secure" on the phrase you quote has a completely different meaning from what you use on your comment.
Didn't people get that a few times around the 60's?
There are some keywords at TFA that give a hint. The computer is "measurement based", what I'll understand as "the computer only does measurements", also, "without knowing the original states, nobody can decode the output".
Turns out that are infinite ways (normaly over a finite continuum space) to encode your original bits, and if your computer only does measurements, the answer will be encoded the same way you encoded the data. If the computer operators don't know your encoding, they won't be able to read your data.
The hard thing is getting those phothons already encoded through the world into the computer, and getting the results back. Also, the above assumes that you can't discover the encoding, but it doesn't survive known plaintext attacks.