But those computer-designed chips are made using human guidance. The computer could never design a new chip without being told what to design (with current technology, anyhow)
And the philosophers have been working on all of those questions for far longer than we've been systematically trying to understand the brain.
I believe that we'll gradually come to understand the brain better, and from that, how the mind arises from its physical functioning. *That* is where an artificial intelligence can be designed, when we understand the cognition provided by the brain.
The idea of copying a human brain is that *we* could be the super-smart machines, capable of extending ourselves relatively quickly (compared to evolutionary terms), and close to without limit. If your consciousness was run on a computer, rather than the current wetware, that hardware could be extensible in ways not limited by biology.
But this new version doesn't have to be physical, necessarily, and it could replace the original version of the AI. New AI is created, gets tested, and when it has been proven (by some measure), the old AI discards itself. Or something.
How do you mean? One key is generated based on the other one, in a deterministic algorithm. You end up with the same key-pair each time, given the same input. Or are you defining the use of keys to encrypt messages to encrypt message packets? (Many keys to many messages, etc)?
Twitter (and his many aliases) is a well-known troll, and takes every opportunity to talk about how terrible anything having to do (even remotely) with Microsoft is. As an example: http://slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=562692&cid=23524480
I guess what I'm a little worried about is if the market perception becomes that Linux is only good for small portable computers/cell phones/etc, that the larger distros will stop paying as much attention to the desktop.
I think in the case of Apple, it's the lingering mindset that they're the ailing underdog (which was true for a number of years). I think that as they become larger and stronger, they're losing some of the underdog image, and some people (such as yourself) are beginning to notice that they're just a company, and worse in some ways than the companies we love to ridicule for their success (Microsoft). People as a whole aren't logical. Expecting them to be consistent is further straining credulity, haha.
...Should I be happy or upset that I actually understood both of those posts, although I've not gotten much farther in Esperanto than the basic grammar rules?
From what I understand, quantum computing will basically allow the equivalent of massively parallel computation, so you can find the key that solves the message easily. In RSA, it means that it could factor the large prime numbers that make up the public key, and mathematically generate the private key from those.
Because that's what the user expects to have to do. The net's already confusing enough, with all the flash and different site design ideas. Why make it worse by making the textboxes react in novel ways? Then again, I guess it's Google. They could probably get away with it.
That's the problem right there. Religion isn't logical. Applying a logical device to an inherently illogical construct doesn't work. In short, you can prove that the universe would be simpler without a god. But what's the point of arguing it, if the people you're trying to convince aren't going to accept the reasoning anyhow?
ahhhh....the good old days of split archives and parity files, and hoping that enough of the chunks made it to your ISP's server for you to get the file!
In which case they would be within their rights to summon the police. It's theft; in this case, not only theft of service, but also of bandwidth (which presents a measurable cost to the company).
In this case, the freeloaders are taking bandwidth, which won't be available to customers that need it. Usually, I would say "copyright infringement", but this is an actual theft of service. If someone left their house door open, then it's "unlocked" and "freely accessible", but no one would argue that walking in and taking something without the owner's knowledge was wrong. There is no difference in this case.
Epicycles explain it all! Why can't you all see that our solar system is in a giant crystal sphere with the stars painted on the outside? Why do the stars move, you say? Obviously it's the gnomes slowly repainting them on the outside.
Slashdot Mirror
But those computer-designed chips are made using human guidance. The computer could never design a new chip without being told what to design (with current technology, anyhow)
That one took me a couple seconds. Very realistic, good job! ^_~
And the philosophers have been working on all of those questions for far longer than we've been systematically trying to understand the brain.
I believe that we'll gradually come to understand the brain better, and from that, how the mind arises from its physical functioning. *That* is where an artificial intelligence can be designed, when we understand the cognition provided by the brain.
The idea of copying a human brain is that *we* could be the super-smart machines, capable of extending ourselves relatively quickly (compared to evolutionary terms), and close to without limit. If your consciousness was run on a computer, rather than the current wetware, that hardware could be extensible in ways not limited by biology.
But this new version doesn't have to be physical, necessarily, and it could replace the original version of the AI. New AI is created, gets tested, and when it has been proven (by some measure), the old AI discards itself. Or something.
Too lazy? The system literally forces you to preview before posting...
How do you mean? One key is generated based on the other one, in a deterministic algorithm. You end up with the same key-pair each time, given the same input.
Or are you defining the use of keys to encrypt messages to encrypt message packets? (Many keys to many messages, etc)?
Twitter (and his many aliases) is a well-known troll, and takes every opportunity to talk about how terrible anything having to do (even remotely) with Microsoft is. As an example:
http://slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=562692&cid=23524480
Hold on! I'm working on it! ;-)
I guess what I'm a little worried about is if the market perception becomes that Linux is only good for small portable computers/cell phones/etc, that the larger distros will stop paying as much attention to the desktop.
I think in the case of Apple, it's the lingering mindset that they're the ailing underdog (which was true for a number of years). I think that as they become larger and stronger, they're losing some of the underdog image, and some people (such as yourself) are beginning to notice that they're just a company, and worse in some ways than the companies we love to ridicule for their success (Microsoft). People as a whole aren't logical. Expecting them to be consistent is further straining credulity, haha.
For a certain stretch of the definition of the word "desktop", I suppose.
Just for you, Volatar, I'll become a major game developer and produce a series that only has a first game and a third one.
Not if you're using Ubuntu. I don't remember if the fonts were included by default...but I know it was an option during part of the installation.
...Should I be happy or upset that I actually understood both of those posts, although I've not gotten much farther in Esperanto than the basic grammar rules?
From what I understand, quantum computing will basically allow the equivalent of massively parallel computation, so you can find the key that solves the message easily. In RSA, it means that it could factor the large prime numbers that make up the public key, and mathematically generate the private key from those.
Because that's what the user expects to have to do. The net's already confusing enough, with all the flash and different site design ideas. Why make it worse by making the textboxes react in novel ways? Then again, I guess it's Google. They could probably get away with it.
No, 1 Library of Congress is the equivalent amount of text data stored in the LoC (roughly 10 terabytes, apparently).
I'm thinking he'd just need to post a link to the ROM. It's cake to find a 2600 emulator.
That's the problem right there. Religion isn't logical. Applying a logical device to an inherently illogical construct doesn't work. In short, you can prove that the universe would be simpler without a god. But what's the point of arguing it, if the people you're trying to convince aren't going to accept the reasoning anyhow?
Wow....that's kind of a dark way of thinking about it...
ahhhh....the good old days of split archives and parity files, and hoping that enough of the chunks made it to your ISP's server for you to get the file!
In which case they would be within their rights to summon the police. It's theft; in this case, not only theft of service, but also of bandwidth (which presents a measurable cost to the company).
In this case, the freeloaders are taking bandwidth, which won't be available to customers that need it. Usually, I would say "copyright infringement", but this is an actual theft of service. If someone left their house door open, then it's "unlocked" and "freely accessible", but no one would argue that walking in and taking something without the owner's knowledge was wrong. There is no difference in this case.
Epicycles explain it all! Why can't you all see that our solar system is in a giant crystal sphere with the stars painted on the outside? Why do the stars move, you say? Obviously it's the gnomes slowly repainting them on the outside.