> A century and a half after Darwin suggested natural selection as the mechanism of evolution, engineers have proved him right once again.
I would challenge the assertion that entering the design parameters and working out which is the best result isn't proof of the origin of the species suggested by Darwin. I think you're taking that way too literally. To be more specific, genetic algorithms use natural selection (along with crossovers and mutations) as a means of evolving the genes in a population. So in this sense the author is correct in stating that natural selection can be used as a mechanism of evolution, not that they have proved Darwin's assertions of how life arose on Earth.
No Muslim ever claimed this. I think you meant to say "No true Muslim ever claimed this." That way, if I present a Muslim to you who claims exactly that, you're able to say "Ahh, but the explanation is obvious: that person is not a true Muslim."
So what you are saying is that my looking at someone doing something embarrassing (like a peeing drunk) in public is illegal? Or if I turn to my wife and point out the person standing naked in their window? If it's not illegal for me to see and if it's not illegal for me to point it out to others because it's in a public space where you otherwise have no expectation of privacy, why would it be illegal in a photo? You're right... people don't have an expectation of privacy in a public space. However, if someone decides to discreetly pick their nose and someone else notices they're usually considerate and respect the person's privacy by not pointing it out. On the other hand, if you were to take a picture of that situation and publish it online, that would make you an inconsiderate asshole. It's one thing to not have privacy in a crowd of 20 people. It's another thing to not have privacy in front of millions of people online.
I've heard my whole life that birds have metal in their faces that allows them to sense direction like a compass. I'm sure others have heard this as well. How is noshitsherlock a bad tag for an article stating that birds can "see" magnetic fields, when everyone already knows that they have compasses in their heads? Or were we supposed to assume that these compasses were almost entirely useless until scientists discovered exactly how the neural processes involved work? Everybody knows gravity exists. However, knowing gravity's existence is a long way from being able to explain how it works. If there's an article stating "Physicists discover gravity's underlying mechanism" how smart is it to tag it "noshitsherlock" and say "Well, duh... everyone knows gravity exists".
I've noticed this in other consumer goods as well. Whereas before, if a toaster broke, people would take it into a repair shop and have it looked at, now people just throw the old one away and buy a new model. I've seen this tendency on increasingly (mechanically) complex pieces of hardware - to the point where even lawnmowers are fair game for replacement rather than repair. The problem is the dropping prices. You can buy a new toaster for $10 or perhaps $40 if you go with the uber deluxe model with electronic toast level sensors. If it breaks, now you have to take it to a repair guy who runs about $60/hour. So forget even bothering with the basic toaster... it's more efficient in all ways to simply replace it. But if your expensive model breaks, take it in, the guy spends 15 minutes of billable time looking at it, identifies that it needs a new widget part, discover that there is no readily available supplier of that widget, custom order it from someone else in China, pay for the part plus shipping and duties, wait three weeks, pay for the guy to install said replacement part, and hopefully you now have a functioning toaster again. Meanwhile, three weeks and fifty dollars in parts, shipping, and labor have elapsed... not to mention your time, cost of driving back and forth, etc.
I bet we wouldn't have half the problems we do now if we just stopped having people. But until that times comes, if we simply cull half the people we could achieve a similar rate.
You're assuming that there's no e-textbook cost per student either. Some organization could start writing free textbooks under Creative Commons, but then you could get those printed up for a few bucks each in quantity... just like they profit from those $4.99 bargain bin books that used to be $49.95. Add to that the laptop maintenance/repair costs, and I'm not convinced that this is a cost-savings. Certainly convenience and speed with the benefit of frequent e-text updates, etc. but I'm skeptical regarding the cost.
This is an honest question: why do kids need laptops? Is there some fundamental problem in teaching today that can only be solved with computers? Why did you just use a computer to ask that question? Did you just try and equate Slashdot with a classroom?
I would like to see at least some of these computers go to American schools. Do not get me wrong. I like donating to developing countries, but we also need to take care of home. Our inner cities need help. Even rural schools could use these. This is an honest question: why do kids need laptops? Is there some fundamental problem in teaching today that can only be solved with computers?
Re:Hopefully it's a system level issue...
on
Lair Review
·
· Score: 1
Heavenly Sword's "Twing Twang" sections were far more playable using the analog stick, and Warhawk even has the motion controls disabled by default if that's any indication for you. I just finished Heavenly Sword and I'm able to get headshot after headshot when playing Kai using the motion sensitive aftertouch. My friend has great difficulty as she tries to oversteer with broad movements rather than using the fine adjustments it expects. I have two controllers and generally alternate, using one while the other charges. Both respond quite well. Maybe I'll rent Lair and see what all the fuss is about -- I've been avoiding it because of all the reviews like this.
Re:Really not that bad
on
Lair Review
·
· Score: 1
Behold! The Riders of Ron!
Sounds like a prison title to me. It's the new genre of First Prison Shooters.
Had I chosen to emphasize her disease, as I might have, I don't see that there would have been anything wrong with that. And to those of you who think it's okay to bring nonsensical litigation like this against children, stroke victims, hurricane victims, MS sufferers, disabled people on welfare, and others.... to you I can only say that your value system is not unlike that of my opponents, who likewise see nothing wrong with what they are doing. It's not okay to bring nonsensical litigation against anyone regardless of what life has dealt them. But regarding MS, it's the way you worded it. The last sentence of the submission by you makes the statement that she has multiple sclerosis. Clearly, from the comments, a whole lot of people thinks that is emphasizing the disease. It's an entirely different thing to say that the defendant has a disability (which makes it irrelevant) than it is to say that the RIAA is vigorously pursuing the case because it thinks it can use the defendant's disability to their advantage to increase the probability of a successful claim against the defendant (which makes it wholly relevant).
If you meant to say the latter, then you're my kind of people too and I would suggest improved wording for future submissions. If your intent is simply appeal to pity, then go ahead and hit the foe button already.
I think this is important, not because it excuses anyone, but because it points to how just insane the RIAA has become for their little crusade. The fact that they are willing to risk the potentially *HUGE* PR backlash of suing old ladies and the handicapped just to win a few thousand $ in some petty music downloading cases is a good illustration of how far they've gone down the road. Keep in mind that in most cases the RIAA is suing an IP address with no knowledge of the person. Do defense lawyers respond to the charges and say "My client, who it just so happens has multiple sclerosis (thought you'd like to know), maintains..."? NewYorkCountyLawyer's claim that the RIAA goes after the most helpless members of our society, while true on its face, is a bit disingenious. The RIAA goes after IP addresses, and a lot of the people behind those IPs have downloaded/distributed copyrighted materials. That some of those happen to be sick or down on their luck is not necessarily a reflection that the RIAA targets these people specifically (perhaps they do, but I'd need to see evidence) but rather that the people swept up in their dragnet are a representative cross-section of the population, illnesses and frailties included.
And I'm probably overlooking the obvious, but how is that possible? Is there something like a specific order the numbers have to be entered in? You mean like any other combination lock? 4321 and 1234 are both within the 10,000 number range. If there were no specific order, you could open any such lock in a few minutes.
When I searched Wiki I had no such luck, perhaps you are vastly superior to me? No, it's not that I'm superior -- perhaps you're just inferior? I mean, come on... you checked two sites (and both sites have entries, btw) but didn't even bother to Google for it?
I read (skimmed) the article. I was hoping they were going to build a client / server email engine that could replace MS Exchange, but it does not seem so. Does anyone know of a project trying to replace MS Exchange? Perhaps this one -- seems to have a server component which does what Exchange would do.
I disagree, email is still the dominant form of communication online. If you carefully re-read the post you replied to you will discover that, contrary to your claims, you are agreeing.
Is it safe to SEED again? Naturally you mean things like various Linux distribution ISOs, works released under Creative Commons license or in the public domain, your own creative content, etc.? It's always been safe to seed those. Why do you ask?
It doesn't have to. If a product is dual licensed, and you choose License A over License B, you are not bound to the terms of License B. License B has no legal bearing on the relationship between the licensor and licensee. It is effectively nothing but "plain text", modifiable under the terms of License A, if License A permits modification. After all, if License A is accepted, it becomes the de facto copyright notice. For that to be true, you would need a meta-license from all copyright holders involved granting you permission to throw away either License A or License B. Absent such a meta-license, I fail to see how you can arbitrarily ignore one of them.
Slashdot Mirror
I would challenge the assertion that entering the design parameters and working out which is the best result isn't proof of the origin of the species suggested by Darwin. I think you're taking that way too literally. To be more specific, genetic algorithms use natural selection (along with crossovers and mutations) as a means of evolving the genes in a population. So in this sense the author is correct in stating that natural selection can be used as a mechanism of evolution, not that they have proved Darwin's assertions of how life arose on Earth.
You could move to Calgary. I heard McDonald's pays their workers $18/hr just to attract enough people willing to work there.
Awesome... you not only explained the joke but you also provided exactly the same link as the post you replied to.
You're assuming that there's no e-textbook cost per student either. Some organization could start writing free textbooks under Creative Commons, but then you could get those printed up for a few bucks each in quantity... just like they profit from those $4.99 bargain bin books that used to be $49.95. Add to that the laptop maintenance/repair costs, and I'm not convinced that this is a cost-savings. Certainly convenience and speed with the benefit of frequent e-text updates, etc. but I'm skeptical regarding the cost.
Sounds like a prison title to me. It's the new genre of First Prison Shooters.
If you meant to say the latter, then you're my kind of people too and I would suggest improved wording for future submissions. If your intent is simply appeal to pity, then go ahead and hit the foe button already.
...I want my time back. Lucky you. I want my kidney back.Second result is Wikipedia.