Not really a problem. Machine translation already can handle many words that spell the same but have different meaning (homographs), based on context and position in the sentence. With speech recognition, you just have more of those, you have to throw in homonyms, too.
For simple example, blue in "the blue candle" cannot be a verb.
The real weak spots in Linux drivers are for dialup modems...
I have been using Linux for 11 years, the whole time using dialup, with many different machines, and I never had a problem with a dialup modem. All of them simply worked out of the box, no configuration required. I used to run dual boot with Windows, and at least two of the modems that I had, that ran perfectly well with Linux, simply completely refused to work with Windows, and for several other modems I had to download drivers and configure them. Linux does have hardware issues, but dialup modems are not among them.
No one below the GTK+/Qt layer is paying attention to desktop use-cases, and those GUI developers are left helpless on many issues because of it. Otherwise I would not have to write the above paragraph about audio.
Ehm, and what about the several sound servers that exist? This is simply bullshit. The only problem is with older applications that use/dev/dsp directly.
Also, there would be stable ABIs for drivers and applications (which only removes the freedom to change the architechture BETWEEN major OS releases).
Oh no, not this old tired mantra again. It has been discussed over and over and over, and it's getting really boring.
Well, it is possible, but if that's true, they must start with pretty bad beer. Like the one I once had in Russia, that sent me running to the restroom every hour for the next two days. In that case the propper procedure is:
1) Boil the beer or mix it with bleech to get rid of the bacteria. 2) Mix one part of the disinfected beer with 9 parts of distilled water. 3) Call it Budweiser, after a completely different beer made in completely different part of the world. 4) Profit!
Your decription simply does not not explain the taste. I mean, if you need to chill a beer to near 0 in order to be able to drink it, you have pretty bad tasting beer!
I completely agree. That's why digital is never going to replace film for me. In the darkroom you learn how to use all the properties of the chemical process and the light and optics and how to make them work for you. You can probably simulate every one of the effects you use with photoshop, but it's not the same. It's simply different media.
This kind of distortion is actually not new, it has been known to happen on some traditional film cameras with sliding shutter.
The sliding shutter always moves with the same speed, and high speed (short time) shutter is created by narrowing the openning slit in the shutter that passes in front of the film, usually in horizontal direction. This has exactly the same effect as the scanner, for exactly the same reason. The only difference is that the shutter moves very fast, which makes the effect noticable only when taking picture of very fast moving objects with very fast "shutter speed" (meaning the slit is very narrow). There are some pretty famous shots using this effect.
For me, chemical photography was always playing with light, while digital is playing with numbers. Sure, you can do pretty much everything you can achive in the darkroom with photoshop, too, but it is not natural, it feels like a kludge. The good news is that darkroom equipment should be pretty cheep right now, I think I will start building a darkroom in my basement.
Well, sometimes a good cup of coffe is what you want, but if you were to have any now you'd be wide awake for hours.
This just means that:
1) you don't drink enough coffee. 2) you sleep too much each month.
Using printers to play music
on
Scanjet Music
·
· Score: 1
Back in early 80's, I was in an industrial band, and we used several dot matrix printers in some of our songs. We also used a large mainframe printer in one song, but it had to be recorded on a tape, as it was way to heavy to move around.
Yeah, but you can say the very same thing about communists in 1918 Russia, or NSDAP in Germany, or baath party (or whatever their name was) in Iraq. All of them firmly believed that what they want was the best for their country.
People don't switch to OO because it is full of ridiculous bugs. There's no other reason!
That doesn't make sense. People are happily using MS Office which is also full of ridiculus bugs.
I think the reasons for people not switching are quite obvious:
1) OO is not singnificantly better to justify the switch. 2) OO user interface is sufficiently different from MS Office to make people uncomfortable about switching. 3) OO is significantly slower. 4) Many companies have their workflow based on MS Office documents with bunch of macros, VB and other crap. That stuff isn't (and probably never will be) completely compatible with OO. That's where the incompatibility kicks in. Of course thay will have to rewrite everything at some point anyway, because it will become incompatible with newer versions of MS Office, but I expect they will hang on the stuff as long as they will be able to.
People who can think structurally and algorithmically while still being creative
And what do you think math is about? It's true that some areas of math (geometry, topology, analysis) require great deal of what I would call "visual imagination", or "geometrical thinking" for lack of any better term, but areas like algebra, logic, set theory etc. pretty much fit your description.
I know that this seems to be very rare and unpopular attitude these days, but when I went to college, me and most of my colleagues studied math because we liked it, we were interested in it, it was fun, and we were good at it. Of course, we sort of hoped to get some sort of math related job, but that was mostly because that way we could continue doing what we were good at and what we liked, and be payed for it.
Some of my friends from college have math related jobs, just like me. Some of us do use functional analysis, measure theory, PDE's and whatnot on daily basis. Many of my former colleagues have jobs that have very little to do with math, at least with the kind of math we studied. Some are in IT, some in banking sector, some are lawyers, even few politicians, but all of them tell me that the time and effort spent learning advanced math was not wasted for them. Even though they never use any of the stuff they have learned, they acquired skills that are very useful for their jobs.
Even though the lady that is the subject of this conversation most likely won't teach advanced calculus to her kids, she undoubtedly will teach to them her love of learning, intellectual challenge and curiosity, and appreciation for knowledge. I think that's the best we can give to our children.
Basically that means never use your real name for anything. Get a fake passport, fake SSN, open all your bank accounts under the name Ayman Al-Zawahiri or something like that...
Ehm, it is a science class, and as far as science is concerned, the Sagan's line is totally appropriate. What the kids need to learn is the difference between science a spirituality. Teaching ID in science classes only makes this distinction more fuzzy.
No, they are challenging the whole scientific method, by basically saying that all theories are equivalent, and by rejecting generally accepted and completely satisfactory theory on religious bases. They are in the same group as those who rejected relativity because it was a "Jewish science", in the same group as Lysenko ond other communist "scientists" who tried to twist scientific theories to make them fit their political beliefs.
I didn't follow lynx development lately, but the grandparent is correct, lynx used to have tons of buffer overflows. I remember that at one point of time, there was some major cleaning effort going on, and if I recall correctly, yes, the OpenBSD folks did have a major part in it. Still, several months ago, there was this guy who wrote a program that dumped bunch of bad html onto browsers (I remember he claimed that IE with sp2 was the only browser that didn't crash), I tested lynx, and while it fared pretty decently compared to other browsers (ehm, links, ehm), it still crashed every once a while. Very rarely, but it did.
Slashdot Mirror
Not really a problem. Machine translation already can handle many words that spell the same but have different meaning (homographs), based on context and position in the sentence. With speech recognition, you just have more of those, you have to throw in homonyms, too.
For simple example, blue in "the blue candle" cannot be a verb.
The real weak spots in Linux drivers are for dialup modems...
/dev/dsp directly.
I have been using Linux for 11 years, the whole time using dialup, with many different machines, and I never had a problem with a dialup modem. All of them simply worked out of the box, no configuration required. I used to run dual boot with Windows, and at least two of the modems that I had, that ran perfectly well with Linux, simply completely refused to work with Windows, and for several other modems I had to download drivers and configure them. Linux does have hardware issues, but dialup modems are not among them.
No one below the GTK+/Qt layer is paying attention to desktop use-cases, and those GUI developers are left helpless on many issues because of it. Otherwise I would not have to write the above paragraph about audio.
Ehm, and what about the several sound servers that exist? This is simply bullshit. The only problem is with older applications that use
Also, there would be stable ABIs for drivers and applications (which only removes the freedom to change the architechture BETWEEN major OS releases).
Oh no, not this old tired mantra again. It has been discussed over and over and over, and it's getting really boring.
Well, it is possible, but if that's true, they must start with pretty bad beer. Like the one I once had in Russia, that sent me running to the restroom every hour for the next two days. In that case the propper procedure is:
1) Boil the beer or mix it with bleech to get rid of the bacteria.
2) Mix one part of the disinfected beer with 9 parts of distilled water.
3) Call it Budweiser, after a completely different beer made in completely different part of the world.
4) Profit!
Your decription simply does not not explain the taste. I mean, if you need to chill a beer to near 0 in order to be able to drink it, you have pretty bad tasting beer!
Who in the hell moded this "Funny"? This is completely true, nothing funny about that.
I completely agree. That's why digital is never going to replace film for me. In the darkroom you learn how to use all the properties of the chemical process and the light and optics and how to make them work for you. You can probably simulate every one of the effects you use with photoshop, but it's not the same. It's simply different media.
Well, you can always do tilt and shift in the darkroom, but I agree, it definitely isn't just about the image quality.
This kind of distortion is actually not new, it has been known to happen on some traditional film cameras with sliding shutter.
The sliding shutter always moves with the same speed, and high speed (short time) shutter is created by narrowing the openning slit in the shutter that passes in front of the film, usually in horizontal direction. This has exactly the same effect as the scanner, for exactly the same reason. The only difference is that the shutter moves very fast, which makes the effect noticable only when taking picture of very fast moving objects with very fast "shutter speed" (meaning the slit is very narrow). There are some pretty famous shots using this effect.
Cool pictures, though.
For me, chemical photography was always playing with light, while digital is playing with numbers. Sure, you can do pretty much everything you can achive in the darkroom with photoshop, too, but it is not natural, it feels like a kludge. The good news is that darkroom equipment should be pretty cheep right now, I think I will start building a darkroom in my basement.
I havn't used mutt for a while, but I believe there is a way how you can make it handle VCAL messages using an external application.
Sure, why not, if you run your game on a Cray...
Well, sometimes a good cup of coffe is what you want, but if you were to have any now you'd be wide awake for hours.
This just means that:
1) you don't drink enough coffee.
2) you sleep too much each month.
Back in early 80's, I was in an industrial band, and we used several dot matrix printers in some of our songs. We also used a large mainframe printer in one song, but it had to be recorded on a tape, as it was way to heavy to move around.
Yeah, but you can say the very same thing about communists in 1918 Russia, or NSDAP in Germany, or baath party (or whatever their name was) in Iraq. All of them firmly believed that what they want was the best for their country.
People don't switch to OO because it is full of ridiculous bugs. There's no other reason!
That doesn't make sense. People are happily using MS Office which is also full of ridiculus bugs.
I think the reasons for people not switching are quite obvious:
1) OO is not singnificantly better to justify the switch.
2) OO user interface is sufficiently different from MS Office to make people uncomfortable about switching.
3) OO is significantly slower.
4) Many companies have their workflow based on MS Office documents with bunch of macros, VB and other crap. That stuff isn't (and probably never will be) completely compatible with OO. That's where the incompatibility kicks in. Of course thay will have to rewrite everything at some point anyway, because it will become incompatible with newer versions of MS Office, but I expect they will hang on the stuff as long as they will be able to.
In Korea, only old people clone mammoths.
People who can think structurally and algorithmically while still being creative
And what do you think math is about? It's true that some areas of math (geometry, topology, analysis) require great deal of what I would call "visual imagination", or "geometrical thinking" for lack of any better term, but areas like algebra, logic, set theory etc. pretty much fit your description.
Wow! Great idea! I must suggest that to my daughter! As a matter of fact, now I know what to give her for christmas.
I know that this seems to be very rare and unpopular attitude these days, but when I went to college, me and most of my colleagues studied math because we liked it, we were interested in it, it was fun, and we were good at it. Of course, we sort of hoped to get some sort of math related job, but that was mostly because that way we could continue doing what we were good at and what we liked, and be payed for it.
Some of my friends from college have math related jobs, just like me. Some of us do use functional analysis, measure theory, PDE's and whatnot on daily basis. Many of my former colleagues have jobs that have very little to do with math, at least with the kind of math we studied. Some are in IT, some in banking sector, some are lawyers, even few politicians, but all of them tell me that the time and effort spent learning advanced math was not wasted for them. Even though they never use any of the stuff they have learned, they acquired skills that are very useful for their jobs.
Even though the lady that is the subject of this conversation most likely won't teach advanced calculus to her kids, she undoubtedly will teach to them her love of learning, intellectual challenge and curiosity, and appreciation for knowledge. I think that's the best we can give to our children.
Basically that means never use your real name for anything. Get a fake passport, fake SSN, open all your bank accounts under the name Ayman Al-Zawahiri or something like that...
Not until somebody writes a bathroom cleaning web application.
Ehm, it is a science class, and as far as science is concerned, the Sagan's line is totally appropriate. What the kids need to learn is the difference between science a spirituality. Teaching ID in science classes only makes this distinction more fuzzy.
No, they are challenging the whole scientific method, by basically saying that all theories are equivalent, and by rejecting generally accepted and completely satisfactory theory on religious bases. They are in the same group as those who rejected relativity because it was a "Jewish science", in the same group as Lysenko ond other communist "scientists" who tried to twist scientific theories to make them fit their political beliefs.
I didn't follow lynx development lately, but the grandparent is correct, lynx used to have tons of buffer overflows. I remember that at one point of time, there was some major cleaning effort going on, and if I recall correctly, yes, the OpenBSD folks did have a major part in it. Still, several months ago, there was this guy who wrote a program that dumped bunch of bad html onto browsers (I remember he claimed that IE with sp2 was the only browser that didn't crash), I tested lynx, and while it fared pretty decently compared to other browsers (ehm, links, ehm), it still crashed every once a while. Very rarely, but it did.
It didn't work!
Yes, because they don't show you the 2,000,000,000 links to pages that explain that it is bad.