There's a browser compatibility page on the site, but don't know how good idea it could be, or how easily it could be accepted.
About Ted's whinnings, I really don't know, but the xanadu project existed years before the web took place. In fact the actual hyperlink idea is a simplification of the original xanadu concept, so I prefer to give some extra credit to the fathers of the idea.
Xanadu was ahead of his time (hey it's a 60's thingy), and probably failed due to the lack of processing power among other 'political' reasons, but the base idea was good.
It reminds me the tcp/ip protocol history, a simple and logical protocol, that for years has been underused due to the lack of enough processing power.
No, I can't, that was a loong time ago..:)
Probably modern soft synths retake the freedom of those old and simple designs (modules with ins/ctr&outs fully interconnectable) , that was fun, real fun.
Sure, but sometime people use that idea to try to ignore the fact that music does not exist without some noise level, and ptretend that 'noiseless' processing is 'accurate' when in fact that's simply not true.
I played home made synths before the mini-moog appeared, and yes, the same difference between two classic spanish guitars exists between two electronic devices for a musician. i've never forget those pink noise generators!:)
Digital audio is a very vast field, but analog audio is a far greater and unexplored realm. Maybe the desire of a 'warm' sound will desapair, but if that means that analog audio processing is being forgotten, we all gonna loose something in the end.
Just to be detailed. Were you deaf from the beginning, or it ocurred at a later moment in time?.
Feel free to not respond if you wish, that's personal, but I liked to know that point.
Specially if those internal representations are based on experienced stimulus, or are a purely 'internal' construction.
I was not questioning your habilities.
I was questioning our habilities. Our actual occidental culture tends to look at his own capabilities in a magnified way. I was questioning that irrational trait, other cultures have his own set of misbehaviours, but not fall so easily trying to defend his own nature.
Anyway, to be complex to human understading is nothing special. You can say nature is complex, I prefer to think that our understanding is limited.
Evolved does not mean efficient.
I never said that our brains are inefficient. It's only that 'efficiency' is a subjective criteria.
Whatever happens, you can be sure it's terribly complicated, extremely robust and very efficient.
What if it turns to be, dead simple, delicate and horribly inefficient? Why we like to see our own habilities as something so special? Is not specially rational.
There is a difference between something that helps, and something that is required.
Maybe is just to play with words, (pun intended), but imagine to try to learn to read without being able to 'hear' the music of poetry.
Sounds are simply 'mandatory' in our learnning to talk, hear, read or write.
Now try estimating a thousands scripts (or circuits) done by hundreds of engineers of varying aptitudes that will result in a capital cost of several billion dollars over (hopefully) a few years! All of which is directly reflected in your retirement investments!
More uncertainty means more estimation error, no matter how good you are. Beyond a given point 'decision' becomes 'chance', either that or those thousands incognites are not so unknow (that's my experience).
Ego is a necessary component, without the proper recognition of the work done, people gets unmotivated with the result, but too much of it will surely ruin the whole thing.
I like the visual aspects of Contact, but the story sucks, and the book is not better. Religion vs science dicothomy makes bad sci-fi stories in my opinion.
The only respectable 'religious' quote about sci-fi is the famous: sci-fi is not 'What If?' but 'Oh my God! What If?'.
Slashdot Mirror
REASONS? what about those thousands of innocent civilians killed?
Let's not be fooled, war is the worst thing humans do, there are no REASONS to kill innocent people.
Yeah, I suppouse that's what they call-it spin..., just two atomic blasts upon habited cities being called 'influence'. Great!.
Go figure TROLL!
Maybe it's just me, but all those never-endings turns around java and the gpl is really getting boring no?
If Sun want to do-it they will do-it, the rest is only noise and advertisement.
There's a browser compatibility page on the site, but don't know how good idea it could be, or how easily it could be accepted.
About Ted's whinnings, I really don't know, but the xanadu project existed years before the web took place. In fact the actual hyperlink idea is a simplification of the original xanadu concept, so I prefer to give some extra credit to the fathers of the idea.
Xanadu was ahead of his time (hey it's a 60's thingy), and probably failed due to the lack of processing power among other 'political' reasons, but the base idea was good.
It reminds me the tcp/ip protocol history, a simple and logical protocol, that for years has been underused due to the lack of enough processing power.
If broken links are a problem, maybe the html/http pair would better be shaped more acording the original Xanadu project.http://xanadu.com/
No, I can't, that was a loong time ago.. :)
Probably modern soft synths retake the freedom of those old and simple designs (modules with ins/ctr&outs fully interconnectable) , that was fun, real fun.
Reproduction should be as accurate as possible
Sure, but sometime people use that idea to try to ignore the fact that music does not exist without some noise level, and ptretend that 'noiseless' processing is 'accurate' when in fact that's simply not true.
I played home made synths before the mini-moog appeared, and yes, the same difference between two classic spanish guitars exists between two electronic devices for a musician. :)
i've never forget those pink noise generators!
Art is what we make, not what we use to make-it.
I am 4x, and tell ya both to just play Creedence! :)
Digital audio is a very vast field, but analog audio is a far greater and unexplored realm. Maybe the desire of a 'warm' sound will desapair, but if that means that analog audio processing is being forgotten, we all gonna loose something in the end.
Imagine a cluster of these... Oh well!...
So we have recorded many experimental excess energy setups, and the main objection is 'there's no prouve of deuterium fision'?
Bravo!
But what about the second law of termodinamics?
Just to be detailed. Were you deaf from the beginning, or it ocurred at a later moment in time?.
Feel free to not respond if you wish, that's personal, but I liked to know that point.
Specially if those internal representations are based on experienced stimulus, or are a purely 'internal' construction.
Sorry, but tou missed the point
I was not questioning your habilities.
I was questioning our habilities. Our actual occidental culture tends to look at his own capabilities in a magnified way. I was questioning that irrational trait, other cultures have his own set of misbehaviours, but not fall so easily trying to defend his own nature.
Anyway, to be complex to human understading is nothing special. You can say nature is complex, I prefer to think that our understanding is limited.
Evolved does not mean efficient.
I never said that our brains are inefficient. It's only that 'efficiency' is a subjective criteria.
Whatever happens, you can be sure it's terribly complicated, extremely robust and very efficient.
What if it turns to be, dead simple, delicate and horribly inefficient? Why we like to see our own habilities as something so special? Is not specially rational.
There is a difference between something that helps, and something that is required.
Maybe is just to play with words, (pun intended), but imagine to try to learn to read without being able to 'hear' the music of poetry.
Sounds are simply 'mandatory' in our learnning to talk, hear, read or write.
Now try estimating a thousands scripts (or circuits) done by hundreds of engineers of varying aptitudes that will result in a capital cost of several billion dollars over (hopefully) a few years! All of which is directly reflected in your retirement investments!
More uncertainty means more estimation error, no matter how good you are. Beyond a given point 'decision' becomes 'chance', either that or those thousands incognites are not so unknow (that's my experience).
Well, not so good programmers grew older too..
Ego is like vinegar, use it avariciously.
Ego is a necessary component, without the proper recognition of the work done, people gets unmotivated with the result, but too much of it will surely ruin the whole thing.
AI from Bible?.. And you are talking about something fundamentally wrong? ... Sure!
Maybe Metropolis is just too much of sci-fi for the makers of the list. Other than that is simply incredible.
I like the visual aspects of Contact, but the story sucks, and the book is not better. Religion vs science dicothomy makes bad sci-fi stories in my opinion.
The only respectable 'religious' quote about sci-fi is the famous: sci-fi is not 'What If?' but 'Oh my God! What If?'.
True, maybe the first one to visualize vital moments as bubbles floating in a void, a very ancient image, and a very correct film.
My favorite scene is Harrison Ford talking to the computer to examine in great detail the random digital photograph for clues.
Dude, what makes you think is a digital photograph?
It's a partial 3D holographic rendition on a flat support, is not photograph, and the only maybe 'digital' part is the voice directed image processor.
Even though the ID monster reminds me of the Tasmanian Devil
Maybe it's the other way round.. :)