how about this is a postulate. intelligence is neither inclining or declining, its average is consistent, and it's a function of certain physical aspects of the human brain (not for individuals, for groups). that would be an interesting study if you had a long time.
if it would stop katz from posting so often, it could be considered productive to flame him. is this article where a post it would be moderated redundant. he offers no insight whatsoever, adds nothing to gopnik's claims other than to throw in the word hacker a couple times to make this seem applicable. this write up and the original book both seem to be completely useless to me. the 'predators' are competition, that's what free market is all about. don't forget that t.v. and magazines are businesses. and your claim that politicians are less informed than journalists is bunk. not all politicians or journalists are geniuses, but some politicians do manage to get very very educated about the policy that they really push. uninformed politicians result from uninformed voters. which result, imho, from the partisan political system.
well what i was suggesting is that the evolution of the human mind or whatever isn't tied to the aspects important in natural selection. thats what's interesting about capitalism. it kind of rewards people who have ambition and creativity with money, sort of an artifical natural selection that has nothing to do with producing offspring. a disease that wiped people out would spare the immune but they could be a certain small race of people (native australians, amazonians) who have lived for a long time without a lot of whatever you call it when foreign genes come in (don't think it's drift). anyway the point is that intelligence per se is never going to be related to evolution (not for ages anyhow) so that you can't expect people to 'get smarter' over time.
ok you asked. actually there are two kinds of feedback. it could have positive feedback and be unstable. it could not have feedback and be very stable (static). your post does nothing to show how natural selection can be applied to social phenomena. i think it is kind of obvious it doesn't, where the united states (for example, sorry europeans i'm from the states) has low infant mortality, low birth rates, and high standard of living. that is not 'natural selection' as darwin discussed it, i am not educated as to his views of social selection.
technically in the darwinian sense fertility is the thing that the gene pool should be selecting and therefore the examples you site do fit into natural selection. the infertile members of this community will not procreate, ending their infertile line, and the fertile members will produce a litter big enough in size that at least one member will do the same. the darwinian part comes in 20000 years when some human develops a trait that gives them a better ability to adapt to their environment (immunity to disease?)
better ambition for money and power motivate people than either nothing or a twisted desire to cause pain to others (but not necessarily benifit the 'twisted' one in any material sense).
yea this is what i was trying to say, once we get a couple, well be able to figure out quantum physics, meaning more and/or better quantum computers. i really didnt know how much computing power crays have, just trying to make the point that once we get a few, many of the interesting hard problems (mostly quantum physical/dna/neural net) will fall, and well all end up with some completely different kind of computer on our desktop than pc (if we still have desktop pc at all), but its highly unlikely to be quantum
yea actually etching is suprisingly inaccurate, something like 2 out of 10 wafers are good, the rest are tossed. can you imagine the price change if the supply went up 3 or 4 times?
this is not at all what i meant. they said 5 computers would solve all the worlds problems. i only say a few really tough problems that require immense computational power can be solved. they wont be mainstream because of the large amount of temperature control and other controls that will be required to keep the quanta in a certain state. the difference in energy levels here is very small, there is just no practical way to achieve this in a home. now universities, government institutions (dept of energy - weather) and a few corporations (lockheed and boeing maybe) on the other hand would really be able to put these to use. there is simply no reason a home user would need the incredible amount of computational power these could provide...it would be like every home having 2 crays. i hate when people say 'we dont need more memory, we have enough' or speed or whatever, but this is not even close to comparable.
quantum computing will never be common, but one or two quantum computers will be able to solve a couple of the really tough problems we never thought we could solve
http://www.sciam.com/1998/ 0698issue/0698gershenfeld.html a good scientific america article, basically a quantum particle can exist in more than one state at once (based on its probability of being in a certain state). the state is a way of saying that there are finite energy levels a particle (electron) can have, these can each represent a state. it also talks about action at a distance. all of this is interesting but unfortunately very hard to understand. its based on wacky math and probability functions. the ones and zeros are basically the same thing...a high level and low level of energy. this is just on a smaller level
why not? as you say, the practical reason to do it is for speed...you can always do something faster in assembly. other than that though, some of us actually enjoy (sort of) assembly programming, especially ee's who think oo programming is wussy
writing these apps is educational for many of us, and it allows people to personalize their desktop if you dont like to see all these apps, download stuff from your distro's website
http://www.webstationone.com/er a/html/armstrong.htm double e's especially should read the story of edward armstrong (the inventor of fm radio). a depressing story of what single mindedness and fighting corporate america will get you. a look at the shameful history of rca. whatever happens jim i hope for your sake you find something else in life that makes you happy
The Dickens windowing patent was issued in 1998. Analysts have discovered information on the fix from IBM, which referred to the technique in pamphlets as far back as 1991. Isfahani said there is overwhelming evidence in the industry that windowing was used on a widespread basis as far back as 1990. "The fact that the Patent Office is re-examining the patent is indicative" that the office could change its earlier decision, he added. it would be really good if we could get the information on exactly what process people took to get the pto's attention, the channels, details about the type of information, so on. anybody know this stuff?
true but i understand how this is frustrating for bruce. corel really needs to reign in their legal department. its not fair for bruce to have to constantly step up and fix what corels broken. maybe its time for some sort of gpl legal group, i know you cant trust lawyers, but with more and more companies using free software, were gonna need protection
if you use red hat, like it, and want them to stay in business, consider paying for their product. this is the only way to prove wrong all the people who say open source companies cant make money. please, whatever distro you use, consider paying for it--you will be doing the right thing, and open source will live forever
i run redhat 6 with e and gnome, but im thinking of dropping gnome (im not really sure how id go about doing that). i really like e and want to move away from the start button thing. i wish linux could use the keyboard in the gui like you can alt, or tab around in windows. i dont have support for my sound card yet (aureal vortex (turtle beach montego)) but hopefully thats coming. star office works pretty well for me so far but it has problems figuring out word's drawings. i need a schematics (electrical) drawing type program if anyone knows of one for free. overall im pretty happy, and feel good about supporting something i believe in (free software is good for the consumer, why do people have problems believing this?)
>Hardware hacker - newer machine, DSP or FPGAs, prototyping boards, software (hard to have GPLed tools here) - $5000-$25000-How deep are your pockets...
well if youre a ee, and really interested in that kind of thing, well i know a couple of guys whove written motorola and asked for a chip to do projects with and gotten it(one a 68k and the other the 56k dsp chip). you should only ask if you really are interested though. sure youre not building your own desktop pc but you can still have fun with things you can get for free or cheap
I read this great article explaining the business model of open source or free software. Probably one of the most important points is that something like 90% of all code is written in house. This means a large majority of software is written by people who work at a company with the intention of using it, not selling it. Therefore, a company like sun can release software open source, save time and money on the programming side, have better end results, and concentrate on their core business: hardware. Other companies will concentrate on service, and others on things like books. The point of open source software is not just good software...but software that does what you want-exactly what you want.
Slashdot Mirror
how about this is a postulate. intelligence is neither inclining or declining, its average is consistent, and it's a function of certain physical aspects of the human brain (not for individuals, for groups). that would be an interesting study if you had a long time.
if it would stop katz from posting so often, it could be considered productive to flame him. is this article where a post it would be moderated redundant. he offers no insight whatsoever, adds nothing to gopnik's claims other than to throw in the word hacker a couple times to make this seem applicable. this write up and the original book both seem to be completely useless to me. the 'predators' are competition, that's what free market is all about. don't forget that t.v. and magazines are businesses. and your claim that politicians are less informed than journalists is bunk. not all politicians or journalists are geniuses, but some politicians do manage to get very very educated about the policy that they really push. uninformed politicians result from uninformed voters. which result, imho, from the partisan political system.
well what i was suggesting is that the evolution of the human mind or whatever isn't tied to the aspects important in natural selection. thats what's interesting about capitalism. it kind of rewards people who have ambition and creativity with money, sort of an artifical natural selection that has nothing to do with producing offspring. a disease that wiped people out would spare the immune but they could be a certain small race of people (native australians, amazonians) who have lived for a long time without a lot of whatever you call it when foreign genes come in (don't think it's drift). anyway the point is that intelligence per se is never going to be related to evolution (not for ages anyhow) so that you can't expect people to 'get smarter' over time.
ok you asked. actually there are two kinds of feedback. it could have positive feedback and be unstable. it could not have feedback and be very stable (static). your post does nothing to show how natural selection can be applied to social phenomena. i think it is kind of obvious it doesn't, where the united states (for example, sorry europeans i'm from the states) has low infant mortality, low birth rates, and high standard of living. that is not 'natural selection' as darwin discussed it, i am not educated as to his views of social selection.
technically in the darwinian sense fertility is the thing that the gene pool should be selecting and therefore the examples you site do fit into natural selection. the infertile members of this community will not procreate, ending their infertile line, and the fertile members will produce a litter big enough in size that at least one member will do the same. the darwinian part comes in 20000 years when some human develops a trait that gives them a better ability to adapt to their environment (immunity to disease?)
better ambition for money and power motivate people than either nothing or a twisted desire to cause pain to others (but not necessarily benifit the 'twisted' one in any material sense).
yea this is what i was trying to say, once we get a couple, well be able to figure out quantum physics, meaning more and/or better quantum computers. i really didnt know how much computing power crays have, just trying to make the point that once we get a few, many of the interesting hard problems (mostly quantum physical/dna/neural net) will fall, and well all end up with some completely different kind of computer on our desktop than pc (if we still have desktop pc at all), but its highly unlikely to be quantum
yea actually etching is suprisingly inaccurate, something like 2 out of 10 wafers are good, the rest are tossed. can you imagine the price change if the supply went up 3 or 4 times?
this could be done with much less computing power. much more likely would be optical computers. now those, someday, might be commonplace
this is not at all what i meant. they said 5 computers would solve all the worlds problems. i only say a few really tough problems that require immense computational power can be solved. they wont be mainstream because of the large amount of temperature control and other controls that will be required to keep the quanta in a certain state. the difference in energy levels here is very small, there is just no practical way to achieve this in a home. now universities, government institutions (dept of energy - weather) and a few corporations (lockheed and boeing maybe) on the other hand would really be able to put these to use. there is simply no reason a home user would need the incredible amount of computational power these could provide...it would be like every home having 2 crays. i hate when people say 'we dont need more memory, we have enough' or speed or whatever, but this is not even close to comparable.
quantum computing will never be common, but one or two quantum computers will be able to solve a couple of the really tough problems we never thought we could solve
http://www.sciam.com/1998/ 0698issue/0698gershenfeld.html a good scientific america article, basically a quantum particle can exist in more than one state at once (based on its probability of being in a certain state). the state is a way of saying that there are finite energy levels a particle (electron) can have, these can each represent a state. it also talks about action at a distance. all of this is interesting but unfortunately very hard to understand. its based on wacky math and probability functions. the ones and zeros are basically the same thing...a high level and low level of energy. this is just on a smaller level
youd come home one night to find your computer raping your stereo or something
why not? as you say, the practical reason to do it is for speed...you can always do something faster in assembly. other than that though, some of us actually enjoy (sort of) assembly programming, especially ee's who think oo programming is wussy
writing these apps is educational for many of us, and it allows people to personalize their desktop if you dont like to see all these apps, download stuff from your distro's website
one problem with fdisk is just finding it...i dont always see it included in one of the distributions, where do people usually get it from?
http://www.webstationone.com/er a/html/armstrong.htm double e's especially should read the story of edward armstrong (the inventor of fm radio). a depressing story of what single mindedness and fighting corporate america will get you. a look at the shameful history of rca. whatever happens jim i hope for your sake you find something else in life that makes you happy
The Dickens windowing patent was issued in 1998. Analysts have discovered information on the fix from IBM, which referred to the technique in pamphlets as far back as 1991. Isfahani said there is overwhelming evidence in the industry that windowing was used on a widespread basis as far back as 1990. "The fact that the Patent Office is re-examining the patent is indicative" that the office could change its earlier decision, he added. it would be really good if we could get the information on exactly what process people took to get the pto's attention, the channels, details about the type of information, so on. anybody know this stuff?
true but
i understand how this is frustrating for bruce.
corel really needs to reign in their legal department. its not fair for bruce to have to constantly step up and fix what corels broken. maybe its time for some sort of gpl legal group, i know you cant trust lawyers, but with more and more companies using free software, were gonna need protection
if you use red hat, like it, and want them to stay in business, consider paying for their product. this is the only way to prove wrong all the people who say open source companies cant make money. please, whatever distro you use, consider paying for it--you will be doing the right thing, and open source will live forever
i run redhat 6 with e and gnome, but im thinking
of dropping gnome (im not really sure how id go about doing that). i really like e and want to move away from the start button thing. i wish linux could use the keyboard in the gui like you can alt, or tab around in windows. i dont have support for my sound card yet (aureal vortex (turtle beach montego)) but hopefully thats coming. star office works pretty well for me so far but it has problems figuring out word's drawings. i need a schematics (electrical) drawing type program if anyone knows of one for free. overall im pretty happy, and feel good about supporting something i believe in (free software is good for the consumer, why do people have problems believing this?)
so if they are being sued for one riduculous
patent, maybe they are doing this just to make sure nobody sues them for this too
They should ask major (and minor) distros for a link on their webpage. Maybe even a prominent one. That could definately help.
>Hardware hacker - newer machine, DSP or FPGAs, prototyping boards, software (hard to have GPLed tools here) - $5000-$25000-How deep are your pockets...
well if youre a ee, and really interested in that kind of thing, well i know a couple of guys whove written motorola and asked for a chip to do projects with and gotten it(one a 68k and the other the 56k dsp chip). you should only ask if you really are interested though. sure youre not building your own desktop pc but you can still have fun with things you can get for free or cheap
How can a company make money from OSS?
I read this great article explaining the business model of open source or free software. Probably one of the most important points is that something like 90% of all code is written in house. This means a large majority of software is written by people who work at a company with the intention of using it, not selling it.
Therefore, a company like sun can release software open source, save time and money on the programming side, have better end results, and concentrate on their core business: hardware.
Other companies will concentrate on service, and others on things like books.
The point of open source software is not just good software...but software that does what you want-exactly what you want.