You didn't actually read TFA did you? Shame on you. The author dealt with this.
From TFA:
At Google, Bigelow's vision was being brought to life. The von Neumann universe was becoming a non-von Neumann universe. Turing machines were being assembled into something that was not a Turing machine. In biology, the instructions say "Do this with that" (without specifying where or when the next available copy of a particular molecule is expected to be found) or "Connect this to that" (without specifying a numerical address). Technology was finally catching up. Here, at last, was the long-awaited revolt against the intolerance of the numerical address matrix and central clock cycle for error and ambiguity in specifying where and when.
and
Google
(both directly and indirectly) was breeding huge numbers of Turing-Ulam machines. They were proliferating so fast that real machines were having trouble keeping up.
and
As von Neumann explained in 1948: "A new,
essentially logical, theory is called for in order to understand high- complication automata and, in particular, the central nervous system. It may be, however, that in this process logic will have to undergo a pseudomorphosis to neurology to a much greater extent than the reverse." Ulam had summed it up: âoeWhat makes you so sure that mathematical logic corresponds to the way we think?"
"Example: I needed to add a user. I bought up the little user management app and didn't see any add user button. After a short Google, I found that to add a user, you click the small plus sign at the bottom. Maybe I should have figured that out without Googling, but it sure didn't seem obvious at the time."
How in the hell does a post that essentially consists of "I couldn't' figure out the fucking PLUS SIGN means ADD" get modded to a 5?
Actually, I don't think the problem is bad credit. Let's say they drop a cable and spend a few million dollars doing it. How much does it cost for a ship to drop anchor and "accidentally" drag and cut the cable, again and again and again?
Usually in English we say someone "reached an agreement" with someone else since it takes at least two parties to agree.
But on Slashdot where Google can do no wrong, to suggest that Google had agreed with Viacom would tend to equate Google and Viacom or at least put their resepctive positions on a level footing. Since Viacom is the embodiment of evil (they are messing with Google, QED) and Google is pure good ('cause their business plan says so), this can't be.
Ergo, we throw out common language conventions and show that Google had soundly thrashed and generally whupped Viacom-ass and wrung from the bloody corpse of smoldering evil that is Viacom the AGREEMENT, won in battle pitched, a holy talisman of user protection, not unlike the Grail of legend.
"If they have a "range" that indicates small/medium/large, then they're still counting."
Not necessarily. They could just be comparing. "This rock is bigger than that rock but smaller than that other rock." "The family needs a pile of yams larger than this pile in order to survive the winter but not as large as that pile over there."
By using the phrase "units of food" you frame the question in such as way as to suggest that counting is being done when, in fact, it may not.
Yep, I agree, Google does appear to now fall within the avoid category. It's a shame that the judge is ordering the turn over of this information, but this is easily foreseeable because of the Federal Civil Rules governing discovery, so the real question is why Google keeps this information at all.
Google has become the one-stop-shop for anyone (litigious companies, the government, criminals, advertisers) to get your personal information.
Most people in the age of Vista who want legacy compatibility use XP. MS can just make use of the wisdom of crowds and make it an OS strategy: XP for legacy, Windows Functional (TM) for all the new stuff.
I still don't feel really comfortable with jurors making decisions based on "looking into people's eyes"
Frankly, that bothers me a whole hell of a lot less than the fact that he was convicted of murder without any significant evidence his wife was dead as opposed to simply missing.
My family owned a construction company. We built steel mills, out of steel. The steel was manufactured in a steel mill very similar, if not identical, to the one we were building.
Now, sure, we were all anthropocentric and said "we" built the steel mill, but by the loosy goosy definitions in the article, it appears the steel mill built itself.
We need to stamp out this archaic anthropocentrism.
When we used those TRS-80 Model 100 computers back in the day, the keyboards were too noisy for taking notes in class, so we popped the keys and placed those little rubber bands for orthodontic braces over the posts, put the keys back on and the keyboard was virtually silent.
"Look, I'm all for actually owning the digital music you buy, but I think we're jumping on this for the wrong reason. It's not so much that they are ripping us off of our rights (which they aren't), as it is a stupid business model. There are so many other, better legal alternatives out there, I don't see this one flying."
Frankly, renting songs seems like a stupid business model to me to, but I'm an end user of songs. Patrick Norton, Robert Heron, Leo Laporte and the gang all seem to love the idea. But then, they also seem to think we watch the adverts on their podcasts and don't just skip them.
Was this lady more to blame than the mother who let her mentally deranged, suicidal, daughter onto the "great internet tubes of truth and death" without parental supervision? Maybe, but I think the mom of this psychotic kid should have a criminal charge or two brought against her.
We would file charges against parents who left a quadriplegic kid alone in a house with the stove on and who died in a fired caused by the stove. Is it any more appropriate to let a depressed, suicidal kid on the internet without supervision?
A good idea might be a law that forbids the use of the internet or computers in general to weak minded individuals. We could build a "protector chip" into all computers that would read an RFID tag implanted into the weak-minded individuals (WMI's) and which would shutdown all network access if the WMI tried to use the computer.
I can see this turning/degenerating into a "why doesn't Apple just license MacOS X for PCs?!" discussion awful quick.
I agree. Plus I don't see any point in discussing why Apple should repeat a marketing mistake it made over a decade ago and has finally recovered from.
I hope NASA is making money off the piss-me-off Accord ads at the beginning of the videos. If not, NASA needs to release their videos under a creative commons license.
It bothers me that a tax supported institution is giving "exclusive" video to Wired so it can run ads in front of it. Ads in the story is OK because Wired wrote the story. I didn't bother reading the story so I didn't bother reading their print ads. The vids were all I wanted to see and I didn't watch any after the first because of the ads.
Slashdot Mirror
You didn't actually read TFA did you? Shame on you. The author dealt with this.
From TFA:
At Google, Bigelow's vision was being brought to life. The von Neumann universe was becoming a non-von Neumann universe. Turing machines were being assembled into something that was not a Turing machine. In biology, the instructions say "Do this with that" (without specifying where or when the next available copy of a particular molecule is expected to be found) or "Connect this to that" (without specifying a numerical address). Technology was finally catching up. Here, at last, was the long-awaited revolt against the intolerance of the numerical address matrix and central clock cycle for error and ambiguity in specifying where and when.
and
Google (both directly and indirectly) was breeding huge numbers of Turing-Ulam machines. They were proliferating so fast that real machines were having trouble keeping up.
and
As von Neumann explained in 1948: "A new, essentially logical, theory is called for in order to understand high- complication automata and, in particular, the central nervous system. It may be, however, that in this process logic will have to undergo a pseudomorphosis to neurology to a much greater extent than the reverse." Ulam had summed it up: âoeWhat makes you so sure that mathematical logic corresponds to the way we think?"
and replace them as they 'fail' ... that way we've always got a batman.
Wrong character. That was the Phantom's shtick.
"Example: I needed to add a user. I bought up the little user management app and didn't see any add user button. After a short Google, I found that to add a user, you click the small plus sign at the bottom. Maybe I should have figured that out without Googling, but it sure didn't seem obvious at the time."
How in the hell does a post that essentially consists of "I couldn't' figure out the fucking PLUS SIGN means ADD" get modded to a 5?
Actually, I don't think the problem is bad credit. Let's say they drop a cable and spend a few million dollars doing it. How much does it cost for a ship to drop anchor and "accidentally" drag and cut the cable, again and again and again?
Usually in English we say someone "reached an agreement" with someone else since it takes at least two parties to agree.
But on Slashdot where Google can do no wrong, to suggest that Google had agreed with Viacom would tend to equate Google and Viacom or at least put their resepctive positions on a level footing. Since Viacom is the embodiment of evil (they are messing with Google, QED) and Google is pure good ('cause their business plan says so), this can't be.
Ergo, we throw out common language conventions and show that Google had soundly thrashed and generally whupped Viacom-ass and wrung from the bloody corpse of smoldering evil that is Viacom the AGREEMENT, won in battle pitched, a holy talisman of user protection, not unlike the Grail of legend.
"If they have a "range" that indicates small/medium/large, then they're still counting."
Not necessarily. They could just be comparing. "This rock is bigger than that rock but smaller than that other rock." "The family needs a pile of yams larger than this pile in order to survive the winter but not as large as that pile over there."
By using the phrase "units of food" you frame the question in such as way as to suggest that counting is being done when, in fact, it may not.
Make no mistake, Obama has clearly stated he is against granting the telecoms immunity;
OK, so he's a liar too.
there's simply nothing yuo can do...
Well, for one he could have voted "Nay" like Hillary Clinton did. Or like Sherrod Brown from Ohio did.
I'll lay you money Ohio is a harder win for a Democrat than Illinois.
Yeah, I really want a "leader" who can go with the flow instead of taking a principled stand. God knows America could really use a waffle right now.
"Vote against the bill, denying law enforcements precious tools (He didn't)"
Shredding the Constitution as a law enforcement tool is akin to burning the server as a database bug-fix.
Read the Howard Cthulhu mythos stuff. It is in the Lovecraft style, but his protagonists kick dark god ass.
"Childhood's End" by Arthur C. Clarke
Yep, I agree, Google does appear to now fall within the avoid category. It's a shame that the judge is ordering the turn over of this information, but this is easily foreseeable because of the Federal Civil Rules governing discovery, so the real question is why Google keeps this information at all.
Google has become the one-stop-shop for anyone (litigious companies, the government, criminals, advertisers) to get your personal information.
Um, from TFA, the issue is counterfeit goods being sold, not the resale of legitimate goods.
Even by grand American standards, it is illegal to sell or re-sell counterfeit goods.
Legacy application compatibility is called XP.
Most people in the age of Vista who want legacy compatibility use XP. MS can just make use of the wisdom of crowds and make it an OS strategy: XP for legacy, Windows Functional (TM) for all the new stuff.
"Oh, Louisiana has a long tradition of being critical:..."
But amazingly, not a lick of critical thinking about water management strategies.
The latter seems more appropriate.
I still don't feel really comfortable with jurors making decisions based on "looking into people's eyes"
Frankly, that bothers me a whole hell of a lot less than the fact that he was convicted of murder without any significant evidence his wife was dead as opposed to simply missing.
BS. This doesn't mean he did it. It means he is the World's Greatest Detective. He's Batman!
My family owned a construction company. We built steel mills, out of steel. The steel was manufactured in a steel mill very similar, if not identical, to the one we were building.
Now, sure, we were all anthropocentric and said "we" built the steel mill, but by the loosy goosy definitions in the article, it appears the steel mill built itself.
We need to stamp out this archaic anthropocentrism.
So if Ubuntu 8.04 is scaled down for a UMPC, will the suck also be scaled down, or will it be full suck in half the space?
When we used those TRS-80 Model 100 computers back in the day, the keyboards were too noisy for taking notes in class, so we popped the keys and placed those little rubber bands for orthodontic braces over the posts, put the keys back on and the keyboard was virtually silent.
Frankly, renting songs seems like a stupid business model to me to, but I'm an end user of songs. Patrick Norton, Robert Heron, Leo Laporte and the gang all seem to love the idea. But then, they also seem to think we watch the adverts on their podcasts and don't just skip them.
Was this lady more to blame than the mother who let her mentally deranged, suicidal, daughter onto the "great internet tubes of truth and death" without parental supervision? Maybe, but I think the mom of this psychotic kid should have a criminal charge or two brought against her.
We would file charges against parents who left a quadriplegic kid alone in a house with the stove on and who died in a fired caused by the stove. Is it any more appropriate to let a depressed, suicidal kid on the internet without supervision?
A good idea might be a law that forbids the use of the internet or computers in general to weak minded individuals. We could build a "protector chip" into all computers that would read an RFID tag implanted into the weak-minded individuals (WMI's) and which would shutdown all network access if the WMI tried to use the computer.
I can see this turning/degenerating into a "why doesn't Apple just license MacOS X for PCs?!" discussion awful quick.
I agree. Plus I don't see any point in discussing why Apple should repeat a marketing mistake it made over a decade ago and has finally recovered from.
I hope NASA is making money off the piss-me-off Accord ads at the beginning of the videos. If not, NASA needs to release their videos under a creative commons license.
It bothers me that a tax supported institution is giving "exclusive" video to Wired so it can run ads in front of it. Ads in the story is OK because Wired wrote the story. I didn't bother reading the story so I didn't bother reading their print ads. The vids were all I wanted to see and I didn't watch any after the first because of the ads.