CRTs are outdated because they're dead in the market. Name a consumer-level store you can walk into where they sell new CRT monitors. I haven't seen one in any major chain or specialty store in at least 3 years now.
It'd be great to know how much of the battery life is consumed by the processors. If it's a major factor (versus, say, screen life, where LEDs and quantum well diodes should theoretically help), then perhaps the reversible computing push so prevalent in Kurzweil's books and rhetoric could be of some assistance.
It may be a problem because the curve is only getting steeper and more demanding, and rapid shifts in the economic base are going to become much more likely. If you don't learn to learn as a lifelong skill, then you may be kind of fucked.
I read "everyday activities such as eating and sex" and thought "one of those is not every day on Slashdot". On consideration, it's not every day just about anywhere.
They don't have to see the changes. SVN will merge silently on update. It'll be on the client, but frankly it's very easy to get into the pattern of commit->fail->update->commit.
I think that was more a subtle form of racism, in actual fact. You could find equivalent statements about black Africans in the early and middle part of the last century to indicate why they were in such terrible conditions.
The movie would have been lessened by a broader focus. Where in the plot would you have stuck the activists, scientists, etc? In most real world cases those folks are kept away by bureaucratic means, and the bureaucracy in this movie has its hands full and then some. That's the point of the movie, even - it's administrated horror of a kind all too familiar to South Africans. The lead character is the ultimate administrator, and it's hard to understand that what he's doing is pretty much exactly what members of many world governments do, administrating horrific crimes because it's his job. It's not even a case of "just following orders" - the scene with the eggs is a great example of trying to please without considering the ramifications of your actions.
If you use one of these two languages you'll very quickly find that when a question occurs to you at this point in time you can usually go to StackOverflow, begin typing your question, and find an answer without completing the submission process. I would like to suggest that this is because these are two of the most widely-used languages in the world, but I wouldn't want to be accused of being a corporate whore again. Weekend or no, very few unanswered questions exist about a widely used language after a while.
If you read the article you'll discover that it's not just survival. It's the number of humans required to circumvent survival. One human can kill a lion, tiger, or bear, although it would really depend on their level of technology, which kind of points out a major difficulty with his argument - there isn't a "normalized" version of human intelligence against which to measure.
First of all, he doesn't actually say much about the survival as intelligence idea beyond the positing of the notion itself. It gives him a nice way to consider survival and intelligence as linked systems, with the "survival" of a system (that definition alone gets pretty abstract) being measured in terms of the logarithm of the number of humans required to shut it down.
He says you CAN consider the Internet, legal system, medical system, and others in terms of this notion, but doesn't get terrifically specific about it. He does, however, specifically state that road systems and the legal system are at least an order of magnitude more resilient than a human-level intelligence, which is nice, if you believe his examples are well-chosen. I'd be hard pressed to claim that they are.
In other words, he sets up an interesting research topic and then between his own poor choice of phrasing, the multiple Singularity references which surround the article, and the/. article writers' need to get your attention, it suddenly becomes Human Intelligence Is Over.
Or "TFA is a paid Microsoft detractor". It's not like there's nobody with a commercial reason to cut them down these days, particularly on a site as widely read as this one.
What's your suggestion? That the number of objects deflected into the earth is higher than those swept up + those deflected away? That's what I was responding to. Yes, Jupiter's effect is probably not that high, but all the same it's high enough, particularly assuming that most dangerous objects are trapped in a stellar orbit rather than simply shot like a cannon at the earth. The probability that Jupiter has a clearing-house effect on bodies in orbit turns out to be pretty high over the course of billions of years of stellar evolution, n'est-ce pas?
The susceptibility of users is one possibility, of course, but so are
1) better product (see the comments regarding Cashback ads)
2) better placement
3) better advertising clients (ever seen an interesting google ad but hesitated to click because of the shady domain?)
The proportion of objects which follow this relationship is almost by definition no greater than that which would have hit Earth but for Jupiter's influence, unless there's some cosmic pinballer out there who is specifically banking shots off of Jupiter to try to hit the Earth specifically. Jupiter is gigantic. Just by looking at the"shadow" created by its bulk, not counting the additional deflection from gravity, it creates a zone 22 earth radii wide where nothing coming into the solar system will pass.
This isn't a new criterion. Jupiter's role as a protector of life on Earth has been recognized for a long time. As an example of its mention,this article starts from the assumption that it's understood that Jupiter has a role as a protector (and then goes on to suggest that recent research may debunk that idea, but that doesn't change the original sentiment).
Slashdot Mirror
CRTs are outdated because they're dead in the market. Name a consumer-level store you can walk into where they sell new CRT monitors. I haven't seen one in any major chain or specialty store in at least 3 years now.
Not sure what you thought I meant but...reversible computing
It'd be great to know how much of the battery life is consumed by the processors. If it's a major factor (versus, say, screen life, where LEDs and quantum well diodes should theoretically help), then perhaps the reversible computing push so prevalent in Kurzweil's books and rhetoric could be of some assistance.
Being an asshole is not a born skill, whatever you might tell yourself.
Way to be the kind of person most folks are glad to see leave rural areas.
Don't worry. Robots will be taking those jobs long before they get there.
Ever watch a 6-year-old learn to read from a rabid desire to play Pokemon? There's more than one way to skin a cat.
It may be a problem because the curve is only getting steeper and more demanding, and rapid shifts in the economic base are going to become much more likely. If you don't learn to learn as a lifelong skill, then you may be kind of fucked.
You forgot the word "giant". It's not B-list science fiction until it's giant.
I read "everyday activities such as eating and sex" and thought "one of those is not every day on Slashdot". On consideration, it's not every day just about anywhere.
They don't have to see the changes. SVN will merge silently on update. It'll be on the client, but frankly it's very easy to get into the pattern of commit->fail->update->commit.
I think that was more a subtle form of racism, in actual fact. You could find equivalent statements about black Africans in the early and middle part of the last century to indicate why they were in such terrible conditions.
You've not seen Moon, then.
The movie would have been lessened by a broader focus. Where in the plot would you have stuck the activists, scientists, etc? In most real world cases those folks are kept away by bureaucratic means, and the bureaucracy in this movie has its hands full and then some. That's the point of the movie, even - it's administrated horror of a kind all too familiar to South Africans. The lead character is the ultimate administrator, and it's hard to understand that what he's doing is pretty much exactly what members of many world governments do, administrating horrific crimes because it's his job. It's not even a case of "just following orders" - the scene with the eggs is a great example of trying to please without considering the ramifications of your actions.
If you use one of these two languages you'll very quickly find that when a question occurs to you at this point in time you can usually go to StackOverflow, begin typing your question, and find an answer without completing the submission process. I would like to suggest that this is because these are two of the most widely-used languages in the world, but I wouldn't want to be accused of being a corporate whore again. Weekend or no, very few unanswered questions exist about a widely used language after a while.
If you read the article you'll discover that it's not just survival. It's the number of humans required to circumvent survival. One human can kill a lion, tiger, or bear, although it would really depend on their level of technology, which kind of points out a major difficulty with his argument - there isn't a "normalized" version of human intelligence against which to measure.
First of all, he doesn't actually say much about the survival as intelligence idea beyond the positing of the notion itself. It gives him a nice way to consider survival and intelligence as linked systems, with the "survival" of a system (that definition alone gets pretty abstract) being measured in terms of the logarithm of the number of humans required to shut it down.
/. article writers' need to get your attention, it suddenly becomes Human Intelligence Is Over.
He says you CAN consider the Internet, legal system, medical system, and others in terms of this notion, but doesn't get terrifically specific about it. He does, however, specifically state that road systems and the legal system are at least an order of magnitude more resilient than a human-level intelligence, which is nice, if you believe his examples are well-chosen. I'd be hard pressed to claim that they are.
In other words, he sets up an interesting research topic and then between his own poor choice of phrasing, the multiple Singularity references which surround the article, and the
Didn't we already know that people are the weakest link? Well, except for the Windows servers on the nuclear subs.
Brainwashed much?
Or "TFA is a paid Microsoft detractor". It's not like there's nobody with a commercial reason to cut them down these days, particularly on a site as widely read as this one.
What's your suggestion? That the number of objects deflected into the earth is higher than those swept up + those deflected away? That's what I was responding to. Yes, Jupiter's effect is probably not that high, but all the same it's high enough, particularly assuming that most dangerous objects are trapped in a stellar orbit rather than simply shot like a cannon at the earth. The probability that Jupiter has a clearing-house effect on bodies in orbit turns out to be pretty high over the course of billions of years of stellar evolution, n'est-ce pas?
The susceptibility of users is one possibility, of course, but so are
1) better product (see the comments regarding Cashback ads)
2) better placement
3) better advertising clients (ever seen an interesting google ad but hesitated to click because of the shady domain?)
The proportion of objects which follow this relationship is almost by definition no greater than that which would have hit Earth but for Jupiter's influence, unless there's some cosmic pinballer out there who is specifically banking shots off of Jupiter to try to hit the Earth specifically. Jupiter is gigantic. Just by looking at the"shadow" created by its bulk, not counting the additional deflection from gravity, it creates a zone 22 earth radii wide where nothing coming into the solar system will pass.
This isn't a new criterion. Jupiter's role as a protector of life on Earth has been recognized for a long time. As an example of its mention,this article starts from the assumption that it's understood that Jupiter has a role as a protector (and then goes on to suggest that recent research may debunk that idea, but that doesn't change the original sentiment).
Suicide is not a product of hard work. It may actually be a result of not working hard enough.
Yeah. Tell that to the Japanese.