Functional programming is making a comeback- it's going to be to the 2010s what OOPs was to the 1990s. I'd suggest these, and make recursive loops a major sticking point. Dr Dobbs has a nice article on why these functional languages make excellent methods for taking advantage of multi-core processors.
The BLS discontinued the official U-7 rate in 1994.
Which in and of itself is suspicious to me- it's called avoiding the truth to keep people from panicing. U-7 also includes the mildly disabled, and those who could work in an emergency (such as during WWII, when housewives were tapped to man factories).
U-6 includes those employed part-time who say they'd rather be employed full-time, which is the big difference.
Yes, the underemployed. What, did you think they didn't deserve the right to earn enough to live?
Well, actually, that depends on how you count unemployment. U7 in the US is nearing 60% now. U6 (the measurement I like the best) is 11.7% in the United States as of last month.
Incorrect- they're mainly meth-heads looking for a way to pay for their next hit.
Anyway, no career criminal or bored teen would steal copper from the lights in the MAX tunnel- anybody with a mind not influenced by drugs finds 44 ton trains moving at 55 mph to be kind of scary.
I didn't say that the State Schools didn't have a history of discrimination- just that the discrimination seemed more in keeping with the mission of the school.
Funny, my experience was exactly the opposite. Perhaps the difference is between Ivy League vs State Schools? My State School absolutely favored the children of those who had not gone to college.
Because that's the other side of the coin of ethics- assigning blame. That's the entire reason we have ethics to begin with.
Again, freeways are about getting from point A to point B. Not about killing anyone who steps onto them.
And once again, the purpose of a killing field is to prevent people from getting from Point A to Point B. The actual killing is secondary, and if everybody follows the rules, no killing would take place.
Setting something to kill anyone who approaches would seem to be the opposite of an ethical action if an ethical action would be keeping people away from such.
Big if, since the whole point is to either enable/disable getting from point a to point b.
A child can wander into traffic without intent to do so.
Not if a parent keeps them on a leash like they're supposed to.
No. The purpose is to kill. Not to prevent. There's a difference. A safe can prevent people from getting from point A to point B (point B being inside the safe) without killing anyone.
Incorrect, since the people can always use dynamite.
The fact that you have to make so many false claims should be enough to tell you that you are wrong.
What false claim? The entire purpose of a border is to keep people from crossing it alive.
Machines cannot be ethical because they cannot choose between a more ethical and less ethical course of action.
Interesting thought- obviously you're not a programmer.
Why do you think DARPA gave funding for the self-healing minefield, which basically replaces land mines with robots that are in a bluetooth network? The two big things those robots give you are- they can be turned off, and if a Dutch minesweeping truck drives through the field, the little robots can move back into position, healing the breach.
Landmines suffer from two problems- they can't be switched off if necessary, and a significantly armored heavy truck with chain flail can mow a path between them, because they're not mobile.
Re:And a toddler wanders into your field of fire.
on
Ethical Killing Machines
·
· Score: 2, Insightful
The parents of the toddler should not have been picnicking on a hill overlooking the kill zone. This is no different than a toddler wandering into freeway traffic.
Here's where I see the value of a correctly ethical killing machine:
Enforcing a border between two groups of humans that would otherwise be killing each other, and making that border 100% impenetrable.
To do this, you need more than just a simple robot that has a GPS unit and shoots everything that moves within a predetermined rectangle. You need a CHEAP simple robot that has a GPS unit and shoots everything that moves in a predetermined rectangle; cheap enough so that you can deploy them thickly enough that their weapons overlap to two robots over.
The headlines and the facts seem to be at odds- the search took 4 years, not 200, and the tomb was unmarked, thus it has been lost for 500 years or so, if being known to be in a given church yet unmarked would count a tomb as "lost".
I'd say that the recent con game that the bankers and ratings companies were running proves that the most successful people in business have a lot of the con man in them.
Back on my purposes- yes it's insecure. But the knowledge that it is insecure, is power in and of itself.
I don't care if somebody with a bluetooth riffle from a mile away can hear my listening to GK Chesterton's "New Jerusalem", for instance. I just want the ability to do it.
Speaking of which, does Debian ARM have a A2DP driver for Bluetooth? I ask because that's the one thing I use on my Wing that the G1 is missing, stereo sound over Bluetooth.
Maybe. As time allows. Yeah, Christopher's been a pretty neat kid, even with some of his language problems (he's now 5 and in special-ed kindergarten). Over the weekend, he told me he wasn't a boy, he was a "ristoper".
The other online dating sites didn't exist when I was looking in 1996-1997-1998.
Also, You Get What You Pay For to some extent- though today I'd suggest a young man go to eHarmony- they seem to provide close to the same level of service.
Slashdot Mirror
Functional programming is making a comeback- it's going to be to the 2010s what OOPs was to the 1990s. I'd suggest these, and make recursive loops a major sticking point. Dr Dobbs has a nice article on why these functional languages make excellent methods for taking advantage of multi-core processors.
Of course, one could potentially reopen the factories and labs where this technology was invented in the first place.
The BLS discontinued the official U-7 rate in 1994.
Which in and of itself is suspicious to me- it's called avoiding the truth to keep people from panicing. U-7 also includes the mildly disabled, and those who could work in an emergency (such as during WWII, when housewives were tapped to man factories).
U-6 includes those employed part-time who say they'd rather be employed full-time, which is the big difference.
Yes, the underemployed. What, did you think they didn't deserve the right to earn enough to live?
Well, actually, that depends on how you count unemployment. U7 in the US is nearing 60% now. U6 (the measurement I like the best) is 11.7% in the United States as of last month.
Incorrect- they're mainly meth-heads looking for a way to pay for their next hit. Anyway, no career criminal or bored teen would steal copper from the lights in the MAX tunnel- anybody with a mind not influenced by drugs finds 44 ton trains moving at 55 mph to be kind of scary.
Sounds like racism to me- on both sides!
I find grunting works for that. Those odd creatures "from Venus" often have far more words than are necessary to get a concept across.
I didn't say that the State Schools didn't have a history of discrimination- just that the discrimination seemed more in keeping with the mission of the school.
Notably missing though from the mythbusters test was a full handsfree setup including voice recognition.
Funny, my experience was exactly the opposite. Perhaps the difference is between Ivy League vs State Schools? My State School absolutely favored the children of those who had not gone to college.
Why are you trying to phrase it as "blame" now?
Because that's the other side of the coin of ethics- assigning blame. That's the entire reason we have ethics to begin with.
Again, freeways are about getting from point A to point B. Not about killing anyone who steps onto them.
And once again, the purpose of a killing field is to prevent people from getting from Point A to Point B. The actual killing is secondary, and if everybody follows the rules, no killing would take place.
Setting something to kill anyone who approaches would seem to be the opposite of an ethical action if an ethical action would be keeping people away from such.
Big if, since the whole point is to either enable/disable getting from point a to point b.
A child can wander into traffic without intent to do so.
Not if a parent keeps them on a leash like they're supposed to.
No. The purpose is to kill. Not to prevent. There's a difference. A safe can prevent people from getting from point A to point B (point B being inside the safe) without killing anyone.
Incorrect, since the people can always use dynamite.
The fact that you have to make so many false claims should be enough to tell you that you are wrong.
What false claim? The entire purpose of a border is to keep people from crossing it alive.
Machines cannot be ethical because they cannot choose between a more ethical and less ethical course of action.
Interesting thought- obviously you're not a programmer.
Why do you think DARPA gave funding for the self-healing minefield, which basically replaces land mines with robots that are in a bluetooth network? The two big things those robots give you are- they can be turned off, and if a Dutch minesweeping truck drives through the field, the little robots can move back into position, healing the breach.
Why would anybody "make a mistake"?
Who cares if they should or should not have?
The blame lies with the parents, not the person setting up the kill zone.
The question is about whether it is ethical to kill an innocent child who accidentally wanders into the kill zone.
That's not an accident.
Yes it is. Because no one has claimed that such an event would be "ethical".
I consider freeways, and keeping children off of them, to be pretty ethical behavior.
That would be termed an "accident". The same if ANYONE accidentally wandered into freeway traffic.
No one accidentally wanders into freeway traffic. Either their wardens were faulty, or they ignored the signs on purpose.
The major difference being that freeway traffic is more about getting from point A to point B and NOT about killing people on the freeway.
And the purpose of the field of fire is to prevent people from getting from point A to point B, and everybody knows it.
Landmines suffer from two problems- they can't be switched off if necessary, and a significantly armored heavy truck with chain flail can mow a path between them, because they're not mobile.
The parents of the toddler should not have been picnicking on a hill overlooking the kill zone. This is no different than a toddler wandering into freeway traffic.
Here's where I see the value of a correctly ethical killing machine:
Enforcing a border between two groups of humans that would otherwise be killing each other, and making that border 100% impenetrable.
To do this, you need more than just a simple robot that has a GPS unit and shoots everything that moves within a predetermined rectangle. You need a CHEAP simple robot that has a GPS unit and shoots everything that moves in a predetermined rectangle; cheap enough so that you can deploy them thickly enough that their weapons overlap to two robots over.
But it will never be moral.
The headlines and the facts seem to be at odds- the search took 4 years, not 200, and the tomb was unmarked, thus it has been lost for 500 years or so, if being known to be in a given church yet unmarked would count a tomb as "lost".
I'd say that the recent con game that the bankers and ratings companies were running proves that the most successful people in business have a lot of the con man in them.
Back on my purposes- yes it's insecure. But the knowledge that it is insecure, is power in and of itself.
I don't care if somebody with a bluetooth riffle from a mile away can hear my listening to GK Chesterton's "New Jerusalem", for instance. I just want the ability to do it.
Speaking of which, does Debian ARM have a A2DP driver for Bluetooth? I ask because that's the one thing I use on my Wing that the G1 is missing, stereo sound over Bluetooth.
Perhaps they infect everything.
And do the midichlorians also carry the force?
Seriously, though, I thought we already had mitochondria living in our cells that were also inherited...
Maybe. As time allows. Yeah, Christopher's been a pretty neat kid, even with some of his language problems (he's now 5 and in special-ed kindergarten). Over the weekend, he told me he wasn't a boy, he was a "ristoper".
The other online dating sites didn't exist when I was looking in 1996-1997-1998. Also, You Get What You Pay For to some extent- though today I'd suggest a young man go to eHarmony- they seem to provide close to the same level of service.
Well, actually, my experience predates both my involvement on slashdot *and* their roadside spamming.