Would cheap, good solar panels be an inflexion point in how we generate and use energy?
If our home generate lots of juice, then home-charged electric (or hybrid) cars could suddenly become significantly cheaper to operate than gas cars because charging them could become cheap. Which in turn could significantly lower our reliance on Russian and Middle Eastern oil, making it easier for us to disengage from meddling over there.
Fair point. Although my main intention was to show the the (necessary) use of abstractions when modeling potentially introduces modeling errors. I wasn't really trying to say that a quantum-level simulation would be the gold standard of accuracy.
However, at least, the IBM experiment will tell us whether the operation of the brain is strictly Newtonian. If this artifical brain behaves differently from a mouse brain, then we would know that non-Newtonian physics is crucial to the operation of a flesh-and-blood brain.
Very good point, but I think you have it half-wrong. Because we can't exhaustively compare their model vs. reality, we can't consider the Newtonian assumption fully validated by experiment. But a disagreement between the model and reality certainly disproves at least one of:
the Newtonian assumption
some aspect of their model other than the Newtonian assumption
their implementation
the emperical data against which they're validating the model
Developing simulations involves using abstractions and simplifications to deal with the fact that we can't handle the computational complexity of quantum-level simulation of an entire mouse brain.
I've seen far too many papers where people make a "simulator" for a system, without demonstrating that the simulator has any real connection to reality, and then make grandiose claims about the real system that they're simulating, based on simulation results.
Call me a cranky old computer scientist, but someone simulating a brain isn't particularly noteworthy. Showing that the simulator is accurate enough to shed light on the ways that brains work, or that the simulated mouse brain can achieve things that we have difficulty achieving with traditional computer software, and I'll be excited.
I don't think it makes you a great person to make hateful remark about a dead individual based on his politics alone, you are making it personal.
Politics is personal. It's personal when someone can lose his house, car, etc. because a political lobby got copyright expanded in both scope and duration. It's personal when a cartel's desire for more profits makes criminal the free use of our computing equipment. Friend, there's not much more personal than having your freedoms taken away for the sake of someone else's business model.
So you're right - what I posted does not make me a great person. But Jack Valenti couldn't have made it much more personal if he tried.
I see people often chastise others about thinking about this law before altering incentive systems. But are effects like this really that reasonable to anticipate?
CVG reports that at least one analyst thinks that Wii demand won't be met until 2009.
OMG!!! The data set of analysts' predictions has an outlier??? We should definitely pay the most attention to that estimate and not even mention the average predicted date for demand being met.
You should be a little surprised. QuickTime is a user-privileged program, not part of the kernel and not a device driver. It shouldn't be able to cause the whole OS to crash.
But realistically, that probably just means that QuickTime is demonstrating the existence of a bug in the video driver and/or the Vista kernel. A user-privileged program can't should the whole blame for any BSOD.
As if that wasn't disheartening enough for the future of tech at war,
I think this is actually hugely encouraging:
We're finally getting a concrete reality check about the usefulness of such systems. This might, might be something that moves DoD people towards worrying about effectiveness first and foremost, rather than wanting to be Q from the James Bond books.
Let's be honest - does the world really need a more effective U.S. military right now? To the extend that the DoD is wasting money to its own detriment, perhaps that will clip the Bush administration's ambitions a little.
In the future, if we actually have a just war to wage, we'll potentially go into it with the knowledge that we don't have to spend 400-bazillion dollars to wage it. Sacrifice our sons and daughters, yes. Make them wear heavy, unhelpful equiment, no. This lets us wage war a little bit longer before the dollar collapses and we have to negotiate a truce.
I'm not an official mouthpiece of IBM when I'm posting on Slashdot! It's just a disclaimer (more for IBM's benefit than for mine).
Yeah, I guess that part. I was asking the (somewhat tangental) next-deeper, mroe general question. I'm curious about why we speak of corporations as though they were persons and had minds.
It's interesting that the people in charge of Russia now could be reasonably charged as "counter-revolutionaries" who thwart the will of the people. If I recall, the punishment for that used to be being sent to the Gulag.
the unthinking PC nonsense spouted by DoofusOfDeath.
My comment was neither PC nor thoughtless. From the perspective of most persons that got nuked, nukes suck. I wasn't making a statement either way regarding whether or not I think the nuking was overall a good idea (in fact, I do think it was, assuming we have all the facts).
Slashdot Mirror
Would cheap, good solar panels be an inflexion point in how we generate and use energy?
If our home generate lots of juice, then home-charged electric (or hybrid) cars could suddenly become significantly cheaper to operate than gas cars because charging them could become cheap. Which in turn could significantly lower our reliance on Russian and Middle Eastern oil, making it easier for us to disengage from meddling over there.
Pipe-dream or possibility?
Now we're going to get spam advertising ways to lengthen our nanotubes...
Fair point. Although my main intention was to show the the (necessary) use of abstractions when modeling potentially introduces modeling errors. I wasn't really trying to say that a quantum-level simulation would be the gold standard of accuracy.
Very good point, but I think you have it half-wrong. Because we can't exhaustively compare their model vs. reality, we can't consider the Newtonian assumption fully validated by experiment. But a disagreement between the model and reality certainly disproves at least one of:
Developing simulations involves using abstractions and simplifications to deal with the fact that we can't handle the computational complexity of quantum-level simulation of an entire mouse brain.
I've seen far too many papers where people make a "simulator" for a system, without demonstrating that the simulator has any real connection to reality, and then make grandiose claims about the real system that they're simulating, based on simulation results.
Call me a cranky old computer scientist, but someone simulating a brain isn't particularly noteworthy. Showing that the simulator is accurate enough to shed light on the ways that brains work, or that the simulated mouse brain can achieve things that we have difficulty achieving with traditional computer software, and I'll be excited.
Politics is personal. It's personal when someone can lose his house, car, etc. because a political lobby got copyright expanded in both scope and duration. It's personal when a cartel's desire for more profits makes criminal the free use of our computing equipment. Friend, there's not much more personal than having your freedoms taken away for the sake of someone else's business model.
So you're right - what I posted does not make me a great person. But Jack Valenti couldn't have made it much more personal if he tried.
Why did the media leave out the part about someone driving a wooden stake through his heart?
Until I see that footage, I'm not going to believe tha...
(Hold on - someone's at the door.)
AAAAAAAAARRRRRRRGGGGGHHHHHHH.....
Man, that law is a bitch.
I see people often chastise others about thinking about this law before altering incentive systems. But are effects like this really that reasonable to anticipate?
OMG!!! The data set of analysts' predictions has an outlier??? We should definitely pay the most attention to that estimate and not even mention the average predicted date for demand being met.
It makes a lot of sense, considering how my eyelids feel after reading what the article is about.
You should be a little surprised. QuickTime is a user-privileged program, not part of the kernel and not a device driver. It shouldn't be able to cause the whole OS to crash.
But realistically, that probably just means that QuickTime is demonstrating the existence of a bug in the video driver and/or the Vista kernel. A user-privileged program can't should the whole blame for any BSOD.
I think Apple and Microsoft have a patch for your patch here and here. :)
Unfortunately, this time he tagged someone in England.
I can see it now...
RIAA: Hello? Is this DVD Jon? No! Wait! Don't hang up. We have an... awkward... favor to ask.
Yes, but a high-enough sampling rate and resolution make you not care.
Doesn't the documentation automatically get defragged every 30th time you read it?
I think this is actually hugely encouraging:
We're finally getting a concrete reality check about the usefulness of such systems. This might, might be something that moves DoD people towards worrying about effectiveness first and foremost, rather than wanting to be Q from the James Bond books.
Let's be honest - does the world really need a more effective U.S. military right now? To the extend that the DoD is wasting money to its own detriment, perhaps that will clip the Bush administration's ambitions a little.
In the future, if we actually have a just war to wage, we'll potentially go into it with the knowledge that we don't have to spend 400-bazillion dollars to wage it. Sacrifice our sons and daughters, yes. Make them wear heavy, unhelpful equiment, no. This lets us wage war a little bit longer before the dollar collapses and we have to negotiate a truce.
According to one Microsoft spokesperson, the company reiterated its support for having a common, industry-standard web platform to embrace and extend.
Any news on how hard Intel will work to ensure that good free software exists for driving Santa Rosa's wifi, wired ethernet, and video chips?
Best. Quote. Ever. :)
Yeah, I guess that part. I was asking the (somewhat tangental) next-deeper, mroe general question. I'm curious about why we speak of corporations as though they were persons and had minds.
The following is off-topic, but there was no better place for me to post this, so please don't mod me too harshly...
What does it mean for IBM (which is a corporation) to have an opinion?
It's interesting that the people in charge of Russia now could be reasonably charged as "counter-revolutionaries" who thwart the will of the people. If I recall, the punishment for that used to be being sent to the Gulag.
My comment was neither PC nor thoughtless. From the perspective of most persons that got nuked, nukes suck. I wasn't making a statement either way regarding whether or not I think the nuking was overall a good idea (in fact, I do think it was, assuming we have all the facts).
I would give anything to have mod points right now.