This is basically a computer using a (basic) kind of artificial intelligence to respond to human questions about the real world
Only if you're willing to horribly stretch the definition of AI.
if an intelligence were to directly (or through deception) control a ribosome, like this one does, that would enable it to self-replicate. The question it would need to answer is one that is "but" an exercise in protein folding : "how do I fold a protein so it runs my thinking algorithm ?", even if it's much harder than the current questions being asked.
This isn't designing proteins, it's finding the 3D structures of proteins we know. And designing a protein capable of catalyzing such a complex chain of events is orders of magnitude more complex than what it's doing right now.
Like most research worth pursuing, it's very, very not-buzzword-compliant, and conceivably unbelievably dangerous.
Maybe you took this into account, but remember linux (and probably windows too) grabs unused memory for caches and stuff. It'd be more accurate to use the output from 'top' (at the top of the screen it shows memory usage by category). In windows, I think the process manager gives you these statistics at the process manager.
you should employ people doing whatever work that you can think of. Especially random, somewhat questionable research. Most of the major breakthroughs have been the result of random, somewhat questionable research
Australia has a population density of 2.6/sq. km. The USA has a population density of 31/sq. km. That means that the US is nearly 1200% more densely populated than Australia
You should probably be looking at the distribution of people rather than bare population density. Good luck finding stats on that, though.
Using a small telescope as opposed to a large one, is more beneficial in light polluted areas, since you will be receiving less light-pollution in the 'bucket', brightness of the object in question, remains the same, so the ratio of brightness/light pollution is higher, yielding a brighter image.
Huh? Larger aperture means you get more light, both from the object and the sky.
Some government guy from Israel wanted it to be called "Mexican Flu" because it appears they can't (or shouldn't) name the pig as it's unclean, or something of the sort. Of course, Mexico complained about discrimination (like it did when flights from Mexico to my country were canceled).
But given that the force of gravity decreases by the inverse square law, using something like the infltable tower might make the space elevator much more feasible to create
Take into account the Earth has a radius around 6360km. Even if you go up 100km, that's just 1.57% farther, meaning a 2.47% reduction in gravity.
A guy in my city was caught a few months ago doing a high-tech version of this. He made a kind of man-in-the-middle attack by putting a fake reader on top of the ATM's card reader, and a fake keyboard over the real one. That way, you used the ATM and your card info and PIN was recorded. Afterwards, the guy picked up the device, cloned your card and used your PIN. Clever, huh?
Hey, you (as in the Castrist apologist) do not get to play the innocent and claim that the USG is the root of all evil and that the embargo is thus all the USG's fault.
I'm going to ignore that dumb interpretation of my post, because this discussion might turn out to be interesting. I explicitly said I'm against the current Cuban government, and I said in my last post that you should continue the policy you're applying to Cuba, and extend it to all non-democratic countries (China, Burma, etc).
Shall we go another round or do you recognize that the premise of my initial post is not rebutted by the USG's support of bad rulers in a sea of bad choices?
What's the premise of your initial post? That the embargo is OK because Cuba is anti-democratic? I could possibly agree with that (although I doubt they currently have the will or resources for more communist plots), but that's not what I was arguing about. Regardless of how good that reason is, it can't be the US government's justification, because they turn a blind eye to other dictatorships. Therefore, it's not the dictatorship part that annoys them, but something else.
Hey, you (as in the US gov) are welcome to criticize the hell out of Castro, but it gives the image that you don't actually believe what you say about democracy, and that dictatorships are alright unless they go against American interests.
Opposing some dictatorships and not others is wrong. The solution isn't to stop giving a crap about anyone, but rather to be consistently pro-democracy.
I'm sure that all the Angolans killed over 27 years of Cuban intervention in their once prosperous country are reassured by Cuba's justification that Cuba helped destroy their country to assist the people being oppressed by US supported dictators in the rest of the world
Huh? I'm saying that before the US can use that argument, it should at least acknowledge that its actions in latin america and other places were wrong. Otherwise, you're saying "only the dictatorships we like are OK"
Castro & his apologists like you
How is it insightful to infer this from my post? Your view of the world seems quite shallow. I think Cuba (at present) and the US (certain aspects of it) suck.
This is a US corporation and I think it would be very bad if that started to refuse domain names to Canada because the US government doesn't think our copyright laws are draconian enough
Aren't canadian domains handled by Canada? My country's domains are handled here.
I think he was shooting for irony, and everyone missed it (we know how badly irony is conveyed in writing). Of course there's no child exploitation in the making of manga.
Everywhere in the Americas (and most of the world, I don't know where you are), American == resident of the USA.
When speaking in english. In spanish, saying "americano" instead of "yanqui" or "estadounidense" sounds kinda odd, and we usually refer to the continent when saying "america". I agree that english-speakers should stop bitching about "american" vs "US american" or whatever.
If you think software RNGs aren't random enough to play board games with, you'd better delete your Webmail accounts and close your online bank account, because Web security absolutely relies on them.
I thought they used/dev/random and hired people to wiggle the mouse and type random stuff for entropy:(
Slashdot Mirror
Perhaps you should read the article. They're designing proteins
Yeah, well, you know what? Maybe I should.
(but I won't)
This is basically a computer using a (basic) kind of artificial intelligence to respond to human questions about the real world
Only if you're willing to horribly stretch the definition of AI.
if an intelligence were to directly (or through deception) control a ribosome, like this one does, that would enable it to self-replicate. The question it would need to answer is one that is "but" an exercise in protein folding : "how do I fold a protein so it runs my thinking algorithm ?", even if it's much harder than the current questions being asked.
This isn't designing proteins, it's finding the 3D structures of proteins we know. And designing a protein capable of catalyzing such a complex chain of events is orders of magnitude more complex than what it's doing right now.
Like most research worth pursuing, it's very, very not-buzzword-compliant, and conceivably unbelievably dangerous.
For very small values of 'conceivable'.
Maybe you took this into account, but remember linux (and probably windows too) grabs unused memory for caches and stuff. It'd be more accurate to use the output from 'top' (at the top of the screen it shows memory usage by category). In windows, I think the process manager gives you these statistics at the process manager.
you should employ people doing whatever work that you can think of. Especially random, somewhat questionable research. Most of the major breakthroughs have been the result of random, somewhat questionable research
Monkeys with multiple asses?
Australia has a population density of 2.6/sq. km. The USA has a population density of 31/sq. km. That means that the US is nearly 1200% more densely populated than Australia
You should probably be looking at the distribution of people rather than bare population density. Good luck finding stats on that, though.
This student later became a world-known developer of evolutionary algorithms :P
Using a small telescope as opposed to a large one, is more beneficial in light polluted areas, since you will be receiving less light-pollution in the 'bucket', brightness of the object in question, remains the same, so the ratio of brightness/light pollution is higher, yielding a brighter image.
Huh? Larger aperture means you get more light, both from the object and the sky.
Some government guy from Israel wanted it to be called "Mexican Flu" because it appears they can't (or shouldn't) name the pig as it's unclean, or something of the sort. Of course, Mexico complained about discrimination (like it did when flights from Mexico to my country were canceled).
If you're thinking 'Gravity is a law!', it's an anachronism
Oh yeah? You wanna know what happens to people with their own interpretations?
Okay, you get your points back, but I get 10 points for using a reference to the bible (and lego!) as an "argument"
But given that the force of gravity decreases by the inverse square law, using something like the infltable tower might make the space elevator much more feasible to create
Take into account the Earth has a radius around 6360km. Even if you go up 100km, that's just 1.57% farther, meaning a 2.47% reduction in gravity.
I understand many components of rocket engines are manufactures by private companies. Are they subject to these security standards?
even the theory of gravity can't be proven
You lose a million points for saying theory of gravity, specially if you meant it.
It's like contrast ratio and response time for LCDs. Does anyone actually base their college choice on these rankings, anyway?
Why, I chose the college with the fastest LCDs, something wrong with that?
A guy in my city was caught a few months ago doing a high-tech version of this. He made a kind of man-in-the-middle attack by putting a fake reader on top of the ATM's card reader, and a fake keyboard over the real one. That way, you used the ATM and your card info and PIN was recorded. Afterwards, the guy picked up the device, cloned your card and used your PIN. Clever, huh?
Hey, you (as in the Castrist apologist) do not get to play the innocent and claim that the USG is the root of all evil and that the embargo is thus all the USG's fault.
I'm going to ignore that dumb interpretation of my post, because this discussion might turn out to be interesting. I explicitly said I'm against the current Cuban government, and I said in my last post that you should continue the policy you're applying to Cuba, and extend it to all non-democratic countries (China, Burma, etc).
Shall we go another round or do you recognize that the premise of my initial post is not rebutted by the USG's support of bad rulers in a sea of bad choices?
What's the premise of your initial post? That the embargo is OK because Cuba is anti-democratic? I could possibly agree with that (although I doubt they currently have the will or resources for more communist plots), but that's not what I was arguing about. Regardless of how good that reason is, it can't be the US government's justification, because they turn a blind eye to other dictatorships. Therefore, it's not the dictatorship part that annoys them, but something else.
Hey, you (as in the US gov) are welcome to criticize the hell out of Castro, but it gives the image that you don't actually believe what you say about democracy, and that dictatorships are alright unless they go against American interests.
Opposing some dictatorships and not others is wrong. The solution isn't to stop giving a crap about anyone, but rather to be consistently pro-democracy.
I'm sure that all the Angolans killed over 27 years of Cuban intervention in their once prosperous country are reassured by Cuba's justification that Cuba helped destroy their country to assist the people being oppressed by US supported dictators in the rest of the world
Huh? I'm saying that before the US can use that argument, it should at least acknowledge that its actions in latin america and other places were wrong. Otherwise, you're saying "only the dictatorships we like are OK"
Castro & his apologists like you
How is it insightful to infer this from my post? Your view of the world seems quite shallow. I think Cuba (at present) and the US (certain aspects of it) suck.
for decades Cuba/Castro worked to undermine democracy internationally every chance they got
How many dictatorships did the US support, in latin america and elsewhere?
This is a US corporation and I think it would be very bad if that started to refuse domain names to Canada because the US government doesn't think our copyright laws are draconian enough
Aren't canadian domains handled by Canada? My country's domains are handled here.
I think he was shooting for irony, and everyone missed it (we know how badly irony is conveyed in writing). Of course there's no child exploitation in the making of manga.
Are you kidding? I agreed with you
I agree that english-speakers should stop bitching about "american" vs "US american" or whatever.
This definition may be overly broad (by that definition, my computer's memory chips are alive)
Even better, by that definition our planet is alive. I think Gaia has copyright on that concept
I think Graham Greene thought that Americans were not bad, they were only ingenuous.
naive?
Everywhere in the Americas (and most of the world, I don't know where you are), American == resident of the USA.
When speaking in english. In spanish, saying "americano" instead of "yanqui" or "estadounidense" sounds kinda odd, and we usually refer to the continent when saying "america".
I agree that english-speakers should stop bitching about "american" vs "US american" or whatever.
If you think software RNGs aren't random enough to play board games with, you'd better delete your Webmail accounts and close your online bank account, because Web security absolutely relies on them.
I thought they used /dev/random and hired people to wiggle the mouse and type random stuff for entropy :(