Strikes me as tricky
- What counts as private personal data (£5000 for losing a bit-stick with my passport number on it)?
- As one of the main losers of personal data seems to be HMG, won't it be the taxpayer stumping up the £5k in many cases anyway?
- Given that profitable identity theft will often involve either using more info on me than is leaked or further slovenliness by someone in handing out money or whatever without additional checking, how are the balance of probs calculated? I don't know if my info was on any of the recently-lost bit-sticks, CDs etc., but I am one whos credit-card practices have been made available to others by the people running the Goldfish credit-card scheme in the UK.
When I was a lad... we had books with titles like "Chess, computers and long-range planning". The idea was that the lessons learned from developing clever algorithms to help computers play chess would result in computers that could plan - because planning is key to the way people play chess, so "naturally" it will be the key to developing good computer players. However grunt took the lead role in chess-computer performance-improvement, which isn't to say algorithms didn't improve - they did, but not as quick as hardware.
So this long preamble is really to respond to your post with a question - what's the purpose behind the development of chess-playing computers? If it's just to have computers beat humans, that's fine, but if it's about combining the best of human and computer "algorithms" then I'm not sure this is the best route. After all, these programs will get their asses whupped (I believe that's the corrct idiom) by the eventual (long way-off) emergence of software that does combine the best of both.
Government only works as quickly as it can legislate ie not very and don't forget they've got to find the time to fit in a debate about their greater-than-inflation pay increses.
Part of the rationale for Governments and their associated parliaments (where they existed) was the time it would take to consult the key people was too great, much better to have the key people (or their representatives) gathered together. Well, now they can consult readily with the help of modern comms. However the downside is that it's not just key people who have access to such comms, is scum like me too. So then, that's the challenge for Governments - use modern technology but in a way that only responsible, sensible people get to have a say.
Don't go yet Tony!
Coca-cola landed a water-extraction plant on Mars while no-one was watching and will shortly be selling filtered, purified, expensive water back to the Martian bacteria.
It's OK! The additional "is" in "who's" is to make up for the one that's missing between "it" and "not". I believe there's something in Python about getting the words in the right order. And Eric and Ernie had something similar to say in the musical domain.
I had a summer job (just one) when I was at school. It involved not much more than doing boring, dull jobs that no-one else fancied. Things got off to a bad start when it was explained to the foreman that he couldn't treat health-and-safety for me in the same way he did for the Indian / Pakistani women. The word "fuck", together with its various suffixed featured prominently.
So of I went to get kitted out with blues, gloves and safety specs. On to what was christened "the Bombay Bus". Filled cans would come whizzing down the production line, all I had to do was screw a cheap lid onto a poor thread. No mistakes or the cans would start to back up, topple and spill. I remember it being quite a warm spot when I first arrived. Add the safety gear and it became very warm. Once the cans start arriving it got very, very warm. Gloved hands, crossed threads, steamed safety specs and a vocabuliacally challenged foreman. Fortunately he subsequently found me a job carrying a plastic hose through a small, dirty gap, slightly reminiscent of the sort of chimney children climbed up in pictures of Dickensian England.
And more money than I'd seen in my whole life.
The Amusement Park will be closed for repairs.
A face will appear in the Spirit camera. Lip readers will see "You can't park that 'ere".
Spirit'll find tangled bits of fishing line.
Spirit won't find any decent sea-shells.
It will get a good sniffing from a wet dog ("No! Rex! Stop it! Get your nose out of there!").
I bought "Nanotechnology, the next big thing" (or some such) on the strength of the/. review. This was a mistake.
Best book: The Quantum Universe - interesting on a technical level and gives me a superiority complex when I spot the chemistry mistakes.
I'm no software sort, so shoot me down in flames, but - how many "bloody versions" correct bugs and how many introduce genuinely new, valuable features? How many of the former would be caught if developers followed a regulated process - maybe not Govt regulated (OK, offtopic), not IS09000, but something like ISO 17025 (not a good analogy, but something I'm familiar with)?
As I have pointed out elsewhere here, have you / the proof taken account of zugzwang (the fact that you have to move even though you don't want to because any move you play worsens your position). Therefore the advantage of 'the move' which could lead one to think white must win could prove to be a disadvantage at a key point in 'the perfect game'.
Championship? What championship? Kasparov is a good player, but he's not the World Champion. Curiously enough The Lad Himself, Kramnik, has also been testing his wits against a chess program. Odd of Kasparov not to have mentioned how the World Champion got on.
Slashdot Mirror
It should have been called "waff" - consult the Mayor of London for more details
Strikes me as tricky - What counts as private personal data (£5000 for losing a bit-stick with my passport number on it)? - As one of the main losers of personal data seems to be HMG, won't it be the taxpayer stumping up the £5k in many cases anyway? - Given that profitable identity theft will often involve either using more info on me than is leaked or further slovenliness by someone in handing out money or whatever without additional checking, how are the balance of probs calculated? I don't know if my info was on any of the recently-lost bit-sticks, CDs etc., but I am one whos credit-card practices have been made available to others by the people running the Goldfish credit-card scheme in the UK.
When I was a lad ... we had books with titles like "Chess, computers and long-range planning". The idea was that the lessons learned from developing clever algorithms to help computers play chess would result in computers that could plan - because planning is key to the way people play chess, so "naturally" it will be the key to developing good computer players. However grunt took the lead role in chess-computer performance-improvement, which isn't to say algorithms didn't improve - they did, but not as quick as hardware.
So this long preamble is really to respond to your post with a question - what's the purpose behind the development of chess-playing computers? If it's just to have computers beat humans, that's fine, but if it's about combining the best of human and computer "algorithms" then I'm not sure this is the best route. After all, these programs will get their asses whupped (I believe that's the corrct idiom) by the eventual (long way-off) emergence of software that does combine the best of both.
iThink my money will stay in my pocket. After all, someone's got to have money to bail our banks out.
Government only works as quickly as it can legislate ie not very and don't forget they've got to find the time to fit in a debate about their greater-than-inflation pay increses. Part of the rationale for Governments and their associated parliaments (where they existed) was the time it would take to consult the key people was too great, much better to have the key people (or their representatives) gathered together. Well, now they can consult readily with the help of modern comms. However the downside is that it's not just key people who have access to such comms, is scum like me too. So then, that's the challenge for Governments - use modern technology but in a way that only responsible, sensible people get to have a say. Don't go yet Tony!
"Amazon-whacking" sounds a bit too risky to me.
Coca-cola landed a water-extraction plant on Mars while no-one was watching and will shortly be selling filtered, purified, expensive water back to the Martian bacteria.
It's OK! The additional "is" in "who's" is to make up for the one that's missing between "it" and "not". I believe there's something in Python about getting the words in the right order. And Eric and Ernie had something similar to say in the musical domain.
http://www.wi-fiplanet.com/tutorials/article.php/3 292521
That'll put a Euro on the next MS product. And in such a price sensitive market, this could mean the end.
All that's needed is a big enought order - a trillion or so. http://www.wi-fiplanet.com/tutorials/article.php/3 296031
I had a summer job (just one) when I was at school. It involved not much more than doing boring, dull jobs that no-one else fancied. Things got off to a bad start when it was explained to the foreman that he couldn't treat health-and-safety for me in the same way he did for the Indian / Pakistani women. The word "fuck", together with its various suffixed featured prominently. So of I went to get kitted out with blues, gloves and safety specs. On to what was christened "the Bombay Bus". Filled cans would come whizzing down the production line, all I had to do was screw a cheap lid onto a poor thread. No mistakes or the cans would start to back up, topple and spill. I remember it being quite a warm spot when I first arrived. Add the safety gear and it became very warm. Once the cans start arriving it got very, very warm. Gloved hands, crossed threads, steamed safety specs and a vocabuliacally challenged foreman. Fortunately he subsequently found me a job carrying a plastic hose through a small, dirty gap, slightly reminiscent of the sort of chimney children climbed up in pictures of Dickensian England. And more money than I'd seen in my whole life.
The Amusement Park will be closed for repairs. A face will appear in the Spirit camera. Lip readers will see "You can't park that 'ere". Spirit'll find tangled bits of fishing line. Spirit won't find any decent sea-shells. It will get a good sniffing from a wet dog ("No! Rex! Stop it! Get your nose out of there!").
... as was Peter Higgs and the Bison.
I bought "Nanotechnology, the next big thing" (or some such) on the strength of the /. review. This was a mistake.
Best book: The Quantum Universe - interesting on a technical level and gives me a superiority complex when I spot the chemistry mistakes.
What would it look like?
I'm no software sort, so shoot me down in flames, but - how many "bloody versions" correct bugs and how many introduce genuinely new, valuable features? How many of the former would be caught if developers followed a regulated process - maybe not Govt regulated (OK, offtopic), not IS09000, but something like ISO 17025 (not a good analogy, but something I'm familiar with)?
OK, instead of DVD players, how about toothpaste?
The spelling of 'humor' says something about the poster's language training. But don't let that color your opinion.
Also: One point two one Gigawatts, not one point twentyone Gigawatts. Checkmate.
As I have pointed out elsewhere here, have you / the proof taken account of zugzwang (the fact that you have to move even though you don't want to because any move you play worsens your position). Therefore the advantage of 'the move' which could lead one to think white must win could prove to be a disadvantage at a key point in 'the perfect game'.
(Although white to win has been proven) - I missed that, can you give a reference? I would have thought zugzwang wuld be hard to get around.
Championship? What championship? Kasparov is a good player, but he's not the World Champion. Curiously enough The Lad Himself, Kramnik, has also been testing his wits against a chess program. Odd of Kasparov not to have mentioned how the World Champion got on.