That sounds about right. I wrote one in C that was probably just a bit more than 30 LOC and it's entirely recursive. Perl or Ruby, it could be done in 1 LOC:P
I was able to write the program in a few hours and I know very little about AI. There's no algorithmic intelligence involved, or need for such, solving Sudoku is governed by few, well-defined rules and best tackled by a brute force, rote method. The way I approached the problem was to play it a few times and note the mechanics of solving a puzzle, then convert some of that process into an algorithm, which was the only challenge. I no longer play Sudoku, because I consider the whole set of well-formed puzzles to be a solved problem!
Now generating Sudoku puzzles is a reversal of the same process, but generating interesting Sudoku puzzles mechanically becomes a bit more complex, though still not anywhere near Texas Hold 'Em in complexity.
And, if my experience is any indication, the reason people picked Linux over BSD is the userland (and maybe the license): until a few years ago, the BSD kernel was better than the Linux kernel, but the BSD userland has always sucked compared to the GNU userland.
I'm not clear on whether you mean individuals or industry here, but at the time Linux established itself, there was an ongoing lawsuit filed against BSDi. That, and only that, is why BSD, a much more stable kernel at the time, lagged behind. Industry was scared to invest in it--and who can blame them? I think the 2.6 kernel is superior now, and Linux has a critical mass of developers.
In a way, it's a shame that a better start was scrapped by so many people, but OTOH perhaps a fresh start is what was needed.
You're right though, BSD has a much slower and more methodical approach to everything, which means a comparatively crippled userland. I don't think this would have bothered industry as much as end users though. For the record, I'm a Linux user.
a) In the Dinosaur Book, they say SPECIFICALLY that there are differing viewpoints on what constitutes an operating system, and that THE BOOK chooses to accept that "the operating system is the one program running at all times on the computer (usually called the kernel)." (page 6) That doesn't make other viewpoints wrong.
b) In the Dinosaur Book, it says the following (emphasis mine):
In many ways, the Linux kernel forms the core of the Linux project, but other components make up the complete Linux operating system.
He goes on to list several contributing bodies such as MIT Xwindows and of course GNU utilities. (page 740)
Though you cite this book, they take the opposite view you're trying to support with it. Strange...
The userland != the OS. The OS *is the kernel*. The rest is just tools on top.
I don't agree with this perspective, especially the second quoted sentence. The kernel is the central COMPONENT of an OS. The userland isn't the OS, but neither is the kernel. The OS is the kernel + the userland tools that provide access to the system's functionality. What good is a Linux kernel without a shell or some other userland application interface to access it?
A proof by contradiction: Consider Vista. I believe the drivers in Vista are to run in user space. By your definition, those drivers, the things that allow the software to run on hardware, would not be part of the OS. That's clearly ludicrous, ergo, the kernel does not constitute the entirety of an OS.
Doplhins can clearly see and interact with other dolphins on the other side of the fence, and they still don't jump through this one-foot-over-water fence. Not to bright in my book.
How do you know that? That was quite a leap for the scientist to take. There is a lot of assumption there. Y'all are assuming that the dolphin doesn't think of jumping the barrier. What if the dolphin isn't jumping it because it assumed it's not supposed to? (Unlikely, but the point is not to assume anything).
Goldfish are freshwater fish, are they not? They evolved in ponds and other enclosed waterspaces. For several centuries, they have continued to evolve in human-made enclosed waterspaces. Closed waterspaces can encounter conditions that make them dangerous for a fish to inhabit. For example, a pond could dry up. A goldfish might be well-advised to try to jump into an adjacent body of water such as a stream or another pond in such a situation.
A Dolphin would never find itself in such a circumstance in nature. Manmade barriers present an obstacle that is recent in the evolution of the dolphin, so the species has not developed instincts to seek other bodies of water. I mean, think about it--they live in the freaking OCEAN. The fact that they haven't solved the problem suggests that they lack innovative thought. It doesn't mean they lack intelligence entirely.
In sum, I think that the "intelligence" of goldfish, if it is presumed simply based on what a good scientist would consider an "escape instinct," is in doubt. Alternatively, the intelligence of dolphins, which has a much stronger base of evidence, remains unchallenged, though certainly noto ully understood. It's just bad science.
"Humans think they are smarter than dolphins because we build cars and buildings and start wars, etc...and all that dolphins do is swim in the water, eat fish and play around. Dolphins believe that they are smarter for exactly the same reasons."
This was old news when the IEEE Spectrum featured it in an issue about failed software engineering projects.
On another note, does anyone else find it infuriating that SAIC intentionally refused to alert FBI to the project's going awry? I mean, we're not just talking about stealing taxpayer dollars, we're talking about a system that could save lives.
Linux is a KERNEL. It doesn't make any sense to say it isn't "user friendly." You want a kernel to be fast, stable and efficient, not "user friendly."
Ease of use is a question that centers around which distro you're talking about, and for Ubuntu, the usability gap has closed significantly.
Ubuntu Dapper does everything I need it to do. I'll freely admit to a higher level of technical know-how than most users, but I didn't have to exercise any of it to install a usable distribution that had Rhythmbox configured to launch when I plug in my iPod, and that can read the HFS+ filesystem on it to boot. It took some doing to get everything the way I wanted it, but for a typical end-user, I don't think it would. Using Synaptic is pretty trivial for a user at any level.
Polls are measures of public opinion. They can easily be biased by sampling and slanted questions.
Public opinion is a bad way of determining policy. Therefore, polls should not determine whether the wiretapping program is allowed to continue as-is.
Where did you pull the assertion that the wiretapping program was a "peaceful attempt at security?" Your ass? I haven't seen any substantiation that it is anything but a power grab. I haven't heard of any terrorists nabbed through the program, and I haven't heard a single justification for using this program in lieu of the FISA court's oversight. You should hold your freedoms in higher regard.
Polls are irrelevant wrt the wiretapping policy for a couple of reasons. One is that the questions and sampling often bias the results. The second, and more important reason, is that public opinion is a bad way of determining policy. If polling is conducted responsibly, it is a valuable tool for measuring public opinion, and nothing more.
There's more important fake news to investigate
on
Fake News Stories Probed
·
· Score: 2, Interesting
How many revisions has the model of the atom gone through? Now you can't even quite draw it, you just write it as an equation.
But each revision has been closer to the truth, and has had more predictive power than the last. Similarly, evolutionary biology is improving, as all other sciences are. Just because there is still some murk doesn't discount the framework.
Science doesn't have the answer to everything. There is a reason why they call it a "theory." It's because the guys smart enough to come up with the idea in the first place are smart enough to know they don't know enough to call it a "fact."
No, in fact that is NOT the reason the word "theory" is applied. Theory in scientific jargon has a special meaning: a model with predictive power that is experimentally testable and falsifiable. Religious assertions are not even theories because they fail to meet those standards. A theory, such as the Theory of Evolution, can also be a fact, like the Theory of Evolution.
...that the people least likely to believe in evolution appear to be the least evolved among us? Slope-headed, hunched, grunting neanderthals refusing to believe that their sanctified existence has lowly origins. Hilarious.
Also, I was surprised that only 85% of Icelanders believe in evolution.
I can prove evolution is true. Just look, a monkey typed the headline of this story: Did Humans Evolve? No, Says Americans
So is it a habit of yours to respond to statements without reading them? Or to call someone irrational without reading what they've said? Continuing this discussion is a clear waste of my time.
My PB Rev B 1GHz power brick gets incredibly hot. If its heat dissipation is compromised in the least (say, by a bedsheet being over it) it will overheat and shut down (which is better than burning up!). Under normal conditions, it gets too hot to touch and will melt plastic near it. I wouldn't mind a slightly larger power brick if it meant I didn't have a lump of burning coal attached to my rig...
Now here back on planet Earth, I would like to have a rational discussion
Back here on planet Earth? Are you challenging any of my statements? Because I wasn't talking about Pakistan, India, or Kashmir. Your whole post is an aimless bait-and-switch, with straw men such as talking about how 'many.../.ers think the West is evil.' Did I say the West is evil? Are you proposing that it's somehow an extraterrestrial perspective to note that 9-11 happened on Bush's watch, that there was available intelligence to prepare for such an attack, and that the response was lacking? These are all uncontroversial, undebated facts in the public record. Here. On "planet Earth." You can look them up yourself in an actual reputable source (i.e., not Wikipedia). Is it irrational to point these things out, or is it irrational to ignore them?
Bush has done nothing to make us safer, and has actually made us LESS safe. The Brits and Pakistan foiled this plot, not Bush. So his record on terror remains deplorable. Sure, you can say nothing has happened since 9-11. But that could have been said the day before 9-11. It's a meaningless claim. The proof is in the glaring failure to prevent or respond to 9-11, in the Dubai Ports deal, and in the poor emergency response after Katrina--we ain't ready for a terrorist attack. Whose fault is that?
I also think it's cute how you are so thoroughly brainwashed that you use the vocabulary of the right wing. It's like you're a pet parrot or something, capable of spewing certain terms, but incabable of reasoning. You use terms like "Islamo-fascist." Clearly a person who is easily programmed.
You act like Pakistan is just great, but their government is run by a despot who took over in a military coup, and there are plenty of radicals throughout the country. Another shift in the balance of power could turn that ally into a nuclear radical Islamist power.
Wikipedia is NOT an authoritative source. The etymology of Hindu Kush is actually a mystery. It's not even known from which language the term is derived. There's quite a bit of evidence that Kush meant something like "peak" long ago (the definition to which you refer is modern Persian). There are several similar geological structures in the area having Kush in their names. It probably just means "Mountains of India."
However, all of this is a digression. What's your point? Your post is a complete nonsequitur. I was pointing out that it's stupid to celebrate the fact that we are at risk. It's stupid to accept that this threat should involve handing over freedoms to the government without question and debate. And you respond talking about Pakistan. Let me tell you this--If our safety hinges upon Pakistan providing us intelligence, we are in a dire state. We simply cannot count on such intelligence being provided all the time and forever.
Then you start addressing conspiracy theorists. This is what forensicists call a "Straw Man."
But hey, since you mentioned it, maybe I should point something out about India and terrorism. Remember that mass murder terrorist attack that just happened in India? What did India do differently in response to that devastating attack than we did in response to 9-11? They are investigating the crime and attempting to bring the perpetrators to justice. WE, OTOH, went after a country which supplied NONE of the conspirators or financing for 9-11, in Iraq.
Yes, what an "insightful post." Last time I checked, 9-11 happened on BUSH's watch, in part because he failed to act on intelligence that was presented to him, and in part because for some reason his administration failed to respond, as did NORAD.
Several terrorist plots were foiled under Clinton's watch (such as the attempted bombing of the Holland Tunnel) but of course he didn't dislocate his shoulder trying to pat himself on the back or hold any press conferences or anything as this administration no doubt would.
Yes, cheer as our country is scared into totalitarianism. That's just great. You're the type of idiot that would have followed the sheep into fascism in Nazi Germany after the staged bombing of the Reichstag. Grow a brain.
You aren't getting it. If you have 3 separate browser windows open, CTRL-Tab does NOT iterate through those windows. It will iterate through TABS in a window. Windows treats all open windows as being separate applications. Apple treats all open windows as being instances of different applications.
Look, you can get used to anything. But an OS that uses Alt-F4 to close a window instead of CTRL-W is not usability paradise. Alt-Space for menu? Not intuitive and easy to fat finger. There are plenty of examples that we are used to because they have been there for a time. Also, I understand Windows wants to reserve keystrokes so that applications may use them. I just don't agree with the approach.
OS X has its warts too (I actually prefer GNOME to both) but objectively as someone who uses XP, GNOME, and OS X for hours a day, I can say that XP is the worst of the 3 in terms of usability.
I don't think that using backquote is inconsistent, as it is a key adjacent to Tab. So the comparison here would be to cursor keys, which is at least as valid as the shift text metaphor, probably more so.
Touche! I'm glad you mentioned that, because I knew that shortcut at one point and have long since forgotten it. Since I work on Windows all day, that will come in handy. Thanks!
The point remains that Apple has a more elegant solution though. It's much less of a hand-mangler to just use the key immediately above Tab than it is to add the shift key into the equation. Also, you can click on the icons that appear. Also, the point remains about initiating window-switching with backquote doing application-specific iteration through windows.
Did Windows or OS X come up with the first GUI, with protected memory, with preemptive multitasking, or for that matter, multitasking, with virtual memory, with process scheduling, with threading, with multithreading, with username/password authentication? Gimme a f*c*ing break with all this juvenile copycat garbage. Apple, shut up. Thurott, shut up. Microsoft, quit your day job. I think there are better measures of an OS than who came up with somehting first.
Slashdot Mirror
I was able to write the program in a few hours and I know very little about AI. There's no algorithmic intelligence involved, or need for such, solving Sudoku is governed by few, well-defined rules and best tackled by a brute force, rote method. The way I approached the problem was to play it a few times and note the mechanics of solving a puzzle, then convert some of that process into an algorithm, which was the only challenge. I no longer play Sudoku, because I consider the whole set of well-formed puzzles to be a solved problem!
Now generating Sudoku puzzles is a reversal of the same process, but generating interesting Sudoku puzzles mechanically becomes a bit more complex, though still not anywhere near Texas Hold 'Em in complexity.
In a way, it's a shame that a better start was scrapped by so many people, but OTOH perhaps a fresh start is what was needed. You're right though, BSD has a much slower and more methodical approach to everything, which means a comparatively crippled userland. I don't think this would have bothered industry as much as end users though. For the record, I'm a Linux user.
b) In the Dinosaur Book, it says the following (emphasis mine):
He goes on to list several contributing bodies such as MIT Xwindows and of course GNU utilities. (page 740)Though you cite this book, they take the opposite view you're trying to support with it. Strange...
A proof by contradiction: Consider Vista. I believe the drivers in Vista are to run in user space. By your definition, those drivers, the things that allow the software to run on hardware, would not be part of the OS. That's clearly ludicrous, ergo, the kernel does not constitute the entirety of an OS.
Goldfish are freshwater fish, are they not? They evolved in ponds and other enclosed waterspaces. For several centuries, they have continued to evolve in human-made enclosed waterspaces. Closed waterspaces can encounter conditions that make them dangerous for a fish to inhabit. For example, a pond could dry up. A goldfish might be well-advised to try to jump into an adjacent body of water such as a stream or another pond in such a situation.
A Dolphin would never find itself in such a circumstance in nature. Manmade barriers present an obstacle that is recent in the evolution of the dolphin, so the species has not developed instincts to seek other bodies of water. I mean, think about it--they live in the freaking OCEAN. The fact that they haven't solved the problem suggests that they lack innovative thought. It doesn't mean they lack intelligence entirely.
In sum, I think that the "intelligence" of goldfish, if it is presumed simply based on what a good scientist would consider an "escape instinct," is in doubt. Alternatively, the intelligence of dolphins, which has a much stronger base of evidence, remains unchallenged, though certainly noto ully understood. It's just bad science.
--Douglas Adams
On another note, does anyone else find it infuriating that SAIC intentionally refused to alert FBI to the project's going awry? I mean, we're not just talking about stealing taxpayer dollars, we're talking about a system that could save lives.
looks like the device itself will be irrelevant though.
Ease of use is a question that centers around which distro you're talking about, and for Ubuntu, the usability gap has closed significantly.
Ubuntu Dapper does everything I need it to do. I'll freely admit to a higher level of technical know-how than most users, but I didn't have to exercise any of it to install a usable distribution that had Rhythmbox configured to launch when I plug in my iPod, and that can read the HFS+ filesystem on it to boot. It took some doing to get everything the way I wanted it, but for a typical end-user, I don't think it would. Using Synaptic is pretty trivial for a user at any level.
This post is very interesting, I found it on Bruce Schneier's blog.
Public opinion is a bad way of determining policy. Therefore, polls should not determine whether the wiretapping program is allowed to continue as-is.
Where did you pull the assertion that the wiretapping program was a "peaceful attempt at security?" Your ass? I haven't seen any substantiation that it is anything but a power grab. I haven't heard of any terrorists nabbed through the program, and I haven't heard a single justification for using this program in lieu of the FISA court's oversight. You should hold your freedoms in higher regard.
Polls are irrelevant wrt the wiretapping policy for a couple of reasons. One is that the questions and sampling often bias the results. The second, and more important reason, is that public opinion is a bad way of determining policy. If polling is conducted responsibly, it is a valuable tool for measuring public opinion, and nothing more.
I don't like fake news in any form, but I think they should focus on false news coming out of the White House first.
Also, I was surprised that only 85% of Icelanders believe in evolution.
I can prove evolution is true. Just look, a monkey typed the headline of this story: Did Humans Evolve? No, Says Americans
Cos Westinghouse was right and Edison was wrong!
My PB Rev B 1GHz power brick gets incredibly hot. If its heat dissipation is compromised in the least (say, by a bedsheet being over it) it will overheat and shut down (which is better than burning up!). Under normal conditions, it gets too hot to touch and will melt plastic near it. I wouldn't mind a slightly larger power brick if it meant I didn't have a lump of burning coal attached to my rig...
Bush has done nothing to make us safer, and has actually made us LESS safe. The Brits and Pakistan foiled this plot, not Bush. So his record on terror remains deplorable. Sure, you can say nothing has happened since 9-11. But that could have been said the day before 9-11. It's a meaningless claim. The proof is in the glaring failure to prevent or respond to 9-11, in the Dubai Ports deal, and in the poor emergency response after Katrina--we ain't ready for a terrorist attack. Whose fault is that?
I also think it's cute how you are so thoroughly brainwashed that you use the vocabulary of the right wing. It's like you're a pet parrot or something, capable of spewing certain terms, but incabable of reasoning. You use terms like "Islamo-fascist." Clearly a person who is easily programmed.
You act like Pakistan is just great, but their government is run by a despot who took over in a military coup, and there are plenty of radicals throughout the country. Another shift in the balance of power could turn that ally into a nuclear radical Islamist power.
Wikipedia is NOT an authoritative source. The etymology of Hindu Kush is actually a mystery. It's not even known from which language the term is derived. There's quite a bit of evidence that Kush meant something like "peak" long ago (the definition to which you refer is modern Persian). There are several similar geological structures in the area having Kush in their names. It probably just means "Mountains of India."
However, all of this is a digression. What's your point? Your post is a complete nonsequitur. I was pointing out that it's stupid to celebrate the fact that we are at risk. It's stupid to accept that this threat should involve handing over freedoms to the government without question and debate. And you respond talking about Pakistan. Let me tell you this--If our safety hinges upon Pakistan providing us intelligence, we are in a dire state. We simply cannot count on such intelligence being provided all the time and forever.
Then you start addressing conspiracy theorists. This is what forensicists call a "Straw Man."
But hey, since you mentioned it, maybe I should point something out about India and terrorism. Remember that mass murder terrorist attack that just happened in India? What did India do differently in response to that devastating attack than we did in response to 9-11? They are investigating the crime and attempting to bring the perpetrators to justice. WE, OTOH, went after a country which supplied NONE of the conspirators or financing for 9-11, in Iraq.
Several terrorist plots were foiled under Clinton's watch (such as the attempted bombing of the Holland Tunnel) but of course he didn't dislocate his shoulder trying to pat himself on the back or hold any press conferences or anything as this administration no doubt would.
Yes, cheer as our country is scared into totalitarianism. That's just great. You're the type of idiot that would have followed the sheep into fascism in Nazi Germany after the staged bombing of the Reichstag. Grow a brain.
Look, you can get used to anything. But an OS that uses Alt-F4 to close a window instead of CTRL-W is not usability paradise. Alt-Space for menu? Not intuitive and easy to fat finger. There are plenty of examples that we are used to because they have been there for a time. Also, I understand Windows wants to reserve keystrokes so that applications may use them. I just don't agree with the approach.
OS X has its warts too (I actually prefer GNOME to both) but objectively as someone who uses XP, GNOME, and OS X for hours a day, I can say that XP is the worst of the 3 in terms of usability.
I don't think that using backquote is inconsistent, as it is a key adjacent to Tab. So the comparison here would be to cursor keys, which is at least as valid as the shift text metaphor, probably more so.
The point remains that Apple has a more elegant solution though. It's much less of a hand-mangler to just use the key immediately above Tab than it is to add the shift key into the equation. Also, you can click on the icons that appear. Also, the point remains about initiating window-switching with backquote doing application-specific iteration through windows.
Did Windows or OS X come up with the first GUI, with protected memory, with preemptive multitasking, or for that matter, multitasking, with virtual memory, with process scheduling, with threading, with multithreading, with username/password authentication? Gimme a f*c*ing break with all this juvenile copycat garbage. Apple, shut up. Thurott, shut up. Microsoft, quit your day job. I think there are better measures of an OS than who came up with somehting first.