"Slashdot, can we please stop posting stories about people trying to make brains on chips and post stories about real AI research?"
Those are two very different research areas, and both quite interesting. I'd vote for the continuation of the status quo, and having stories about both. But I'm willing to let the sensationalist summaries go.
There are no two distinct bodies. The GP is proposing piecewise replacement (probably after defects, I wouldn't get them any other way) and improvement. That is not the conventional uploading you see around, and "feels" way different.
One simulated connection is enough to study them, can we simplify the implementation while maintaining the emergent propeties? We'll only know if we study them. Also, if they are similar enough and if it is fast enough, one hardware based connection is enough for speeding a software simulation of as many as you #define on your code.
The problem is indeed of scale, but link count isn't the only way to solve it.
Well, it is your carrier that is overselling their bandwidth. It is really not Apple's fault.
It would be Apple's fault if your phone couldn't use a signal that was there, or if ou had to hold it in a funny way to not touch the antena. That problem you describe, it's really an AT&T problem.
That's quite a generic shape for an airport. If you go looking for it you'll get hundreds of airports (and nearly all the military bases) with that basic shape.
Some kind of salt mining? I first though about an irrigation grid. For salt mining, I'd expec wider "channels" (so wide that one wouldn't call them channels anymore).
The second does indeed look like targets for artilhery. I couldn't open the third one in google maps, so I don't know its scale, the next one makes no sense unless it's a scenario (WTF are those small planes?), and the last is quite different from the first in that the channels don't follow the terrain.
The Wii control works on PC out of the factory, no need for anything fancy, except for bluetooth. People just don't use it a lot (except, maybe, on media centers) because it doesn't make much sense.
Microsoft is on a different situation, because the kinetic would be usefull on a PC (for some really targeted applications), and because it prohibited people from using it that way. Now you are trying to make MS backtracking from that prohibition sound as if it was making some incredible innovation. That simply isn't true, all the "innovation" MS is doing here is removing the restrictions (that aren't even legal around here) it tried to impose on its clients.
And by the way, did MS already release the kitnetic for PCs? Or is it still just vapourware anounced to stop competitors?
Well, untill we have direct neural interfaces, any game input system will be (and currently is) a limited kind of toy. Old directional plus buttons joystic leads to 2D interaction, even when the game tries to create a 3D environment, stearing wells and pistol lead to car and shooting games, respectively, the Wii control restrics the games to very coarse movements, and so on.
In the end, it is ok that the kinetic is a false movement plataform. It happens to be quite fun, at least sporadicaly (I don't own one), as is the Wii, restricted to those coarse movements. Controlling things with your fingers gets tiresome after you try those other devices. Also, it is not just a camera with depth finding capabilties, it is a cheap camera with depth finding capabilities. Just like the Wii mote isn't just a set of accelerometers...
Probably the banks already offer better discounts for people that use credit in a sane way, or have anything to lose in a bankrupcy. It is a different kind of market, and those people probably won't want this smaller discount.
Anyway, gimmick marketing toward young people is very important for companies that have a long term relationship with clients (like banks). We are seeing an example of banks being smart the right way (instead of being dumb managers and smartly stealing from governments to compensate). That is a nice change of tone.
People that find the Linuxquestions isos are quite weard (DSL?!). Well, I didn't know they distributed isos, and never found those on google... The most downloaded ever hanking is more normal, but that "ever" part probably makes it not display well current trends.
Slackware is great. You can do anything, change your system in any way untill it is unrecognizable, then install another package and it will work. But no, I don't normaly use it, only when I have a problem that Linux From Scratch would fit, then I give it a try. For normal tasks I like to have nearly all the software I may want one command away...
Google "Debian pinning", and install apt-listbugs. It will make you have a system based on stable with just the parts of testing or unstable you want. Then, cheer because you'll have the last update of every piece of software you care about much earlier than Ubunty or Mint.
What you call lack of refinement debian people call flexibility. It is there because Debian is way bigger than RH, and the possible combinations of packages increasy, well, in combinatory way.
Also, that last fact is what people normaly mean when they say that apt is more developped than rpm, you can install more software, and seldon used packages normaly won't break your system, and will install. People are just bad at describing that feature. It does not mean that the software, or the protocol are better, but that the packages are. And, of course, they get less so at testing and unstable...
"On Linux, if you want software, you use apt-get, yum, etc. If the package you want exists in the repository, great. If not, things get tricky."
That is true, but it is also true that most software that isn't available at the repositories also won't be available as an installer for Windows, and tracking dependencies, compiling, etc on Windows is way harder than on Linux. Also, nowadays it is easier to search for software using aptitude than google, so, how important it is to get the software from the author?
Anyway, the point is moot. As you said, Windows does almost all of what Linux does. Just developpers will feel any improvemnt on Linux, and while more people should learn how to code (that is becomming essential knowledge), they didn't and won't, so for most people there is no advantaje.
"This is barely defensible, because the next step is to not understand things and have critical thinking done in the same way as looking up a constant in a book."
I'd say that this next step isn't defensible. That fact says nothing about the current step. There was a flaw at your consulting of "non sequitur" on Wikipedia.
About your "why Napoleon invaded Russia", I'm really lost on that one. We can do much better critical thinking when we have easy access to tons of data, so it should be better to learn to work this way. By the other side, we must have a set of stored on our heads, or we'll be unable to link one stuff with another (at least with current technology), so it is important to learn some things the old way. Maybe we should expect children to do both: reduce a bit the amount of data they are expected to learn but conserve a huge part, and teach them how to reach new data and criticize it.
We have productivity (badly) measured by econometrics... If there is currently any gain, it is lost on the noise. Ok, there can be a lot of gain lost in noise, but there is no evidence that it is real.
"Why can't we just call people "hyper", "slow", "lazy", "shy", "wierd", "dumn", or "scary"?"
In part that is because of politicaly correct madness, in part that is because people do like new trends and are happy to jump on the new names.
Anyway, the baggage a word carries is mainly determined by how it is used, maybe a bit by length and origin, but not much. Thus if people start using "Aspenger" instead of "shy" in short time "Aspenger" will carry exactly the same baggage as "shy" does now. (Now, tell that to the people that insist on changing words because the old one has a bad baggage...)
Slashdot Mirror
Guess what bacon is made of?
"Slashdot, can we please stop posting stories about people trying to make brains on chips and post stories about real AI research?"
Those are two very different research areas, and both quite interesting. I'd vote for the continuation of the status quo, and having stories about both. But I'm willing to let the sensationalist summaries go.
There are no two distinct bodies. The GP is proposing piecewise replacement (probably after defects, I wouldn't get them any other way) and improvement. That is not the conventional uploading you see around, and "feels" way different.
One simulated connection is enough to study them, can we simplify the implementation while maintaining the emergent propeties? We'll only know if we study them. Also, if they are similar enough and if it is fast enough, one hardware based connection is enough for speeding a software simulation of as many as you #define on your code.
The problem is indeed of scale, but link count isn't the only way to solve it.
It's hard to imagine a mature Apple. They've already tried to go without their visionary creators, it wasn't a very nice experience.
Well, it is your carrier that is overselling their bandwidth. It is really not Apple's fault.
It would be Apple's fault if your phone couldn't use a signal that was there, or if ou had to hold it in a funny way to not touch the antena. That problem you describe, it's really an AT&T problem.
That's quite a generic shape for an airport. If you go looking for it you'll get hundreds of airports (and nearly all the military bases) with that basic shape.
Some kind of salt mining? I first though about an irrigation grid. For salt mining, I'd expec wider "channels" (so wide that one wouldn't call them channels anymore).
The second does indeed look like targets for artilhery. I couldn't open the third one in google maps, so I don't know its scale, the next one makes no sense unless it's a scenario (WTF are those small planes?), and the last is quite different from the first in that the channels don't follow the terrain.
Is China investing on "blow things up" movies?
Since they are not part of the Euro, the UK can simply make some inflation (the old trusted way) and devalue themselves out of debt.
11 of each 10 keynesian economists say that works. We'll soon discover if they are right.
The Wii control works on PC out of the factory, no need for anything fancy, except for bluetooth. People just don't use it a lot (except, maybe, on media centers) because it doesn't make much sense.
Microsoft is on a different situation, because the kinetic would be usefull on a PC (for some really targeted applications), and because it prohibited people from using it that way. Now you are trying to make MS backtracking from that prohibition sound as if it was making some incredible innovation. That simply isn't true, all the "innovation" MS is doing here is removing the restrictions (that aren't even legal around here) it tried to impose on its clients.
And by the way, did MS already release the kitnetic for PCs? Or is it still just vapourware anounced to stop competitors?
Well, untill we have direct neural interfaces, any game input system will be (and currently is) a limited kind of toy. Old directional plus buttons joystic leads to 2D interaction, even when the game tries to create a 3D environment, stearing wells and pistol lead to car and shooting games, respectively, the Wii control restrics the games to very coarse movements, and so on.
In the end, it is ok that the kinetic is a false movement plataform. It happens to be quite fun, at least sporadicaly (I don't own one), as is the Wii, restricted to those coarse movements. Controlling things with your fingers gets tiresome after you try those other devices. Also, it is not just a camera with depth finding capabilties, it is a cheap camera with depth finding capabilities. Just like the Wii mote isn't just a set of accelerometers...
Probably the banks already offer better discounts for people that use credit in a sane way, or have anything to lose in a bankrupcy. It is a different kind of market, and those people probably won't want this smaller discount.
Anyway, gimmick marketing toward young people is very important for companies that have a long term relationship with clients (like banks). We are seeing an example of banks being smart the right way (instead of being dumb managers and smartly stealing from governments to compensate). That is a nice change of tone.
That's not really different from sudo (but since you are AC, you won't answer anyway)...
The solution here is a mix of backups, testing your scripts, and using the simplest possible commands on vital environments.
Yet, you don't have any evidence they are false either. Are you beliving that religions are false despite the lack of evidence?
1 - Open Suse; 2 - Mint; 3 - Puppy; 4 - DSL; 5 - CentOS; 6 - Ubuntu
People that find the Linuxquestions isos are quite weard (DSL?!). Well, I didn't know they distributed isos, and never found those on google... The most downloaded ever hanking is more normal, but that "ever" part probably makes it not display well current trends.
Slackware is great. You can do anything, change your system in any way untill it is unrecognizable, then install another package and it will work. But no, I don't normaly use it, only when I have a problem that Linux From Scratch would fit, then I give it a try. For normal tasks I like to have nearly all the software I may want one command away...
I don't get it. Well, on servers I can understand, but what is the problem of having a root user in a machine with only one administrator?
Google "Debian pinning", and install apt-listbugs. It will make you have a system based on stable with just the parts of testing or unstable you want. Then, cheer because you'll have the last update of every piece of software you care about much earlier than Ubunty or Mint.
What you call lack of refinement debian people call flexibility. It is there because Debian is way bigger than RH, and the possible combinations of packages increasy, well, in combinatory way.
Also, that last fact is what people normaly mean when they say that apt is more developped than rpm, you can install more software, and seldon used packages normaly won't break your system, and will install. People are just bad at describing that feature. It does not mean that the software, or the protocol are better, but that the packages are. And, of course, they get less so at testing and unstable...
I would put apt and aptitude at the same level...
But anyway, I'm replying to add there apt-files, debmany, and, of course, apt-listbugs, if you want to use testing.
Sorry, no, I can't see it. Not even Hubble can see it.
That is true, but it is also true that most software that isn't available at the repositories also won't be available as an installer for Windows, and tracking dependencies, compiling, etc on Windows is way harder than on Linux. Also, nowadays it is easier to search for software using aptitude than google, so, how important it is to get the software from the author?
Anyway, the point is moot. As you said, Windows does almost all of what Linux does. Just developpers will feel any improvemnt on Linux, and while more people should learn how to code (that is becomming essential knowledge), they didn't and won't, so for most people there is no advantaje.
I'd say that this next step isn't defensible. That fact says nothing about the current step. There was a flaw at your consulting of "non sequitur" on Wikipedia.
About your "why Napoleon invaded Russia", I'm really lost on that one. We can do much better critical thinking when we have easy access to tons of data, so it should be better to learn to work this way. By the other side, we must have a set of stored on our heads, or we'll be unable to link one stuff with another (at least with current technology), so it is important to learn some things the old way. Maybe we should expect children to do both: reduce a bit the amount of data they are expected to learn but conserve a huge part, and teach them how to reach new data and criticize it.
We have productivity (badly) measured by econometrics... If there is currently any gain, it is lost on the noise. Ok, there can be a lot of gain lost in noise, but there is no evidence that it is real.
In part that is because of politicaly correct madness, in part that is because people do like new trends and are happy to jump on the new names.
Anyway, the baggage a word carries is mainly determined by how it is used, maybe a bit by length and origin, but not much. Thus if people start using "Aspenger" instead of "shy" in short time "Aspenger" will carry exactly the same baggage as "shy" does now. (Now, tell that to the people that insist on changing words because the old one has a bad baggage...)