I've never bought a house (the one I own, I acquired after my parents died.)
Are you saying: If I were buying a house, and had been "on time" with all my payments and have 10 years to go on a 20 year loan . . . the bank can "call in" the loan early?
Surely not!?
I'm assuming you mean for people already behind on payments.
I would add . . . its not just pure "research" with the superficial understanding of programming.
I've seen personally (and "Dilbert" would seem to confirm as universal) the generalized business belief that . . .
"programming is easy."
"quality is easy."
"expand-ability is easy."
"maintainability is easy."
"If I just had a Project Management tool to keep a death grip on delivery time . . . all those other "easy" things will just naturally fall into place."
I keep thinking the opposite . ..
Quality, Suitability of Purpose, Expand-ability, Maintainability, Inter-operability, the delivery of promised features . . . those are the "hard" things. If we had a true handle on those . . . we wouldn't need the death grip on deliver-ability. Because we'd deliver a reliable version of what was needed the first pass, and spend less time maintaining it over the long haul to have time for the other projects and future expansion.
(Its been how many years now . . . and we're still not accepting the basic concepts from the Mythical Man Month?)
Right . . . "symptom not cause" . . . the whole discussion hides the implicit lie . . . that if you got out of the house, . . . "You're practically guaranteed to find the perfect mate, and live happily ever after with 2.5 children in the two story house, in a good neighborhood, with the white picket fence. (And good resale value.)"
Sure, you "fall off the horse, you get back on" . . . you, get thrown from the horse and kicked in the face 200-300 times with a shod hoof . . . even the densest person begins to realize a promising career in equestrian events, might not be in your future.
It may be bitter but . . . you may not find the perfect mate. Even if you do . . . she may not be interested in you.
Its not so much that its "easier" in the house . . . its that the alternative of eternal emotional self-flagellation outside the house, with no guarantee that if you "try just a little longer" you'll find what you've been waiting for . . . ultimately loses its appeal.
("Out of the house" for over 30 years, but no "perfect mate", no "2.5 children", and the house (inherited from two dead parents) has no picket fence.)
After all . . . the series did end with Charlie Brown NEVER getting to kick the ball . . .
So . . . why not just stay "in the house" where you have at least some control/guarantee of your level of happiness?
It has always been explained to me (by the zealots) that the "joy and beauty" of Java (and Python) is that . . . "You don't need to write lots. Someone has probably already done that, just reuse their code."
Fine, so I get the, lets see . . . Windowing API from vendor_A, the DB API from author_B, and the Serial I/O API from freewareProject_C.
Great, now all I have to do is write the core, and utilize the API's that have already been written.
But vendor_A used WhatYouCallCamelCase, author_B usednocaseatall, freewareProject_C used_under_score_variables.
Now your central core, must reference/utilize variables/functions/objects/etc . . . of all three types.
It'd be nice . . . if each language (like the K&R book did for "C") at least suggested a Preferred Standard Format.
From my own experience (or just read the preceding 800 posts) indentation can become a holy war. (Seriously, I don't see how Python survives more than one coder's reformatting . ..) Be it a good or a bad standard . . . if each language at least proposed a preferred . . . then you have a shot at all the independently developed API's . . . utilizing the same format.
Then, your core and all its references are at least "consistent" for pure visual readability. Allowing you to focus on "what it does" not "how it looks". It also has a "shot" at depersonalizing the choice. ("I know you like it like that . . . but we try to adhere to the Preferred Standard here, so . . . though I'm very sorry it disturbs you, my hands are tied." Yes, its a cop out, but it can be utilized as an argument deflating position for the better of all.)
I've been calling them Shaman's . . . since there can only be one Chief, and lots of follower Indians, but sometimes, you just need someone with specialized knowledge.
Like for the former Space Shuttle . . . there can be only one Mission Commander, and one Pilot . . . but you may have several Mission Specialists.
I'm afraid we've become a world where "You're a Leader, or you're pond scum." And its just not that simple. Even Boy Scouts tries to make everyone a Leader. Have you ever been in a troop of 16 "Leaders"? You can't get anything done because everyone is an expert on every subject. (Or at least thinks they are.)
Now, we don't need another Jonestown . . . you can't be "Blind" followers. But there's nothing wrong with being a good follower. Or thinking to yourself . . . in 80% of what I do, I know better, but for these two things that make up the 20% . . . "that guy/girl" seems to know what they're doing, I'd be more productive to the group, and myself to just help them.
But we're not training children to be (or accept) Shaman's. Its Leader or nothing. . .
Lots of people in the world . . . just don't live long enough to get cancer. Something else gets them first.
U.S.A. is 50th of 221nations listed above in overall life expectancy.
We're probably just the right mixture. ..
Better Health Care in general (so we live longer than many).
More industrialized (so more pollutants/preservatives ingested).
Poorer lifestyles than others (the average Swiss citizen is probably exercising more and eating less "good ole southern fried cooking" than we are.)
Its possible its right. We'd have to know all the life expectancies by weighted population to have a clear answer.
I keep having the same arguments with friends asking me "Why do you still have a landline?"
#1 its a handy backup.
#2 when I call the police during an emergency from my copper wire, after they deal with the 10 people in front of me, I'll eventually get help. You on the other hand, won't be able to call at all, because 10,000 people will be calling their sweetie-pies to let them know they're OK.
I only have to wait out the people actually before me talking to the police(fire/ambulance/whatever). . . where you on the cell . . . will have to wait until all the non-emergency calls to non-emergency people, subside so you can get a call through . . .
"Every" call blocks you, "only" the emergency calls stand in my way.
Sure, service (simultaneous capacity in this case) pretty much, gets better every year. I just don't want a loved one to die, because I couldn't get a spot in the cell around 10,000 non-emergency calls.
There are still some true merits to the copper system.
You don't say it explicitly, but hint at what I've seen . ..
It isn't always "feature creep" or "inflation of priorities" in many cases, so much as . . . "Not enough original resources, to solve the original problem in the original time frame." And the time overrun leads you into the normal "next problem/project" that would naturally occur, blending into your proceeding/existing project.
If we could "deliver" instantly fast . . . no one would have time to slip in "the next" feature. So we should be asking, "Are they really adding new features to the current project? Or were we so slow delivering the current project, that we drifted into the 'next' project?"
Can't make "explosive force" bombs . . . can it make "dirty" bombs???
Heck, my High School science teacher didn't like Americium in Smoke Alarms . . . I wonder what he'd think of the "guy next door with the Thorium reactor"?
(OK, I read the entire article.) So . . . who pays for all this? The Swiss Government? Swiss Insurance companies? They're cleaning up all the USA/Russian/Chinese junk out of the pure goodness of their hearts?
I mean . . . its a DEFINITE NEED . . . I've just never understood, even if we developed the technology, who would pay for it? If you could de-orbit it slowly and preserve the parts . . . some independent savager might have some some juicy silver/gold (and other precious metals) to recycle for sale. But . . . right now, I don't see the cost/benefit to clean up OTHER peoples mess.
As for how, . . . "catching" things going so fast, seems problematic. And the "catcher" is also flying around and expelling/expending fuel and becomes yet another part of the problem. Pushing things up and out of orbit with lasers would seem to require lots of power. A better method might be to send a higher stable-orbit satellite up to use solar powered lasers to "push down" items to burn up in orbit. Even if it takes a few days between bursts to recharge. (Really, I mean, a giant orbital platform with lasers facing down towards the earth . . . what could possibly go wrong with that?) OK, with some good targeting and positioning, you could catch items at the horizon, and only blast away at items where the earth isn't actually behind them, laser-line-of-site-wise.
True but then, why not experiment with the LEAST harmful virus to learn about "natural process", instead of starting with one already hyper-deadly? Why would it be likely that only the most dangerous, will exhibit the things we need to see? Even if that's true, (its a feature of the most deadly we need to master), wouldn't it be better to near-exhaust research on the lesser harmful, before continuing on to that? First you juggle 3 soft balls, then 4, then 5, you don't "start" with the Chainsaw, Bowling Ball, and Egg early on. (And, I respectfully submit, from a genetic-flu understanding standpoint . . . its "early on".)
I guess someone in the TSA finally caught up on their Heinlein reading.
"If I can just arch my shoulder blade back in the right position to hit the detonation switch . .."
So now what . . . X-Raying to see through our cloths isn't enough. Now we'll be required to have MRI's before boarding for internal scans as well?
(sigh) . . .
Interesting, but ultimately pointless until we have cars that can talk to soccer balls. You know . . . like when your human eyes/mind sees a soccer ball roll into the street, and you knows to slow down because, seeing the ball, you know a child might just come running along behind it . . . Seriously, its good work that needs to be done, but unless we're going to drive cars in isolated pathways, there are just too many non-automotive things that can spring out from the road side to make this alone the wonder solution.
(Yes, I realize I'm mixing my Scifi shows but . ..) Because in the end, all the guns, lasers, spaceships, aliens, transporters, and holodecks in the universe . . . are just contrived plot devices. In the end . . . its always the people and the choices they make that matters. I watch TV shows and movies (aside from the pretty girls) for one reason . . . in hopes of seeing the "one perfect moment". Where story, writing, delivery, photography, all come together to produce something more than just "a scene". For me, in Firefly, that "one perfect moment" came in the 2nd episode "The Train Robbery". "Mal" has unwittingly stolen medicine desperately needed by the mining colony. When he sees what has happened, and how many will suffer for it, he tries to return it. The Sheriff spots him coming to drop off the stolen goods and intercepts him. Saying . . . "Times are hard. A man might take a job and not ask too many questions about what's involved. When he gets the full story, he has a choice to make." Mal says "No, I don't believe he does." When faced with jail time, or possibly even death . . . for Mal there was no other choice but to "do the right thing". He was a man of character at all costs to himself. In Serenity the movie, the entire crew essentially made a similar choice. And some did die for it. It was about people being their best, when things were at their worst. It may not qualify as great SciFi . . . but it can make your heart soar to watch. It can make you wish at 48, that you can still be Malcolm Reynolds when you grow up. And strive to be him every day.
How is it controlled? Via computer command? Via voice command? Via preprogrammed sequence? Via no command whatsoever (where its just a remote manipulator torso controlled directly by humans.)
If it has innate skills, does it have vision systems to find a bolt, and a hole, and know how to use a wrench and install the bolt? Is there any task its programmed to complete independently?
(Yes, I linked onto the NASA article too. . . no more real information there.)
Gosh, wouldn't 10million children suddenly develop interest in robotics if they thought we really were close to an "R2-D2" like robot?
No discussion of "Humanoid" vs "Practical configuration"?
Can no one write a fulfilling article anymore? (Makes me want to go "blogger" and track down these answers . . . if I thought I could get paid to do so . ..) Its a shame that those that are paid to do so . . . don't.
Someone enlighten me.
I know with local GPS, the time is encoded on the signal. Its not just a difference in "tick"'s from different satellites. At some point a time is encoded to tell us which "tick" that last "tick" was.
I'm going out on a limb and saying no one's flown out to these Pulsars and encoded "which millisecond tick is which" in the datastream.
So if my ship flies inside a large hole in an asteroid (while avoiding Xur and the Kodan Armada), when I come back out, how will I know how many milliseconds I've missed from each pulsar?
Surely across Galactic scale, and relativistic effects. . . just accurately counting the time between ticks from Pulsar to Pulsar won't be enough to know where you are. You'll have to know which tick is which. (Or is everyone assuming its like gyroscopes. . . you spin them up, and have to keep them going. . . or you're lost forever . ..)
What am I missing?
jkh
Yes, testing was done by a "penetration tester". If he fails, he can NOT look forward to 20 years in jail and $1M fine for corporate espionage.
Its one thing to sling a few "bots" together from another continent and "see if you can get in" anonymously from the safety of your den or bedroom. Its takes quite another breed of individual to walk their living flesh in the front door and risk being taken out in handcuffs. To face felony theft in months of court time later. . .
Yes, its a valid demonstration of what is available if they make it in. . . I'm not sure its at all statistically or even operationally significant by any practical stretch. . .
Why should I risk my own freedom? How about instead of going in, I just wait will the branch manager comes out on his way home, club him over the head, and extract the passwords I need from him directly. After I've transferred a few hundred million to my bank account in an extradition free country (do we still have those? And can someone list them for me?) then I'd be all set.
Comparing the type of "in your face, willing to risk capture and jail-time" type of personality, with the "I'd like to stay safe at home" type of crime. . . seems too much Apples and Oranges comparison to suit my tastes.
How many 13 year old adolescent pimple faced copier repair men do you typically expect to see in your average work day? And how many "back alley club-you-over-the-head" thieves are pulling major-league cyber-crimes?
Apple crimes for Apple risk, or Orange crimes for Orange risk, but this is Orange risk for Apple crimes.
"if every one of 110 million American households bought just one [CFL], took it home, and screwed it in the place of an ordinary 60-watt bulb, the energy saved would be enough to power a city of 1.5 million people. One bulb swapped out, enough electricity saved to power all the homes in Delaware and Rhode Island...."
Power the city/state FOR HOW LONG??????? Statements like this are meaningless without a time frame. If I replaced one single bulb in my one single apartment, it would save enough energy to power the entire planet . . . for a few hundred billionths of a nanosecond.
Hummm, Measure of a Man is one of my favorite episodes. (Or at least the "potential it had" is. ..)
I never took "Does Data have a Soul" as the central theme. . . to me the focus was always in the other direction, at society itself.
"IF" there is "some possibility" that Data has a soul. . . do we want to be the type of race that takes the chance and subjects this individual (and the others like him to come) to, what essentially consititutes slavery? The diminishment of the individuals very worth, to simple property?
It wasn't so much about what Data was/wasn't. Or what he had/didn't have. It was about society's responsibility to "choose its own moral path and stick to it. .." How do we (as a society) want to be regarded/known by the other races "out there" amongst the stars. ..?
Sitting in a resturant one day, I overheard a Doctor talking with a co-worker in the next booth. He was ranting about the number of people that used Chapstick (or Blistex or whatever your favorite brand is.) That it was a self-reinforcing problem. The more you used it, the more you became dependent on it as your body chemistry changed (locally) to need the protection of the ointment.
Which I though was stupid, but refrained from telling him. What does he thinks happens to start someone using a lip balm?
(Trenchcoat clad figure approaches young child on the playground. ..)
Trenchcoat: "Pssst, hey kid come over here."
Kid: "Hi Mister."
(Opening coat to reveal rows of various lip balms, speaking in a hushed voice. ..)
Trenchcoat: "Wanna try some Chapstick? You'll like it."
Kid: "Gosh, I don't know."
Trenchcoat: "Trust me, you'll like it. First hit's free, but then you gotta pay."
No one gets "addicted to lip balm" because they were lured into it by some unsavory individual. They start using it because their lips are already dry, cracked, and near (if not already) bleeding.
The doctors false assumption was that "Everything was otherwise fine and normal." That it was the act of becoming addicted that caused the problems.
Same bad assumptions here. That playing (EQ for me, not a WOW player) is ruining my other personal relationships.
I have to ask . . . "what" other relationships? You've started out assuming that I have this loving wife and children. (Apparently I'm required to have one of these as a standard part of life, to leave at home (presumably "barefoot and pregnant") to pickup the UPS package deliveries. Since UPS won't abide my instructions and just leave them on the apartment porch.)
Not everyone has this "assumed" gift, nor is there any guarantee that they would have it (either instantly or for many years to come) if they stopped playing the mmorpg at this moment.
Lots of big unwarranted assumptions going on here about "what you're guaranteed to get in return" if you don't have the mmorpg addiction.
Yes, it's the addictive personality that is more likely to turn to Alcohol or Gambling TO COMBAT THE PREEXISTING PROBLEM.
I understand that "piling on" the greater burden of Alcohol won't make it any easier to solve the "other" problem. . . but without a solution or relief from that initial problem. . . Solving the Alcohol problem will only push the addiction to something else.
Know anyone that's given up smoking, and in return. . . is now 50lbs heaver, or consumed chewing gum like its going out of style? There's a new book every few months like Bowling Alone that surmizes that society is becoming more disconnected. I suppose that's my ultimate point. . . Are these people hurting the rest of their lives because they're "addicted to WOW" . . . or are they addicted to WOW because they're already hurting in the rest of their lives. ..
And I can stop playing EQ anytime I want. I've barely logged in all summer. Did I mention I bought a motorcycle? Let me tell you all about it . . .
To heck with my dog, how bout tossing one in my car for when its stolen? Not to mention the fact that . . . unless it's solar powered (I didn't look) I'm not sure how I train the dog to charge it once in a while. But in the car, I can at least wire something to the car battery for a bit longer life.
Slashdot Mirror
I've never bought a house (the one I own, I acquired after my parents died.)
Are you saying: If I were buying a house, and had been "on time" with all my payments and have 10 years to go on a 20 year loan . . . the bank can "call in" the loan early?
Surely not!?
I'm assuming you mean for people already behind on payments.
I would add . . . its not just pure "research" with the superficial understanding of programming.
.
I've seen personally (and "Dilbert" would seem to confirm as universal) the generalized business belief that . . .
"programming is easy."
"quality is easy."
"expand-ability is easy."
"maintainability is easy."
"If I just had a Project Management tool to keep a death grip on delivery time . . . all those other "easy" things will just naturally fall into place."
I keep thinking the opposite . .
Quality, Suitability of Purpose, Expand-ability, Maintainability, Inter-operability, the delivery of promised features . . . those are the "hard" things. If we had a true handle on those . . . we wouldn't need the death grip on deliver-ability. Because we'd deliver a reliable version of what was needed the first pass, and spend less time maintaining it over the long haul to have time for the other projects and future expansion.
(Its been how many years now . . . and we're still not accepting the basic concepts from the Mythical Man Month?)
jkh
Right . . . "symptom not cause" . . . the whole discussion hides the implicit lie . . . that if you got out of the house, . . . "You're practically guaranteed to find the perfect mate, and live happily ever after with 2.5 children in the two story house, in a good neighborhood, with the white picket fence. (And good resale value.)"
Sure, you "fall off the horse, you get back on" . . . you, get thrown from the horse and kicked in the face 200-300 times with a shod hoof . . . even the densest person begins to realize a promising career in equestrian events, might not be in your future.
It may be bitter but . . . you may not find the perfect mate. Even if you do . . . she may not be interested in you.
Its not so much that its "easier" in the house . . . its that the alternative of eternal emotional self-flagellation outside the house, with no guarantee that if you "try just a little longer" you'll find what you've been waiting for . . . ultimately loses its appeal.
("Out of the house" for over 30 years, but no "perfect mate", no "2.5 children", and the house (inherited from two dead parents) has no picket fence.)
After all . . . the series did end with Charlie Brown NEVER getting to kick the ball . . .
So . . . why not just stay "in the house" where you have at least some control/guarantee of your level of happiness?
It has always been explained to me (by the zealots) that the "joy and beauty" of Java (and Python) is that . . . "You don't need to write lots. Someone has probably already done that, just reuse their code."
.) Be it a good or a bad standard . . . if each language at least proposed a preferred . . . then you have a shot at all the independently developed API's . . . utilizing the same format.
Fine, so I get the, lets see . . . Windowing API from vendor_A, the DB API from author_B, and the Serial I/O API from freewareProject_C.
Great, now all I have to do is write the core, and utilize the API's that have already been written.
But vendor_A used WhatYouCallCamelCase, author_B usednocaseatall, freewareProject_C used_under_score_variables.
Now your central core, must reference/utilize variables/functions/objects/etc . . . of all three types.
It'd be nice . . . if each language (like the K&R book did for "C") at least suggested a Preferred Standard Format.
From my own experience (or just read the preceding 800 posts) indentation can become a holy war. (Seriously, I don't see how Python survives more than one coder's reformatting . .
Then, your core and all its references are at least "consistent" for pure visual readability. Allowing you to focus on "what it does" not "how it looks". It also has a "shot" at depersonalizing the choice. ("I know you like it like that . . . but we try to adhere to the Preferred Standard here, so . . . though I'm very sorry it disturbs you, my hands are tied." Yes, its a cop out, but it can be utilized as an argument deflating position for the better of all.)
I've been calling them Shaman's . . . since there can only be one Chief, and lots of follower Indians, but sometimes, you just need someone with specialized knowledge.
Like for the former Space Shuttle . . . there can be only one Mission Commander, and one Pilot . . . but you may have several Mission Specialists.
I'm afraid we've become a world where "You're a Leader, or you're pond scum." And its just not that simple. Even Boy Scouts tries to make everyone a Leader. Have you ever been in a troop of 16 "Leaders"? You can't get anything done because everyone is an expert on every subject. (Or at least thinks they are.)
Now, we don't need another Jonestown . . . you can't be "Blind" followers. But there's nothing wrong with being a good follower. Or thinking to yourself . . . in 80% of what I do, I know better, but for these two things that make up the 20% . . . "that guy/girl" seems to know what they're doing, I'd be more productive to the group, and myself to just help them.
But we're not training children to be (or accept) Shaman's. Its Leader or nothing. . .
I am not a medical professional, or a statistician, but . . .
.
https://www.cia.gov/library/publications/the-world-factbook/rankorder/2102rank.html
Lots of people in the world . . . just don't live long enough to get cancer. Something else gets them first.
U.S.A. is 50th of 221nations listed above in overall life expectancy.
We're probably just the right mixture. .
Better Health Care in general (so we live longer than many).
More industrialized (so more pollutants/preservatives ingested).
Poorer lifestyles than others (the average Swiss citizen is probably exercising more and eating less "good ole southern fried cooking" than we are.)
Its possible its right. We'd have to know all the life expectancies by weighted population to have a clear answer.
Great point.
I keep having the same arguments with friends asking me "Why do you still have a landline?"
#1 its a handy backup.
#2 when I call the police during an emergency from my copper wire, after they deal with the 10 people in front of me, I'll eventually get help. You on the other hand, won't be able to call at all, because 10,000 people will be calling their sweetie-pies to let them know they're OK.
I only have to wait out the people actually before me talking to the police(fire/ambulance/whatever). . . where you on the cell . . . will have to wait until all the non-emergency calls to non-emergency people, subside so you can get a call through . . .
"Every" call blocks you, "only" the emergency calls stand in my way.
Sure, service (simultaneous capacity in this case) pretty much, gets better every year. I just don't want a loved one to die, because I couldn't get a spot in the cell around 10,000 non-emergency calls.
There are still some true merits to the copper system.
jkh
You don't say it explicitly, but hint at what I've seen . . .
It isn't always "feature creep" or "inflation of priorities" in many cases, so much as . . . "Not enough original resources, to solve the original problem in the original time frame." And the time overrun leads you into the normal "next problem/project" that would naturally occur, blending into your proceeding/existing project.
If we could "deliver" instantly fast . . . no one would have time to slip in "the next" feature. So we should be asking, "Are they really adding new features to the current project? Or were we so slow delivering the current project, that we drifted into the 'next' project?"
"can't make bombs" . . . .
Can't make "explosive force" bombs . . . can it make "dirty" bombs???
Heck, my High School science teacher didn't like Americium in Smoke Alarms . . . I wonder what he'd think of the "guy next door with the Thorium reactor"?
(OK, I read the entire article.) So . . . who pays for all this? The Swiss Government? Swiss Insurance companies? They're cleaning up all the USA/Russian/Chinese junk out of the pure goodness of their hearts?
I mean . . . its a DEFINITE NEED . . . I've just never understood, even if we developed the technology, who would pay for it? If you could de-orbit it slowly and preserve the parts . . . some independent savager might have some some juicy silver/gold (and other precious metals) to recycle for sale. But . . . right now, I don't see the cost/benefit to clean up OTHER peoples mess.
As for how, . . . "catching" things going so fast, seems problematic. And the "catcher" is also flying around and expelling/expending fuel and becomes yet another part of the problem. Pushing things up and out of orbit with lasers would seem to require lots of power. A better method might be to send a higher stable-orbit satellite up to use solar powered lasers to "push down" items to burn up in orbit. Even if it takes a few days between bursts to recharge. (Really, I mean, a giant orbital platform with lasers facing down towards the earth . . . what could possibly go wrong with that?) OK, with some good targeting and positioning, you could catch items at the horizon, and only blast away at items where the earth isn't actually behind them, laser-line-of-site-wise.
True but then, why not experiment with the LEAST harmful virus to learn about "natural process", instead of starting with one already hyper-deadly? Why would it be likely that only the most dangerous, will exhibit the things we need to see? Even if that's true, (its a feature of the most deadly we need to master), wouldn't it be better to near-exhaust research on the lesser harmful, before continuing on to that? First you juggle 3 soft balls, then 4, then 5, you don't "start" with the Chainsaw, Bowling Ball, and Egg early on. (And, I respectfully submit, from a genetic-flu understanding standpoint . . . its "early on".)
I guess someone in the TSA finally caught up on their Heinlein reading. "If I can just arch my shoulder blade back in the right position to hit the detonation switch . . ."
So now what . . . X-Raying to see through our cloths isn't enough. Now we'll be required to have MRI's before boarding for internal scans as well?
(sigh) . . .
Interesting, but ultimately pointless until we have cars that can talk to soccer balls. You know . . . like when your human eyes/mind sees a soccer ball roll into the street, and you knows to slow down because, seeing the ball, you know a child might just come running along behind it . . . Seriously, its good work that needs to be done, but unless we're going to drive cars in isolated pathways, there are just too many non-automotive things that can spring out from the road side to make this alone the wonder solution.
(Yes, I realize I'm mixing my Scifi shows but . . .) Because in the end, all the guns, lasers, spaceships, aliens, transporters, and holodecks in the universe . . . are just contrived plot devices. In the end . . . its always the people and the choices they make that matters. I watch TV shows and movies (aside from the pretty girls) for one reason . . . in hopes of seeing the "one perfect moment". Where story, writing, delivery, photography, all come together to produce something more than just "a scene". For me, in Firefly, that "one perfect moment" came in the 2nd episode "The Train Robbery". "Mal" has unwittingly stolen medicine desperately needed by the mining colony. When he sees what has happened, and how many will suffer for it, he tries to return it. The Sheriff spots him coming to drop off the stolen goods and intercepts him. Saying . . . "Times are hard. A man might take a job and not ask too many questions about what's involved. When he gets the full story, he has a choice to make." Mal says "No, I don't believe he does." When faced with jail time, or possibly even death . . . for Mal there was no other choice but to "do the right thing". He was a man of character at all costs to himself. In Serenity the movie, the entire crew essentially made a similar choice. And some did die for it. It was about people being their best, when things were at their worst. It may not qualify as great SciFi . . . but it can make your heart soar to watch. It can make you wish at 48, that you can still be Malcolm Reynolds when you grow up. And strive to be him every day.
Only if you use '3 spaces' for the indentation. Since I (exclusively) do that, amongst all other programmers on the planet.
How is it controlled? Via computer command? Via voice command? Via preprogrammed sequence? Via no command whatsoever (where its just a remote manipulator torso controlled directly by humans.) If it has innate skills, does it have vision systems to find a bolt, and a hole, and know how to use a wrench and install the bolt? Is there any task its programmed to complete independently? (Yes, I linked onto the NASA article too. . . no more real information there.) Gosh, wouldn't 10million children suddenly develop interest in robotics if they thought we really were close to an "R2-D2" like robot? No discussion of "Humanoid" vs "Practical configuration"? Can no one write a fulfilling article anymore? (Makes me want to go "blogger" and track down these answers . . . if I thought I could get paid to do so . . .) Its a shame that those that are paid to do so . . . don't.
So Unix is 40 years old, and knew at birth what Microsoft still hasn't figured out. Its a bad idea to store unencrypted passwords. Got it.
Someone enlighten me. I know with local GPS, the time is encoded on the signal. Its not just a difference in "tick"'s from different satellites. At some point a time is encoded to tell us which "tick" that last "tick" was. I'm going out on a limb and saying no one's flown out to these Pulsars and encoded "which millisecond tick is which" in the datastream. So if my ship flies inside a large hole in an asteroid (while avoiding Xur and the Kodan Armada), when I come back out, how will I know how many milliseconds I've missed from each pulsar? Surely across Galactic scale, and relativistic effects. . . just accurately counting the time between ticks from Pulsar to Pulsar won't be enough to know where you are. You'll have to know which tick is which. (Or is everyone assuming its like gyroscopes. . . you spin them up, and have to keep them going. . . or you're lost forever . . .)
What am I missing?
jkh
"succeed at once"? Not succeed, "once", or even "twice" in fact. See http://www.engadget.com/2007/05/12/scottys-ashes-crash-land-after-failed-flight/ for the first failed attempt. Well, maybe 3'rd times charm. Come on guys . . . boost that transporter signal.
Its one thing to sling a few "bots" together from another continent and "see if you can get in" anonymously from the safety of your den or bedroom. Its takes quite another breed of individual to walk their living flesh in the front door and risk being taken out in handcuffs. To face felony theft in months of court time later. . .
Yes, its a valid demonstration of what is available if they make it in. . . I'm not sure its at all statistically or even operationally significant by any practical stretch. . .
Why should I risk my own freedom? How about instead of going in, I just wait will the branch manager comes out on his way home, club him over the head, and extract the passwords I need from him directly. After I've transferred a few hundred million to my bank account in an extradition free country (do we still have those? And can someone list them for me?) then I'd be all set.
Comparing the type of "in your face, willing to risk capture and jail-time" type of personality, with the "I'd like to stay safe at home" type of crime. . . seems too much Apples and Oranges comparison to suit my tastes.
How many 13 year old adolescent pimple faced copier repair men do you typically expect to see in your average work day? And how many "back alley club-you-over-the-head" thieves are pulling major-league cyber-crimes?
Apple crimes for Apple risk, or Orange crimes for Orange risk, but this is Orange risk for Apple crimes.
jkh
"if every one of 110 million American households bought just one [CFL], took it home, and screwed it in the place of an ordinary 60-watt bulb, the energy saved would be enough to power a city of 1.5 million people. One bulb swapped out, enough electricity saved to power all the homes in Delaware and Rhode Island. ..."
Power the city/state FOR HOW LONG??????? Statements like this are meaningless without a time frame. If I replaced one single bulb in my one single apartment, it would save enough energy to power the entire planet . . . for a few hundred billionths of a nanosecond.
Give us a time frame or don't even start.
Hummm, Measure of a Man is one of my favorite episodes. (Or at least the "potential it had" is. . .)
." How do we (as a society) want to be regarded/known by the other races "out there" amongst the stars. . .?
I never took "Does Data have a Soul" as the central theme. . . to me the focus was always in the other direction, at society itself.
"IF" there is "some possibility" that Data has a soul. . . do we want to be the type of race that takes the chance and subjects this individual (and the others like him to come) to, what essentially consititutes slavery? The diminishment of the individuals very worth, to simple property?
It wasn't so much about what Data was/wasn't. Or what he had/didn't have. It was about society's responsibility to "choose its own moral path and stick to it. .
IMHO
Sitting in a resturant one day, I overheard a Doctor talking with a co-worker in the next booth. He was ranting about the number of people that used Chapstick (or Blistex or whatever your favorite brand is.) That it was a self-reinforcing problem. The more you used it, the more you became dependent on it as your body chemistry changed (locally) to need the protection of the ointment.
.) .)
.
Which I though was stupid, but refrained from telling him. What does he thinks happens to start someone using a lip balm?
(Trenchcoat clad figure approaches young child on the playground. .
Trenchcoat: "Pssst, hey kid come over here."
Kid: "Hi Mister."
(Opening coat to reveal rows of various lip balms, speaking in a hushed voice. .
Trenchcoat: "Wanna try some Chapstick? You'll like it."
Kid: "Gosh, I don't know."
Trenchcoat: "Trust me, you'll like it. First hit's free, but then you gotta pay."
No one gets "addicted to lip balm" because they were lured into it by some unsavory individual. They start using it because their lips are already dry, cracked, and near (if not already) bleeding.
The doctors false assumption was that "Everything was otherwise fine and normal." That it was the act of becoming addicted that caused the problems.
Same bad assumptions here. That playing (EQ for me, not a WOW player) is ruining my other personal relationships.
I have to ask . . . "what" other relationships? You've started out assuming that I have this loving wife and children. (Apparently I'm required to have one of these as a standard part of life, to leave at home (presumably "barefoot and pregnant") to pickup the UPS package deliveries. Since UPS won't abide my instructions and just leave them on the apartment porch.)
Not everyone has this "assumed" gift, nor is there any guarantee that they would have it (either instantly or for many years to come) if they stopped playing the mmorpg at this moment.
Lots of big unwarranted assumptions going on here about "what you're guaranteed to get in return" if you don't have the mmorpg addiction.
Yes, it's the addictive personality that is more likely to turn to Alcohol or Gambling TO COMBAT THE PREEXISTING PROBLEM.
I understand that "piling on" the greater burden of Alcohol won't make it any easier to solve the "other" problem. . . but without a solution or relief from that initial problem. . . Solving the Alcohol problem will only push the addiction to something else.
Know anyone that's given up smoking, and in return. . . is now 50lbs heaver, or consumed chewing gum like its going out of style?
There's a new book every few months like Bowling Alone that surmizes that society is becoming more disconnected. I suppose that's my ultimate point. . . Are these people hurting the rest of their lives because they're "addicted to WOW" . . . or are they addicted to WOW because they're already hurting in the rest of their lives. .
And I can stop playing EQ anytime I want. I've barely logged in all summer. Did I mention I bought a motorcycle? Let me tell you all about it . . .
To heck with my dog, how bout tossing one in my car for when its stolen? Not to mention the fact that . . . unless it's solar powered (I didn't look) I'm not sure how I train the dog to charge it once in a while. But in the car, I can at least wire something to the car battery for a bit longer life.