Don't use TP, use rags - they're more environmentally friendly. Not only do you avoid throwing out old T-shirts and such, but you keep reusing them over and over. You'll save money, too!
I'd say do this the same way you'd choose something like a software development strategy - write down your requirements, write down your schedule, look at your risks, and come up with a plan.
For example, if you won't have much time to unpack after you get to your new apartment, I would suggest working primarily by a priority system augmented by categorization - this will enable you to get to things quickly even if they're packed away. This is how I pack when I'm going to college, since my school doesn't allow returning students to move in until the day before classes. That way, random shit like decorations go on the bottom of the pile, whereas my toothbrush and my notebooks are in the same box, which is also the first box I unpack.
On the other hand, if you don't have much of a time constraint on either end, a relativistic approach is clearly the best - think about where things will go in your new place, and pack so that you minimize the box trucking when you unpack.
On the other hand, if you have to pack real quick, you might have to sacrifice organization in favor of getting it pitched into boxes quickly. In that case, the relativistic approach works, only you pack things that are close together in your current abode in the same box.
Think about supplies, too. If you don't have much shit and not much is breakable, garbage bags work wonders.
Minimizing space is worth considering, too, if you're looking at making multiple trips (heaven forbid.) Don't just pack that desk empty - load it into the truck, and then fill the drawers with smaller boxes full of stuff. I know putting a box inside my mini-fridge saved the day this year. . .
If you're rich, on the other hand, consider throwing out or giving away easily replaceable good such as notebooks, underwear, pens, signifigant others, and dishes.
Consider that Google has to make money somewhere, and the only way they seem to be able to do that is by selling advertisemet involving inflated PageRank scores or those extra links at the top of each search page (with the rest of the services Google offers being simple marketing).
In that case, both companies are in the same market, with roughly the same business strategy - their primary source of income is revenue for selling advertisement, and they attract customers to this advertising using various services, with Internet search being one of the main ones.
Most human and animal learning is simpler than that - it's just the cataloguing of appetetive and aversive stimuli. How are we defining learning here? You seem to have learning confused with cognitive thought or symbolic reasoning.
The computer takes a game it's playing and uses it to help play better in the future by changing some piece of data that may, down the line and under the correct circumstances, change its behavior, hopefully in a way that will cause it to be more likely to win chess games. That sounds like machine learning to me.
Brute force is the most popular method; and it is the main one used by computers like Deep Blue. There are other approaches to computer chess that do attempt to recognize patterns on the board. I have a friend who is working on a chess program that knows how to 'play for position.'
As for learning from mistakes, there are chess programs with libraries of games that add games they are playing to the library - doesn't that count as learning from mistakes? How about multiple-heuristic chess programs that modify their heuristics in-game to try to match their style to the style of their opponents?
I think windowmanager choice is a somewhat different issue from software package choice.
My take on the whole issue is that software (office suites, Mozilla, etc.) is what the computer is actually there for, and this stuff should be the focus of what I am doing when I sit down.
To that end, when I login on my computer, I am not logging in to goof around with Gnome or KDE, I'm logging in to browse the web, check my e-mail, or work on some project.
It's probably of note that I program enough that most of my time interacting with my computer is either done through a web browser or through CLI.
I also want X. As far as I can tell, the CLI jockeys who don't use X aren't using any applications that need X - say, OpenOffice or a web browser. The GUI people who say someone who wants to use X but have it get out of his way, on the other hand, have missed the point.
I like WYSIWYG word processors like OpenOffice, I like browswing webpages with web browsers that are capable of displaying images, and I don't know how in the heck I would maintain my webpage if I didn't have X to run a decent paint program from.
What I don't like is navigating endless menus, using the mouse to manipulate files, and not being able to efficiently switch tasks with only a keystroke. You know that feeling some people express that Windows is more of a roadblock on the path to efficient computer usage, and so is MacOS? I feel the same way about Sawfish.
This is a very different issue from Mozilla wasting resources - that has nothing to do with the interface. Frankly, the Web is a mouse-driven thing, and for that I can handle Mozilla being mouse-driven. Resource wastage is bad, but then again so is resource wastage on most any other decent web browser. Besides, Mozilla is an application, not a desktop environment.
Since about 90% of mac users won't ever put a second disk in, and there isn't even room in an iMac for a second disk that I know of, I'd imagine they are only talking about on a single disk.
Duh. Giving every software project a name that tells you directly what it does is really kinda lame. It'd be like renaming the Cadillac Escalade the "Cadillac SUV That Is Just Like A Certain Popular GMC SUV Only It Costs More Because It's A Caddie And You Don't Even Get All The Snazzy Features On Other Caddies Such As Northstar."
What would we call all the office suites?
The KDE Office Suite, the Gnome Office Suite, the Sun Office suite, with apps in them called KDE Word, Gnome Spreadsheet, and Sun Presentation Software?
No, we couldn't even do that, because we'd have to name the projects themselves with a name that makes sense, so KDE would be called the "Desktop Environment Project That's Based On A Library That Used To Be Called QT Only We Can't Call It That Anymore Because It's Not Descriptive Enough." Sun would suffer even worse.
Only Gnome and GTK+ would survive, since they are descriptive acronyms based on (somewhat) descriptive acronyms. We probably wouldn't be able to get away with using them in acronymic form, though. So GTK+ would suddenly become the "Gnu Image Manipulation Program ToolKit Plus"
God save us with Gnome - we couldn't call it the GNU Network Object Model Environment, because we'd have to unroll the GNU, so it would become the GNU's Not Unix Network OBject Model Environment, only suddenly we have another acronym to unroll, and everything goes to hell and it's like trying to debug C++ programs that use multiple inheritance using gdb.
Re:Some disappointed scientists
on
Space Junk Tracked
·
· Score: 3, Funny
If they were real scientists, they'd build a rocket out of spare parts and make their own seismic phenomena.
You've got more honor than me. When people insult Illinois, I usually concede, "Yeah, we really are a flat state with terrible weather whose only two claims to fame are the World Church of the Creator and a city that smells like transmission fluid."
At least in my hometown, EarthLink is the slowest ISP there is. One oft-cited reason for people I know switching to AOL is because it gives them a noticeably faster online experience.
No offense to my many Texan friends, but I kind of want to give Texas back to Mexico.
Not that they would want to take it. . . no amount of oil and old-recipe Dr. Pepper in the world is worth having to deal with a state that has the kind of culture that produces legislation making it illegal for a man to kiss another man in public.
I heard on one of those charlatan pop psychology radio shows (of the Dr. Laura variety) once that fathers should not allow their children to see them naked. For daughters, it is because they would be afraid of their dad's penis, and for sons it would be because they are intimidated by its size.
Guys who look at pornography as children are LESS likely to commit sex crimes. MUCH less likely.
If I remember right, about half of rapists are white men from middle class conservative Christian backgrounds who weren't exposed to sex much as children.
Ya know that US stereotype of a cowboy - the guy who carries at least one gun on him at all times, but doesn't even take his clothes off to bathe?
That's us.
We still think violence is an excellent way to solve problems, and are largely inured to it - hence the reason why we're one of the last countries in the world to allow captial punishment for mentally retarded individuals.
Besides, violence raises few anxieties in people that affect them directly. Sex, on the other hand, raises all sorts of issues that Americans never deal with - like our own lack of comfort with our bodies. I still think one of the biggest reasons why there is basically no full-frontal male nudity in movies as opposed to female full-frontal nudity, which is quite common, is related to size issues. I wouldn't be surprised if there are guys out there who have refused to se The Pillow Book because they know they'd have to see Ewan McGregor's big dick.
Of course, I can't really say this is all that much different from other cultures, since I have never lived anywhere but the USA. Let's hope I'm providing some insight, though - I'd be depressed if this is the way it is around the world.
Slashdot Mirror
Don't use TP, use rags - they're more environmentally friendly. Not only do you avoid throwing out old T-shirts and such, but you keep reusing them over and over. You'll save money, too!
I'd say do this the same way you'd choose something like a software development strategy - write down your requirements, write down your schedule, look at your risks, and come up with a plan.
For example, if you won't have much time to unpack after you get to your new apartment, I would suggest working primarily by a priority system augmented by categorization - this will enable you to get to things quickly even if they're packed away. This is how I pack when I'm going to college, since my school doesn't allow returning students to move in until the day before classes. That way, random shit like decorations go on the bottom of the pile, whereas my toothbrush and my notebooks are in the same box, which is also the first box I unpack.
On the other hand, if you don't have much of a time constraint on either end, a relativistic approach is clearly the best - think about where things will go in your new place, and pack so that you minimize the box trucking when you unpack.
On the other hand, if you have to pack real quick, you might have to sacrifice organization in favor of getting it pitched into boxes quickly. In that case, the relativistic approach works, only you pack things that are close together in your current abode in the same box.
Think about supplies, too. If you don't have much shit and not much is breakable, garbage bags work wonders.
Minimizing space is worth considering, too, if you're looking at making multiple trips (heaven forbid.) Don't just pack that desk empty - load it into the truck, and then fill the drawers with smaller boxes full of stuff. I know putting a box inside my mini-fridge saved the day this year. . .
If you're rich, on the other hand, consider throwing out or giving away easily replaceable good such as notebooks, underwear, pens, signifigant others, and dishes.
Consider that Google has to make money somewhere, and the only way they seem to be able to do that is by selling advertisemet involving inflated PageRank scores or those extra links at the top of each search page (with the rest of the services Google offers being simple marketing).
In that case, both companies are in the same market, with roughly the same business strategy - their primary source of income is revenue for selling advertisement, and they attract customers to this advertising using various services, with Internet search being one of the main ones.
Hey, at least you would't be the poor sap who has to get dumped for the A.I. chat bot that HE WROTE.
Most human and animal learning is simpler than that - it's just the cataloguing of appetetive and aversive stimuli. How are we defining learning here? You seem to have learning confused with cognitive thought or symbolic reasoning.
The computer takes a game it's playing and uses it to help play better in the future by changing some piece of data that may, down the line and under the correct circumstances, change its behavior, hopefully in a way that will cause it to be more likely to win chess games. That sounds like machine learning to me.
Brute force is the most popular method; and it is the main one used by computers like Deep Blue. There are other approaches to computer chess that do attempt to recognize patterns on the board. I have a friend who is working on a chess program that knows how to 'play for position.'
As for learning from mistakes, there are chess programs with libraries of games that add games they are playing to the library - doesn't that count as learning from mistakes? How about multiple-heuristic chess programs that modify their heuristics in-game to try to match their style to the style of their opponents?
I think windowmanager choice is a somewhat different issue from software package choice.
My take on the whole issue is that software (office suites, Mozilla, etc.) is what the computer is actually there for, and this stuff should be the focus of what I am doing when I sit down.
To that end, when I login on my computer, I am not logging in to goof around with Gnome or KDE, I'm logging in to browse the web, check my e-mail, or work on some project.
It's probably of note that I program enough that most of my time interacting with my computer is either done through a web browser or through CLI.
I also want X. As far as I can tell, the CLI jockeys who don't use X aren't using any applications that need X - say, OpenOffice or a web browser. The GUI people who say someone who wants to use X but have it get out of his way, on the other hand, have missed the point.
I like WYSIWYG word processors like OpenOffice, I like browswing webpages with web browsers that are capable of displaying images, and I don't know how in the heck I would maintain my webpage if I didn't have X to run a decent paint program from.
What I don't like is navigating endless menus, using the mouse to manipulate files, and not being able to efficiently switch tasks with only a keystroke. You know that feeling some people express that Windows is more of a roadblock on the path to efficient computer usage, and so is MacOS? I feel the same way about Sawfish.
This is a very different issue from Mozilla wasting resources - that has nothing to do with the interface. Frankly, the Web is a mouse-driven thing, and for that I can handle Mozilla being mouse-driven. Resource wastage is bad, but then again so is resource wastage on most any other decent web browser. Besides, Mozilla is an application, not a desktop environment.
The FCC seems to stop listening to the radio after 10:00 PM. . .
Hey, ya need a spouse? 'cos I just read the document and think I should maybe move to the EU quickly, before the cops catch me.
Since about 90% of mac users won't ever put a second disk in, and there isn't even room in an iMac for a second disk that I know of, I'd imagine they are only talking about on a single disk.
Journalling filesystems don't suffer data loss when the computer loses power suddenly. That's probably the most salient advantage.
If you can afford a UPS and run an OS that doesn't crash or hang often, you can most likely survive without one.
Duh. Giving every software project a name that tells you directly what it does is really kinda lame. It'd be like renaming the Cadillac Escalade the "Cadillac SUV That Is Just Like A Certain Popular GMC SUV Only It Costs More Because It's A Caddie And You Don't Even Get All The Snazzy Features On Other Caddies Such As Northstar."
What would we call all the office suites?
The KDE Office Suite, the Gnome Office Suite, the Sun Office suite, with apps in them called KDE Word, Gnome Spreadsheet, and Sun Presentation Software?
No, we couldn't even do that, because we'd have to name the projects themselves with a name that makes sense, so KDE would be called the "Desktop Environment Project That's Based On A Library That Used To Be Called QT Only We Can't Call It That Anymore Because It's Not Descriptive Enough." Sun would suffer even worse.
Only Gnome and GTK+ would survive, since they are descriptive acronyms based on (somewhat) descriptive acronyms. We probably wouldn't be able to get away with using them in acronymic form, though. So GTK+ would suddenly become the "Gnu Image Manipulation Program ToolKit Plus"
God save us with Gnome - we couldn't call it the GNU Network Object Model Environment, because we'd have to unroll the GNU, so it would become the GNU's Not Unix Network OBject Model Environment, only suddenly we have another acronym to unroll, and everything goes to hell and it's like trying to debug C++ programs that use multiple inheritance using gdb.
If they were real scientists, they'd build a rocket out of spare parts and make their own seismic phenomena.
You've got more honor than me. When people insult Illinois, I usually concede, "Yeah, we really are a flat state with terrible weather whose only two claims to fame are the World Church of the Creator and a city that smells like transmission fluid."
At least in my hometown, EarthLink is the slowest ISP there is. One oft-cited reason for people I know switching to AOL is because it gives them a noticeably faster online experience.
I don't know. How hard is it to set up linux on a mac?
No offense to my many Texan friends, but I kind of want to give Texas back to Mexico.
Not that they would want to take it. . . no amount of oil and old-recipe Dr. Pepper in the world is worth having to deal with a state that has the kind of culture that produces legislation making it illegal for a man to kiss another man in public.
I heard on one of those charlatan pop psychology radio shows (of the Dr. Laura variety) once that fathers should not allow their children to see them naked. For daughters, it is because they would be afraid of their dad's penis, and for sons it would be because they are intimidated by its size.
Guys who look at pornography as children are LESS likely to commit sex crimes. MUCH less likely.
If I remember right, about half of rapists are white men from middle class conservative Christian backgrounds who weren't exposed to sex much as children.
Ya know that US stereotype of a cowboy - the guy who carries at least one gun on him at all times, but doesn't even take his clothes off to bathe?
That's us.
We still think violence is an excellent way to solve problems, and are largely inured to it - hence the reason why we're one of the last countries in the world to allow captial punishment for mentally retarded individuals.
Besides, violence raises few anxieties in people that affect them directly. Sex, on the other hand, raises all sorts of issues that Americans never deal with - like our own lack of comfort with our bodies. I still think one of the biggest reasons why there is basically no full-frontal male nudity in movies as opposed to female full-frontal nudity, which is quite common, is related to size issues. I wouldn't be surprised if there are guys out there who have refused to se The Pillow Book because they know they'd have to see Ewan McGregor's big dick.
Of course, I can't really say this is all that much different from other cultures, since I have never lived anywhere but the USA. Let's hope I'm providing some insight, though - I'd be depressed if this is the way it is around the world.
Read the article - they have a page talking about how 8-legged robots provide a much more stable platform while walking than 6-legged ones.
This makes sense to me - I can't really see any leg movement pattern for a 6-legged robot that wouldn't introduce a fair amount of wiggling.
Check out the demoscene. Not really previously unexploited media so much as using an existing and well known medium in an interesting way.
Haha! Thou hast given me the (Score: -1, Redundant) of shame, but it does not hurt, for I am Karma Whorez0|2 and cannot be defeated!
Aren't you special?