you'll understand this issue when you realize that music is not an "Entertainment Option" it's a "Cultural/Spiritual Nescessity" and that most folks around here that want to stick it to the man aren't actually sooo desperate to get their hands on the latest crap; they are merely (merely?! maybe very!!) excited that, unexpectedly, joyously, there is now a way that future generations of americans (think of the children!) have a way to enjoy their cultural norms without fat business fucks acting like they are the priesthood of a new information age chapel.
In other words, most people are far more excited to see the monopoly/monoculture fall then we ever were with what is actually being shared/downloaded. We came *this* close to being sucker punched for *generations* by DRM. And it still might happen if you don't do your part.
Being "stumped" is a wonderful thing in direct proportion to how well you can state what it is you dont know. As any software engineer debugging a program can also tell you, at about the same time you can say what is exactly wrong is about the same time you know what it is you have to do!
Collorary: an exact question and an exact answer approach unity; they are the same thing, in the end. Thus, it is the persuit of the right question as much as the right answer, that makes for the ethic of science appreciated in the GP post./of course, those who've read HGTG know this
The chemical definition of organic is CHON: carbon hydrogen oxygen and nitrogen. Mostly carbon,really. I think you misunderstand the definition of organic. You might look up organic chemistry on wikipedia.
Roman Priests: Your thoughts betray you. Your feelings for them are strong. Especially for...sister! So, you have a twin sister. Your feelings have now betrayed her, too. The Three Wise Men were wise to hide her from me. Now his failure is complete. If you will not turn to the dark side, then perhaps she will.
I agree that a serial system can emulate a parallel one. You can even determine how much longer a serial computer will take to execute a massively parallel program. Problem is, the time it takes to solve a problem scales very very badly with the complexity of the problem. If you have a true parallel machine (as possible using physical phenomena such that analog systems use in one form or another) and not just a system that computes in parallel, but in parallel of thousands or hundreds of thousands of nodes in just a few "steps" - you can't really always define the processing of a real neural network as "step based".
That's my argument, that there is an entirely different way of solving problems in a discrete "digital" system then a continuous "analog" system. They have their strengths and *compliment* each other, not *equal* each other, in terms of their strengths.
Trying to model certain aspects of intelligence in silicon is like trying to make a rocket out of some number of aerosol deodorant cans - theoretically you can fly if you just have enough but in practice you'll always need more aerosol then space available on the thing to be lifted! And it never gets better using aerosol - lifting a person is just as hard as lifting a space-shuttle.
On certain intelligence related problems, digital will *never* enjoy the economies of scale that analog neural network design provides. This is a deep intuition after much study. Bet on it.
took too long to write and i didn't read it again, sorry about the typos at the bottom and the forgotten parallel about what a digital delay pedal entails. The difference between iron-tape and RAM. It's not the best example. ah well.
You may tell me that a turing system could emulate the brain, and i could tell you that a lighter could melt a bridge. A turing machine is meant compute in distinct sequences; no matter how many cores your cpu is running some basic algorithms will always have an sequence of steps.
The answer to real intelligence has zero-zip to do with sequential calculation. Here's a (ahem) parallel:
an analog delay pedal for music is a few dollars worth of tape and circuits that anyone can build in their living room. it has no latency of calculation, actually, the exact algorithm was never expressed in mathematical form at all!
The reason why turing machines will never emulate neurological systems effectively (even if you make a silicon-laser based neural network, let's say) is that they do not calculate their result as the SIMULTANEOUS calculation that a physical property (the addition of light, the addition of electricity)
And we know that reality is discontinuous at um... Plank size.. but computers are discontinuous by whole numbers (it's all binary in computers, whole binary numbers) and to *calculate* the number that represents the summing of say, 15000 other nodes is going to exorbitantly increase and increase.. and be a rat race to nowhere.
Moral of the story,
- DIGITAL aka sequential discrete algorithms will always be out of reach
the length of time it takes to solve a problem increases exponentially
faster with problem difficultyblooms with the ANALOG aka physical
continuous summation
- ANALOG aka intantaeous continuous algorithms based on real-world phenomena
scales linearly with the diffculty of the problem. I can't really say that -
no one really knows how the brain scales in that regard, but I can certainly
say that a whole class of problems exist that will forever be out of the reach
"classical" sequential machines.
What some people are thinking is right though, digital computers can do things that brains can't, and they'd be right. We've spent along time with digital logic and found alot of it's basic theorems and limits.
To close: It's the other side, the continuous field of analog electronics - not turing! - that has the promise of creating the type of intelligence we equate with "intelligence" and "free will"./"Free-will" sounds like a very continuous concept, doesn't it?//It might look like intelligence isn highly discontinuous if you examine humans too closely:)
too true - the only thing that gives us a "right" to our existence is that each of our experiences (our trajectory through life) are unique, developing a unique being and hence, we ourselves fufill the role of "the creator". If external forces disturb that feedback cycle of experience->chemical action->experience->chemical action, we may find that we are no longer created by "reality" but by eachother.
perhaps it's ignorant to try and define a soul as seperate from the the world that holds it. I'm certain that removing that connection renders the term soul meaningless, after it's been thought through.
I'd say this is, upon reflection, will come as a huge blow to proponents of an ineffable soul. If emotions have a chemical basis (and i suppose, pheromones and hormones and the like already prove this, if not as viscerally) then ones innate moral and ethical feelings may ultimately be stripped of environmental causation.
I'd hazard that imbibing such a chemical is the equivalent of running magnetic bulk erasers against your spirit. Not that it's not interesting for use in PTSD cases, or hell, asking the lady you love out on a date, but if there is no causative relationship between what you learn and what you feel, is that any different then not learning at all?
That our intelligence is a better guardian then our heart, may be or may be not, but the coup is underway!
(and i've read enough science fiction to handle it, baby!)
Whoa, little quick there. I'd LOVE to take you up on that challenge. You buying? And, don't be dense - LSD isn't addictive. Not. Even. A. Little. Bit.
I'll match each day you smoke Marlboro Lights with four daily doses of cocaine. At the end of a week, you're on. Relapse time period, three months to prove it. Just like some other people here, all propaganda, no experience.
You show me a world where cigarettes are outlawed and you can only get them at the dead of night in a bad neighboorhood, and i'll show you people that will suck dick to smoke them.
Are you so foolish as to not consider the relative ease of supply? THINK, dammit THINK for a second - people don't kill eachother over cigarettes because it's easier to shop lift them.
Look man, i can't waste too much time on people with no perspective, but if you think nicotine would inspire less violence in addicts given a restricted supply... Guess what, your a moron. Me, i've done all three, like i said, and only ever been addicted to nicotine. I mean, smoking week-old butts out of a public ashtray addicted.
Oh - and stop getting your behavioral knowledge from the Shapell Show, that will help.
C'mon.. the Think Train is IN my friend - the logic goes:
if nicotine (an addictive, horribly toxic drug) can have positive health affects and it's really "medicine" for the menally ill, HOW is it that the same argument can't be applied publically to Marijunana, a safe, and proven remedy that DOESN'T kill your dumb ass.
It's damned obvious that Marijuana has no nicotine. However, I suggest you pick up a bong - you seem like your a little pent up.
"There will be great progress when the nicotine sister drugs come to market," he says. "About half the cigarettes in this country are bought by people with psychiatric problems -- high percentages of people with depression and schizophrenia smoke, for example."
"When we can give people their medicine in a form that doesn't kill them, it will be real progress."
so, nicotine is used by people with mental problems and they just need this "medicine" in a less harmful way? Gee... that doesn't sound like Marijuana AT ALL (sarcasm) damn their hypocrisy (not sarcasm) because there are *tens of thousands* of mentally ill patients who are being incarcerated RIGHT NOW because of a lack of "real progress" -- and pharma companies that know they'll not be able to control the supply.
Way to illustrate the idiocy of Marijuana Prohibition, while addictive, deadly, ostracized nicotine is really... you know... helping our mentally ill legally, state-sanctioned, everyday.
I think it's pretty important to note here, for the uninformed, that cocaine and LSD are nowhere NEAR as harmful a decision to try then nicotine. The thing that harms you is that, with nicotine, you'll do it everyday for the rest of your life.
Nicotine is a "hard" drug. Cocaine, less so. LSD, i'd say it's a "squishy" drug. YMMV.
It's odd that I'd take a devils advocate position here, but as both an enthusiast musician and a consultant programmer, i've got to take issue. What's so horrible about a label owning a song performed for them? It's called work-for-hire, and *every* programmer encounters this on a regular basis. Company A pays the bills and Company A owns the work. To be upset about a music label doing this is to somehow claim that music itself is somehow more priceless then, say, the code I write on the job (both are equal to me).
The afore should highlight why i do music for myself and programming for a living.
I think it's time for musicians to realize that if they want to get paid for what they do without starting their own business to do it - be ready to do what most every programmer has done: Suffer the proprietary slop because it's eaiser, or support Open Source Music because it doesn't mean you sell control away. (but.. but... how do we get paid?? look at open source business!!)
Complaining that a company owns a work-for-hire done for them, sounds alot like musicians are just out to get a fast buck.
/o rly? //music for kids by kids ///because we wanna, not because we gotta!
Just because it's easier, more beautiful, compact, and enjoyable doesn't make it a two-seater miata!/and when i thought programming really wasn't fun, and there was just too much toil-per-feature, i found it myself. and at least programming is fun again!//Python3000 will have interfaces
Please tell me that edus's aren't double taxed. When you get a new computer with an unused Vista on it, the price of that computer *did not* include a Vista license, right? Otherwise you are paying twice, once for the site license, and then every time you buy a new computer, which is totally undeserved profit./IF that's true, what i wrote above, i can see why you have "no problems". Very nice of M$ to accommodate.//If it's not, thanks for making that clear for the crowd - it'd be about honorable.
Its the parents job to keep inappropriate things from thier kids, not society's.
So we'll be having the cocaine stands for the high school prom then? Fantastic! And E. coli? It's the parent's job to test that stuff! Let's pit each and every family up against corporations with $$$ and drugs and sex and heavy-metal laced foods!
I know what you're thinking, "centipedes, in my vagina?" But it can happen to you.
Slashdot Mirror
you'll understand this issue when you realize that music is not an "Entertainment Option" it's a "Cultural/Spiritual Nescessity" and that most folks around here that want to stick it to the man aren't actually sooo desperate to get their hands on the latest crap; they are merely (merely?! maybe very!!) excited that, unexpectedly, joyously, there is now a way that future generations of americans (think of the children!) have a way to enjoy their cultural norms without fat business fucks acting like they are the priesthood of a new information age chapel.
In other words, most people are far more excited to see the monopoly/monoculture fall then we ever were with what is actually being shared/downloaded. We came *this* close to being sucker punched for *generations* by DRM. And it still might happen if you don't do your part.
a-bloody-men.
"Happiness is a Mediocre Sin" - saul williams
I modded someone down by accident. Posting here nulls that... g'day!
(pls just leave this unmodded @ 1? thanks)
Being "stumped" is a wonderful thing in direct proportion to how well you can state what it is you dont know. As any software engineer debugging a program can also tell you, at about the same time you can say what is exactly wrong is about the same time you know what it is you have to do!
/of course, those who've read HGTG know this
Collorary: an exact question and an exact answer approach unity; they are the same thing, in the end. Thus, it is the persuit of the right question as much as the right answer, that makes for the ethic of science appreciated in the GP post.
do you mean the "cancel/allow hybrid user frustration function"?
Because after trying that, i sure felt chuffed.
The chemical definition of organic is CHON: carbon hydrogen oxygen and nitrogen. Mostly carbon,really. I think you misunderstand the definition of organic. You might look up organic chemistry on wikipedia.
Roman Priests: Your thoughts betray you. Your feelings for them are strong. Especially for...sister! So, you have a twin sister. Your feelings have now betrayed her, too. The Three Wise Men were wise to hide her from me. Now his failure is complete. If you will not turn to the dark side, then perhaps she will.
I agree that a serial system can emulate a parallel one. You can even determine how much longer a serial computer will take to execute a massively parallel program. Problem is, the time it takes to solve a problem scales very very badly with the complexity of the problem. If you have a true parallel machine (as possible using physical phenomena such that analog systems use in one form or another) and not just a system that computes in parallel, but in parallel of thousands or hundreds of thousands of nodes in just a few "steps" - you can't really always define the processing of a real neural network as "step based".
That's my argument, that there is an entirely different way of solving problems in a discrete "digital" system then a continuous "analog" system. They have their strengths and *compliment* each other, not *equal* each other, in terms of their strengths.
Trying to model certain aspects of intelligence in silicon is like trying to make a rocket out of some number of aerosol deodorant cans - theoretically you can fly if you just have enough but in practice you'll always need more aerosol then space available on the thing to be lifted! And it never gets better using aerosol - lifting a person is just as hard as lifting a space-shuttle.
On certain intelligence related problems, digital will *never* enjoy the economies of scale that analog neural network design provides. This is a deep intuition after much study. Bet on it.
mod the godel gotchas gabbed garishly up
took too long to write and i didn't read it again, sorry about the typos at the bottom and the forgotten parallel about what a digital delay pedal entails. The difference between iron-tape and RAM. It's not the best example. ah well.
You may tell me that a turing system could emulate the brain, and i could tell you that a lighter could melt a bridge. A turing machine is meant compute in distinct sequences; no matter how many cores your cpu is running some basic algorithms will always have an sequence of steps.
/"Free-will" sounds like a very continuous concept, doesn't it? //It might look like intelligence isn highly discontinuous if you examine humans too closely :)
The answer to real intelligence has zero-zip to do with sequential calculation. Here's a (ahem) parallel:
an analog delay pedal for music is a few dollars worth of tape and circuits that anyone can build in their living room. it has no latency of calculation, actually, the exact algorithm was never expressed in mathematical form at all!
The reason why turing machines will never emulate neurological systems effectively (even if you make a silicon-laser based neural network, let's say) is that they do not calculate their result as the SIMULTANEOUS calculation that a physical property (the addition of light, the addition of electricity)
And we know that reality is discontinuous at um... Plank size.. but computers are discontinuous by whole numbers (it's all binary in computers, whole binary numbers) and to *calculate* the number that represents the summing of say, 15000 other nodes is going to exorbitantly increase and increase.. and be a rat race to nowhere.
Moral of the story,
- DIGITAL aka sequential discrete algorithms will always be out of reach
the length of time it takes to solve a problem increases exponentially
faster with problem difficultyblooms with the ANALOG aka physical
continuous summation
- ANALOG aka intantaeous continuous algorithms based on real-world phenomena
scales linearly with the diffculty of the problem. I can't really say that -
no one really knows how the brain scales in that regard, but I can certainly
say that a whole class of problems exist that will forever be out of the reach
"classical" sequential machines.
What some people are thinking is right though, digital computers can do things that brains can't, and they'd be right. We've spent along time with digital logic and found alot of it's basic theorems and limits.
To close: It's the other side, the continuous field of analog electronics - not turing! - that has the promise of creating the type of intelligence we equate with "intelligence" and "free will".
Isn't it already running osx? isn't one operating system enough?
(hmm.. dual-booting.... cell phones?)
too true - the only thing that gives us a "right" to our existence is that each of our experiences (our trajectory through life) are unique, developing a unique being and hence, we ourselves fufill the role of "the creator". If external forces disturb that feedback cycle of experience->chemical action->experience->chemical action, we may find that we are no longer created by "reality" but by eachother.
perhaps it's ignorant to try and define a soul as seperate from the the world that holds it. I'm certain that removing that connection renders the term soul meaningless, after it's been thought through.
I'd say this is, upon reflection, will come as a huge blow to proponents of an ineffable soul. If emotions have a chemical basis (and i suppose, pheromones and hormones and the like already prove this, if not as viscerally) then ones innate moral and ethical feelings may ultimately be stripped of environmental causation.
I'd hazard that imbibing such a chemical is the equivalent of running magnetic bulk erasers against your spirit. Not that it's not interesting for use in PTSD cases, or hell, asking the lady you love out on a date, but if there is no causative relationship between what you learn and what you feel, is that any different then not learning at all?
That our intelligence is a better guardian then our heart, may be or may be not, but the coup is underway!
(and i've read enough science fiction to handle it, baby!)
total intuition and i know no facts here,
but doesn't it just reek of bribe? only takes one good bribe in the right place, sometimes...
Whoa, little quick there. I'd LOVE to take you up on that challenge. You buying? And, don't be dense - LSD isn't addictive. Not. Even. A. Little. Bit.
I'll match each day you smoke Marlboro Lights with four daily doses of cocaine. At the end of a week, you're on. Relapse time period, three months to prove it. Just like some other people here, all propaganda, no experience.
You show me a world where cigarettes are outlawed and you can only get them at the dead of night in a bad neighboorhood, and i'll show you people that will suck dick to smoke them.
Are you so foolish as to not consider the relative ease of supply? THINK, dammit THINK for a second - people don't kill eachother over cigarettes because it's easier to shop lift them.
Look man, i can't waste too much time on people with no perspective, but if you think nicotine would inspire less violence in addicts given a restricted supply... Guess what, your a moron. Me, i've done all three, like i said, and only ever been addicted to nicotine. I mean, smoking week-old butts out of a public ashtray addicted.
Oh - and stop getting your behavioral knowledge from the Shapell Show, that will help.
C'mon.. the Think Train is IN my friend - the logic goes:
if nicotine (an addictive, horribly toxic drug) can have positive health affects and it's really "medicine" for the menally ill,
HOW is it that the same argument can't be applied publically to Marijunana, a safe, and proven remedy that DOESN'T kill your dumb ass.
It's damned obvious that Marijuana has no nicotine. However, I suggest you pick up a bong - you seem like your a little pent up.
"There will be great progress when the nicotine sister drugs come to market," he says. "About half the cigarettes in this country are bought by people with psychiatric problems -- high percentages of people with depression and schizophrenia smoke, for example."
"When we can give people their medicine in a form that doesn't kill them, it will be real progress."
so, nicotine is used by people with mental problems and they just need this "medicine" in a less harmful way? Gee... that doesn't sound like Marijuana AT ALL (sarcasm) damn their hypocrisy (not sarcasm) because there are *tens of thousands* of mentally ill patients who are being incarcerated RIGHT NOW because of a lack of "real progress" -- and pharma companies that know they'll not be able to control the supply.
Way to illustrate the idiocy of Marijuana Prohibition, while addictive, deadly, ostracized nicotine is really... you know... helping our mentally ill legally, state-sanctioned, everyday.
I think it's pretty important to note here, for the uninformed, that cocaine and LSD are nowhere NEAR as harmful a decision to try then nicotine. The thing that harms you is that, with nicotine, you'll do it everyday for the rest of your life.
Nicotine is a "hard" drug. Cocaine, less so. LSD, i'd say it's a "squishy" drug. YMMV.
It's odd that I'd take a devils advocate position here, but as both an enthusiast musician and a consultant programmer, i've got to take issue. What's so horrible about a label owning a song performed for them? It's called work-for-hire, and *every* programmer encounters this on a regular basis. Company A pays the bills and Company A owns the work. To be upset about a music label doing this is to somehow claim that music itself is somehow more priceless then, say, the code I write on the job (both are equal to me).
/o rly?
//music for kids by kids
///because we wanna, not because we gotta!
The afore should highlight why i do music for myself and programming for a living.
I think it's time for musicians to realize that if they want to get paid for what they do without starting their own business to do it - be ready to do what most every programmer has done: Suffer the proprietary slop because it's eaiser, or support Open Source Music because it doesn't mean you sell control away. (but.. but... how do we get paid?? look at open source business!!)
Complaining that a company owns a work-for-hire done for them, sounds alot like musicians are just out to get a fast buck.
Just because it's easier, more beautiful, compact, and enjoyable doesn't make it a two-seater miata! /and when i thought programming really wasn't fun, and there was just too much toil-per-feature, i found it myself. and at least programming is fun again! //Python3000 will have interfaces
Please tell me that edus's aren't double taxed. When you get a new computer with an unused Vista on it, the price of that computer *did not* include a Vista license, right? Otherwise you are paying twice, once for the site license, and then every time you buy a new computer, which is totally undeserved profit. /IF that's true, what i wrote above, i can see why you have "no problems". Very nice of M$ to accommodate. //If it's not, thanks for making that clear for the crowd - it'd be about honorable.
Its the parents job to keep inappropriate things from thier kids, not society's.
So we'll be having the cocaine stands for the high school prom then? Fantastic! And E. coli? It's the parent's job to test that stuff! Let's pit each and every family up against corporations with $$$ and drugs and sex and heavy-metal laced foods!
I know what you're thinking, "centipedes, in my vagina?" But it can happen to you.
You must be new here. What, you didn't have to hand your girlfriend over for 'debriefing' when you signed up? CowboyNeal said it was pure SOP.