Yeah...why distros (at least those non-US based) don't put out fully featured ISOs for download if your IP is from place with more sensible laws? Why do I have to be unconvienienced by some stupid laws that don't apply to me?
(and yes, it hit me few times - you need a working internet connection to have fully functional Linux install)
(not sure how popular it is at your place, but recently teens here on the stupid side of bell curve tend to listen as loud as possible to crap music on crap loudspeakers of their cellphones while walking on the street/etc.)
I'd argue there's more to making a presentation that simply available technology.
Sadly, the amount of horrible Powerpoint presentations one has to witness in this world means my views are not very common... (at least at the point when average person, bored during presentation while on the audience, has to be a presenter and simply uses Powerpoint as a cheat-sheet)
...but I can't benefit from doing so by learning about cool new music from them
Uhmmm...you can't? The recommendation system still works, I don't remember whether personal recommendation radio was ever a free feature (if it was...well, big deal, they just made p2p more attractive). And it still works quite well, not sure what you mean by "It worked quite well"
We already have cheap and ubiquitous way for transferring data while on-the-go: cellphone network. I'm thinking about implementing it at some point in UAV that I'm toying with.
Granted, there are countries with spotty coverage...but there are also those where, even if 3G range is limited to aglomerations, 2G/GPRS is practically everywhere (or at least - I've never seen "out of range" on my cellphone; also, beeing somewhat above ground will help reception on an UAV)
Especially since pro Linux movements in Europe are, also, largery a grassroots thing, so their members don't really care that much whether or not that particular group of pro Linux buddies / neighbouars reside in a country that's part of the EU or not...
Open source autopilot/software/hardware design for small UAVs. Check succes stories and links on their webpage for a quick overview of what (quite a lot!) can be reasonably easily achieved.
I would expect the weapons used by machines in the case of a revolt to differentiate quite rapidly from their human-built predecessors, if only because of higher rate of development and lack of need for retraining. Building them so that only machines (themselves differentiated for the purpose) can use them is sensible.
I think you conveniently forget about how good humans are at noticing subtle facial clues (you can easily notice paralisis of even small portion of face muscles, real skin or not). Ditto with eyes - it's more about the muscles around them. Sure, you can grow them - but making them behave convincingly is a totally different league.
And shell shock or post traumatic stress doesn't really come into this - sure, the emotions expressed are totally different in such cases, but at the same time still clear (to humans) and extremelly subtle and convoluted (to AI).
And we ARE extremelly good at noticing this. Heck, in vast majority of cases I can correctly determine whether I see a woman or a man which is, say, 100 meters from me. Plus I can guess their emotional state with quite high accuracy. Software can't even reliably do man-woman guess when presented with HD photo of a face.
IMHO it all boils down to: any AI that will be sufficiently advanced to make human-robots convincing enough for human consumption, won't have to play in fielding inflitrators. The cyborgs from many movies (including Terminator) are convincing only because they were played by humans. But notice how easily you can determine when Cameron used puppet-head in T1. OTOH "artificial" animals in movies - they're good enough already.
That's not a simple purpose. It involves movement. It involves weapons use. It involves communication. It involves organizational abilities. (plus in response to later they are better at doing simplified repetitive tasks. The more complex a task you put in front of it, the more complex of a robot you would need. )
There is more than one and only human-way to achieve those. Sure, vision of terminators is very anthropocentric (and I don't mean only their looks...), but hive mind AI is perhaps more likely.
And quadripedal robots could certianly handle the terrain. But would they be able to carry weapons and blend in with regular dogs? Probably not...
You're forgetting it's about something that doesn't require many internal organs of a dog; why couldn't it have some ranged weapon hidden inside? Also, making a dog-robot believable to humans is a CONSIDERABLY easier task (just compare CG of animals, quite convincing even 15 years ago, with todays CG of humans) than achieving the same thing with human-robot. Plus humans will loose the trust in their dogs.
but who will fix it if no robots have hands? It's a complex task, it's not a simple as weld the same spot on the chasis as they travel down the assembly line. Why fix it?
That would be a major disadvantage for robots, naturally the more technologically advanced side - it means humans could also easily use their gear.
Yes, bipedal forms will be usefull, I won't fall into a trap that the other poster has by advocating something dramatically different. But...they need to be made incompatible with the form of humans. For example greater degree of freedom in finger/hand joints, plus much stronger grip, both REQUIRED to use their weapons. Or, while the gun remains physically separate, it's logically part of the robot through some kind of wireless network.
Electronics of MiG-25 was still, to astonishment of people who abalised one that landed in Japan, tube-based. So I imagine they would use them in probes; btw, their Mars probes didn't really survive any landings; Venus ones - yeas, but with atmosphere as dense as our ocean...
Though you have to remember that what had become Russian part of ISS was originally named Mir 2. And even if at least desing work on Mir 2 wasn't ongoing during Soviet Union, those modules are certainly based on Mir.
Giess I should add "generally"; sure, there were always some games ahead of the curve but, in the time period I was thinking about, vast majority were still made to be perfectly playable on non-TnL cards. Only programmable shaders really changed that.
Though TBH I actually would be surprised if similar things wouldn't be used already, or planned to be used at least.
Unless...it haven't really yet occured to people wishing for covert means of transport, in which case perhaps we should be a bit quiet about it, giving time for means of detection to improve...
I actually was thinking about building small autonomous boat, solar powered, just for fun; guess I decided to keep playing with ground vehicles also until swimming ones will be common enough that mine won't have much chance of attracting attention of people I wouldn't want to deal with...
Slashdot Mirror
Yeah...why distros (at least those non-US based) don't put out fully featured ISOs for download if your IP is from place with more sensible laws? Why do I have to be unconvienienced by some stupid laws that don't apply to me?
(and yes, it hit me few times - you need a working internet connection to have fully functional Linux install)
Hm, need for a "darkened room"...that could actually be an advantage when inviting somebody for moviewatching ;p
(yes, I eagerly await lower prices, hopefully by this Autumn, on DLP (or what was the name of that TI micromirror technology) based miniprojectors)
Oh, Lords of Kobol, please make it stop!
(not sure how popular it is at your place, but recently teens here on the stupid side of bell curve tend to listen as loud as possible to crap music on crap loudspeakers of their cellphones while walking on the street/etc.)
I'd argue there's more to making a presentation that simply available technology.
Sadly, the amount of horrible Powerpoint presentations one has to witness in this world means my views are not very common... (at least at the point when average person, bored during presentation while on the audience, has to be a presenter and simply uses Powerpoint as a cheat-sheet)
...in UK.
...but I can't benefit from doing so by learning about cool new music from them
Uhmmm...you can't? The recommendation system still works, I don't remember whether personal recommendation radio was ever a free feature (if it was...well, big deal, they just made p2p more attractive). And it still works quite well, not sure what you mean by "It worked quite well"
Well, if you don't know what UAV is, this discussion is no place for you; sounds fait to me.
We already have cheap and ubiquitous way for transferring data while on-the-go: cellphone network. I'm thinking about implementing it at some point in UAV that I'm toying with.
Granted, there are countries with spotty coverage...but there are also those where, even if 3G range is limited to aglomerations, 2G/GPRS is practically everywhere (or at least - I've never seen "out of range" on my cellphone; also, beeing somewhat above ground will help reception on an UAV)
Especially since pro Linux movements in Europe are, also, largery a grassroots thing, so their members don't really care that much whether or not that particular group of pro Linux buddies / neighbouars reside in a country that's part of the EU or not...
Because that is the unfortunate reality in most of Europe, not only in EU countries.
http://paparazzi.enac.fr/wiki/Main_Page
Open source autopilot/software/hardware design for small UAVs. Check succes stories and links on their webpage for a quick overview of what (quite a lot!) can be reasonably easily achieved.
I would expect the weapons used by machines in the case of a revolt to differentiate quite rapidly from their human-built predecessors, if only because of higher rate of development and lack of need for retraining. Building them so that only machines (themselves differentiated for the purpose) can use them is sensible.
I think you conveniently forget about how good humans are at noticing subtle facial clues (you can easily notice paralisis of even small portion of face muscles, real skin or not). Ditto with eyes - it's more about the muscles around them. Sure, you can grow them - but making them behave convincingly is a totally different league.
And shell shock or post traumatic stress doesn't really come into this - sure, the emotions expressed are totally different in such cases, but at the same time still clear (to humans) and extremelly subtle and convoluted (to AI).
And we ARE extremelly good at noticing this. Heck, in vast majority of cases I can correctly determine whether I see a woman or a man which is, say, 100 meters from me. Plus I can guess their emotional state with quite high accuracy. Software can't even reliably do man-woman guess when presented with HD photo of a face.
IMHO it all boils down to: any AI that will be sufficiently advanced to make human-robots convincing enough for human consumption, won't have to play in fielding inflitrators. The cyborgs from many movies (including Terminator) are convincing only because they were played by humans. But notice how easily you can determine when Cameron used puppet-head in T1. OTOH "artificial" animals in movies - they're good enough already.
"DON'T RUN! WE ARE FRIENDLY!"
That's not a simple purpose. It involves movement. It involves weapons use. It involves communication. It involves organizational abilities.
(plus in response to later they are better at doing simplified repetitive tasks. The more complex a task you put in front of it, the more complex of a robot you would need. )
There is more than one and only human-way to achieve those. Sure, vision of terminators is very anthropocentric (and I don't mean only their looks...), but hive mind AI is perhaps more likely.
And quadripedal robots could certianly handle the terrain. But would they be able to carry weapons and blend in with regular dogs? Probably not...
You're forgetting it's about something that doesn't require many internal organs of a dog; why couldn't it have some ranged weapon hidden inside? Also, making a dog-robot believable to humans is a CONSIDERABLY easier task (just compare CG of animals, quite convincing even 15 years ago, with todays CG of humans) than achieving the same thing with human-robot. Plus humans will loose the trust in their dogs.
but who will fix it if no robots have hands? It's a complex task, it's not a simple as weld the same spot on the chasis as they travel down the assembly line.
Why fix it?
That would be a major disadvantage for robots, naturally the more technologically advanced side - it means humans could also easily use their gear.
Yes, bipedal forms will be usefull, I won't fall into a trap that the other poster has by advocating something dramatically different. But...they need to be made incompatible with the form of humans. For example greater degree of freedom in finger/hand joints, plus much stronger grip, both REQUIRED to use their weapons. Or, while the gun remains physically separate, it's logically part of the robot through some kind of wireless network.
Electronics of MiG-25 was still, to astonishment of people who abalised one that landed in Japan, tube-based. So I imagine they would use them in probes; btw, their Mars probes didn't really survive any landings; Venus ones - yeas, but with atmosphere as dense as our ocean...
Though you have to remember that what had become Russian part of ISS was originally named Mir 2. And even if at least desing work on Mir 2 wasn't ongoing during Soviet Union, those modules are certainly based on Mir.
Giess I should add "generally"; sure, there were always some games ahead of the curve but, in the time period I was thinking about, vast majority were still made to be perfectly playable on non-TnL cards. Only programmable shaders really changed that.
"Informative"...only on /. ;p
Though TBH I actually would be surprised if similar things wouldn't be used already, or planned to be used at least.
Unless...it haven't really yet occured to people wishing for covert means of transport, in which case perhaps we should be a bit quiet about it, giving time for means of detection to improve...
I actually was thinking about building small autonomous boat, solar powered, just for fun; guess I decided to keep playing with ground vehicles also until swimming ones will be common enough that mine won't have much chance of attracting attention of people I wouldn't want to deal with...
So...why not go back? Heck, there are even newer, currently produced models in style of 1100: 1200 and 1208.
I don't actually believe he was able to destroy one of those... ;)
Uhm, the silence was also present during the jump towards the drilling platform.
Some kind of consistancy, I guess - every time when a character was more or less exposed to vacuum; when they wouldn't be able to hear anything.
Well, I guess if you actually plan to keep this car instead of changing them every 2 or 3 years like I often see...
Perhaps the devil is in the details then...