You idiot, he answered your claim directly. You say "registering it on block chain proves you possessed it first." What was his counterargument to that? How do you answer his counterargument? Why did you pretend it didn't exist?
It's not useful any time you have a ledger or a chain of custody. It's extremely inefficient compared to other solutions, and if the item being tracked isn't entirely digital (like bitcoin), it still requirestrust in a human to make sure the item is tracked correctly.
Hadoop has been a fantastic example of this. Everyone and their goldfish think they need hadoop because they have SO MUCH DATA! Does your data measure in petabytes? No? Then you don't have as much data as you think you do.
The funny thing is when they have all this NoSQL or highly scaleable stuff and they are still having trouble. I saw a company recently that was having trouble getting more than a hundred open orders at a time, considering all kinds of exotic solutions. I wanted to be thorough and eliminate all potential problems, so I asked, "Do you have indexes on your tables?" They said, "Well, we recently started added in them." Alright then. Let me blow your mind with the mysql "Explain" command.
The only usecase I've seen for blockchain that makes sense is the original usecase, a currency, and even then, only for some transactions, not for buying coffee at your local shop. Cash works fine for that. Blockchain is only useful when you need a (very slow) public database and no one trusts anyone.
However, this quote from the article highly entertained me:
Oddly enough, even non-working cases may be useful. Say a corporation uses a long-outdated process/system. Instead of opting for a normal and obvious solution, management decides to invest in hype (blockchain/big data/AI/IoT) to gain a lead....If you are offered the chance to use blockchain, make sure it is actually blockchain. However, even if it is not, it could still be a sensible offer.
I am sure IBM right now is selling people "blockchain" technology that doesn't have any blockchain at all, just like they sell Watson technology without and Watson. It's a brand.
The lead author, Tapio Schnieder, works at California Institute of Technology. His email is in the paper (first link on Slashdot) if you want to talk to him, he'd probably respond.
In responding, a Microsoft spokesperson said, "Come on guys, who would run a battleship on Windows? Seriously? That thing would blue-screen at the first sign of a threat. It's obvious we are trying to cause peace here."
Richard Stallman couldn't be reached for comment, but was heard laughing in the back.
My feeling from the advertising is that they are trying to figure out a way to get women interested in superhero movies. Similar thing with the first Thor, but a different approach. Thor was eye candy, captain marvel will have drama elements (like slapping an old woman in the face on a train).
Redis makes one of the most popular NoSQL databases (I believe it's basically just a key-value store, and people use it a lot for holding high-volume reads that don't change very often, like cookies).
Amazon wants to take their database, modify it so it can be used as a hosted AWS service, and not contribute back their code changes.
If that bothers Redis, they should use the AGPL, which specifically prevents that kind of thing. The BSD licenses specifically allow it. Instead, Redis made their own licence, which annoyed RedHat enough to threaten removing Redis from their distro.
Why do you doubt it? Certainly you can accept that an artist channels some of his mind into a book when he writes, because you can read it there. Then when he paints, he is showing what he believes to be beautiful (or important, or would sell, whatever). The artist is showing his strengths and weaknesses (no artist has mastered all the techniques of art). You can perceive more deeply, too. You can see the clarity of his eye by looking at which lines he chooses to draw, and you can see the clarity of his mind by looking at the individual brush strokes apart from everything. An artist with a cloudy mind will have lousy brush strokes, but that's harder to see.
People need to define "art" at the top of any article they write about this kind of thing. The paper is more or less useless if we don't define clearly what art is, and once it is defined, the question is settled. No need to write more.
We don't know how to modify the genome to enhance intelligence. The article doesn't even present evidence that it was enhanced, it could have just as easily be reduced.
We don't entirely understand what intelligence is, we understand the genome even less, and modifying the genome to enhance intelligence is basically impossible at this point.
Slashdot Mirror
Pocket computing has been here (in some form or another) since the 80s
Worth adding that it's good at interpolation, not extrapolation.
You need to be able to calculate the error bars for your predictions.
I don't think any company who wants DRM would want to give up that kind of control of their DRM server.
You idiot, he answered your claim directly. You say "registering it on block chain proves you possessed it first." What was his counterargument to that? How do you answer his counterargument? Why did you pretend it didn't exist?
It's not useful any time you have a ledger or a chain of custody. It's extremely inefficient compared to other solutions, and if the item being tracked isn't entirely digital (like bitcoin), it still requirestrust in a human to make sure the item is tracked correctly.
The lynchpinis that no one has thought up a use for smart contracts that works better than what we already have.
Hadoop has been a fantastic example of this. Everyone and their goldfish think they need hadoop because they have SO MUCH DATA! Does your data measure in petabytes? No? Then you don't have as much data as you think you do.
The funny thing is when they have all this NoSQL or highly scaleable stuff and they are still having trouble. I saw a company recently that was having trouble getting more than a hundred open orders at a time, considering all kinds of exotic solutions. I wanted to be thorough and eliminate all potential problems, so I asked, "Do you have indexes on your tables?" They said, "Well, we recently started added in them." Alright then. Let me blow your mind with the mysql "Explain" command.
However, this quote from the article highly entertained me:
Oddly enough, even non-working cases may be useful. Say a corporation uses a long-outdated process/system. Instead of opting for a normal and obvious solution, management decides to invest in hype (blockchain/big data/AI/IoT) to gain a lead....If you are offered the chance to use blockchain, make sure it is actually blockchain. However, even if it is not, it could still be a sensible offer.
I am sure IBM right now is selling people "blockchain" technology that doesn't have any blockchain at all, just like they sell Watson technology without and Watson. It's a brand.
This is one group, with one model.
The worst part is they don't have any estimate for how accurate or inaccurate their model might be.
The lead author, Tapio Schnieder, works at California Institute of Technology. His email is in the paper (first link on Slashdot) if you want to talk to him, he'd probably respond.
In Yodobashi in Japan, they have this on loop all day long. Over and over. It gets to you pretty quick.
In responding, a Microsoft spokesperson said, "Come on guys, who would run a battleship on Windows? Seriously? That thing would blue-screen at the first sign of a threat. It's obvious we are trying to cause peace here."
Richard Stallman couldn't be reached for comment, but was heard laughing in the back.
My feeling from the advertising is that they are trying to figure out a way to get women interested in superhero movies. Similar thing with the first Thor, but a different approach. Thor was eye candy, captain marvel will have drama elements (like slapping an old woman in the face on a train).
most researchers will still simply call it impossible and work on other things.
I don't think many researchers call room-temperature superconductors impossible, and many scientists are actually working on it.
So much for the hypothesis that AGW would weaken the jet stream.
Agpl will impact a lot of use cases that are possible now. Think for example in an embedded device.
How would that be impacted? Serious question.
Redis makes one of the most popular NoSQL databases (I believe it's basically just a key-value store, and people use it a lot for holding high-volume reads that don't change very often, like cookies).
Amazon wants to take their database, modify it so it can be used as a hosted AWS service, and not contribute back their code changes.
If that bothers Redis, they should use the AGPL, which specifically prevents that kind of thing. The BSD licenses specifically allow it. Instead, Redis made their own licence, which annoyed RedHat enough to threaten removing Redis from their distro.
I'm not sure if you're ignorant of Waymo's capabilities,
There at level 3 self-driving, which is why they can't sell their cars.
or just stupid.
You're not stupid, but you can't admit when you're wrong.
but if Youtube is going to be have to do more about them then respond to user complaints
They can just threaten to remove the channels if they do not police their own comments.
Why do you doubt it? Certainly you can accept that an artist channels some of his mind into a book when he writes, because you can read it there. Then when he paints, he is showing what he believes to be beautiful (or important, or would sell, whatever). The artist is showing his strengths and weaknesses (no artist has mastered all the techniques of art). You can perceive more deeply, too. You can see the clarity of his eye by looking at which lines he chooses to draw, and you can see the clarity of his mind by looking at the individual brush strokes apart from everything. An artist with a cloudy mind will have lousy brush strokes, but that's harder to see.
People need to define "art" at the top of any article they write about this kind of thing. The paper is more or less useless if we don't define clearly what art is, and once it is defined, the question is settled. No need to write more.
No, "it has" is not the same as "it can." My wagon has done self driving by your stupid definition.
Too bad it can't drive driverlessly. That's the only thing it's supposed to be able to do.
We don't know how to modify the genome to enhance intelligence. The article doesn't even present evidence that it was enhanced, it could have just as easily be reduced.
We don't entirely understand what intelligence is, we understand the genome even less, and modifying the genome to enhance intelligence is basically impossible at this point.