The fact that you claimed ReactOS was Linux, means you either don't know what ReactOS is, or you are simply trolling. Based on your response, I'm guessing a bit of both.
The robot that vacuums my floors does so without even when the layout of my room changes. Image recognition hasn't achived human levels, but it has definitly improved. The Wii, Xbox360, and PS3 all prove this beyond a shadow of a doubt. In the 70's, you generally pushed the door to a grociery store open. If they were cutting edge, they would have a pressure mat that when you stepped on it, the door would open. Those have been completely replaced by....Imaging systems. Robotic door men that see you coming and open the door for you when you approach. My yard lights up automatically when I approach at night. This is from imaging systems.
Robots and computer "intelligence" has consistent improved since the 60. The problem is that the stuff that made it main stream doesn't count for most people because it has made it main stream.
That may be so. We just need to see if banging a robot can be as satisfying as banging a real live Natalie Portman. You must take another comedian's joke into account with your army of Natalie Portmans. When Danny Boneduce was asked, "If your wife was a perfect 10, what would it take to get you to cheat on her?" His answer... "A six I haven't slept with yet."
That is a non starter. Your average Mac users is not going to type ssh anything. If there is not a UI element that they can click on to implement the multi-user mode, it isn't what most Mac users bought a Mac for. If they have to set up config files and type cryptic Unix commands, they might as well be running Linux. Enabling screen sharing IS easy to do. Getting more than one user running their own desktop at the same time seems to be something that isn't easy to do.
You are wrong. I highly doubt that you actually do your own laundry. I would guess that you just deliver your clothes and some soap to a robot who then takes care of the washing for you. I don't think I have met a single person that has ever done their own laundry beyond what they have done while camping or the occasional instance where they don't have a clothes washing robot in their home, and needed a specific piece of clothes sooner than they could get it clean by taking it to the public clothes washing robot facility.
While humans still drive their own cars, that is not the robotics engineers fault. It is the lawyers, lawmakers, insurance company and lawsuit plaintiffs fault. Most people DO use a robot to wash their cars though. It is also extremely common to have robots wash your dishes. The only place that I have ever seen an elevator that wasn't a robot was in movies. While still not ubiquitous, robotic vacuums can be purchased locally in almost any town from a number of different stores. Lawn watering has been largely taken over by robots as well.
Robots are all around you. The problem isn't that robots are not there. The problem is that once the robot is ubiquitous, you don't count it as a robot anymore.
I didn't see where that 30% quote came from, but I would guess that it is either that they predict 30% of households will have a robot in the future, but are stating it in a way to make it clear they are guessing, or they are saying that they believe there are robots in 30% of households now, but are guessing at that.
Personally, I would suspect that in the US, the number of households that have robots is likely closer to 80%. Since every washing machine and dish washer is a robot, and a good many of the microwave ovens are robots, 80% seems pretty conservative to me. No, they are not "Androids", but they are robots.
You should give that to the huge number of workers in the cloths washing business. They must be there somewhere and the fact that almost 100% of clothes washing is done by robots must be my imagination. By the way, could you point me in the direction of where I can hire someone to wash my clothes for less than the cost of using a machine?
That's not true. I once heard a black comedian (I don't remember who. It may have been Chris Rock.) crack a joke about why black men shouldn't hate white people. He pointed out that it takes white people to make "hot white chicks". Yes, it was a racist joke. Yes, it was pretty funny. The statement also applies to what you said, just without the racial piece. Those in charge will need the poor masses to be the breeding stock for their sexual pleasures. That doesn't necessarily require that they treat that breeding stack badly, and if they have nothing to lose, they it makes their job easier to keeping the breeding stock content and non-rebellious.
It seems to me that just having drivers that work for the most popular VMs would bring enough compatibility to make the system useful. The problem with Wine is that because the underlying kernel is so different, it brings a lot of regression. In theory at least, every fix to ReactOS makes it closer and closer to what Windows is, so regressions should only happen due to programming errors, and not because of fundamental differences in the kernel.
The way that you do a clean room reverse engineering of undocumented APIs is to have one group that taints themselves by looking at the original, and that group documents the API and behavior for a different group that stays clean on the implementation. The 'clean' group can then write the compatible software without risk of copyright infringement.
The statement that it is Linux indicates that you are not really familiar with what ReactOS is. ReactOS doesn't need to be on par with the current version of Windows. If it is stable and can run just the one piece of software you need it to run, it is 100% usable for that task. Consider how many people would be just fine with it if it could run 95% of Windows XP software. Even if it was 95% of the initial release of Windows XP. That would be huge! So, they can be 10+ years behind in Windows compatibility, and still be incredibly important.
The ability to include it as part of the various x86 Virtual machines would make a major splash.
There seems to be a myth that bullies are always weak cowardly people. That just isn't the case. Sometimes they are people that just like to fight, and enjoy the rush of a fight more than the dislike the pain of the fight.
Your definition ends up as, "You can only be bullied if you are willing to kill the bully". Bullying situation can and do escalate. They can and often do escalate to physical violence of a level where people end up dead.
It is kind of naive to claim that "in order to be bullied you have to allow it to happen" without considering that dealing with murder charges is a real possibility when following your advice.
And it does this after the fact. Exactly as the AC said. Your comment doesn't change the fact that China fits the description that tehcyder gave for free speech.
Kind of off topic, but I find it interesting that this line of reasoning is not used when it comes to disciplining children. Specifically, the slightest spanking is considered "abuse", but pretty much any action that only effects them mentally, abusive or not, is considered OK.
I'm not going to say you are all wrong, but you must also acknowledge that the American rights only go into effect when they "Arrest you". If they don't say "Your are under arrest", you lose all those rights. In fact, you can be, and people are regularly arrested for exercising the right to remain silent while being held by the police, prior to being "Arrested". There are legal terms, and there are normal language terms. An "arrest" (legal term) happens well after an "arrest" (American English).
People are selfish, self serving animals that would happily throw a stranger under a bus if it made their life easier. So, yes. Police are people, and thus you must expect them to behave as anyone else would, except with guns and a large powerful organization behind them that will lose face if the person is found to be abusing other people.
You are making a very big assumption that any of the rest of us are human, and that you are not posting to a site generated by a sentient supercomputer bent on destroying the human race or using them as biological generators.
Predicting who will get cancer wouldn't be a breakthrough. It's been done with very high accuracy already. If they live long enough, it will be close to 100% of the population.
You can be that if this treatment worked, there would be heavy work in making it a vaccine. Why get paid for the slow stream of patients when you can just tell parents that they must have the treatment administered to their children before they can be enrolled in Kindergarten?
Of course, if we are worried about destroying the human race by performing poorly tested inoculations, we are already there. The flu vaccines that are administered at drug stores around the country are new formulas each year, and don't even attempt to do what they imply to the public that they do. The chicken pox vaccine is another vaccine that has been tested in the field through mass inoculation of 95% of the population as they reach the age of 3. Both of these have been done to combat diseases with very low mortality rates.
The runny nose and puffy eyes had no correlation to the times he ate peanut butter. They did have a correlation to times of year, amount of wind, and county we were in.
Correlation may not imply causation, but lack of correlation DOES imply a lack of causation.
Slashdot Mirror
I meant that in the "as a society" sort of way. Not necessarily you personally.
The fact that you claimed ReactOS was Linux, means you either don't know what ReactOS is, or you are simply trolling. Based on your response, I'm guessing a bit of both.
The robot that vacuums my floors does so without even when the layout of my room changes. Image recognition hasn't achived human levels, but it has definitly improved. The Wii, Xbox360, and PS3 all prove this beyond a shadow of a doubt. In the 70's, you generally pushed the door to a grociery store open. If they were cutting edge, they would have a pressure mat that when you stepped on it, the door would open. Those have been completely replaced by....Imaging systems. Robotic door men that see you coming and open the door for you when you approach. My yard lights up automatically when I approach at night. This is from imaging systems.
Robots and computer "intelligence" has consistent improved since the 60. The problem is that the stuff that made it main stream doesn't count for most people because it has made it main stream.
Soooo....You found that some people can do real work on them then....
True, but if you have a country like Russia behind it's development, the "for compatibility" clauses would be easier to defend.
That may be so. We just need to see if banging a robot can be as satisfying as banging a real live Natalie Portman. You must take another comedian's joke into account with your army of Natalie Portmans. When Danny Boneduce was asked, "If your wife was a perfect 10, what would it take to get you to cheat on her?" His answer... "A six I haven't slept with yet."
That is a non starter. Your average Mac users is not going to type ssh anything. If there is not a UI element that they can click on to implement the multi-user mode, it isn't what most Mac users bought a Mac for. If they have to set up config files and type cryptic Unix commands, they might as well be running Linux. Enabling screen sharing IS easy to do. Getting more than one user running their own desktop at the same time seems to be something that isn't easy to do.
You are wrong. I highly doubt that you actually do your own laundry. I would guess that you just deliver your clothes and some soap to a robot who then takes care of the washing for you. I don't think I have met a single person that has ever done their own laundry beyond what they have done while camping or the occasional instance where they don't have a clothes washing robot in their home, and needed a specific piece of clothes sooner than they could get it clean by taking it to the public clothes washing robot facility.
While humans still drive their own cars, that is not the robotics engineers fault. It is the lawyers, lawmakers, insurance company and lawsuit plaintiffs fault. Most people DO use a robot to wash their cars though. It is also extremely common to have robots wash your dishes. The only place that I have ever seen an elevator that wasn't a robot was in movies. While still not ubiquitous, robotic vacuums can be purchased locally in almost any town from a number of different stores. Lawn watering has been largely taken over by robots as well.
Robots are all around you. The problem isn't that robots are not there. The problem is that once the robot is ubiquitous, you don't count it as a robot anymore.
I didn't see where that 30% quote came from, but I would guess that it is either that they predict 30% of households will have a robot in the future, but are stating it in a way to make it clear they are guessing, or they are saying that they believe there are robots in 30% of households now, but are guessing at that.
Personally, I would suspect that in the US, the number of households that have robots is likely closer to 80%. Since every washing machine and dish washer is a robot, and a good many of the microwave ovens are robots, 80% seems pretty conservative to me. No, they are not "Androids", but they are robots.
You should give that to the huge number of workers in the cloths washing business. They must be there somewhere and the fact that almost 100% of clothes washing is done by robots must be my imagination. By the way, could you point me in the direction of where I can hire someone to wash my clothes for less than the cost of using a machine?
That's not true. I once heard a black comedian (I don't remember who. It may have been Chris Rock.) crack a joke about why black men shouldn't hate white people. He pointed out that it takes white people to make "hot white chicks". Yes, it was a racist joke. Yes, it was pretty funny. The statement also applies to what you said, just without the racial piece. Those in charge will need the poor masses to be the breeding stock for their sexual pleasures. That doesn't necessarily require that they treat that breeding stack badly, and if they have nothing to lose, they it makes their job easier to keeping the breeding stock content and non-rebellious.
That sounds a lot like why companies always use their patents to wipe out their competitors instead of stockpiling them as a war chest.
I don't know. I see commercial applications released that run on DosBox.
It seems to me that just having drivers that work for the most popular VMs would bring enough compatibility to make the system useful. The problem with Wine is that because the underlying kernel is so different, it brings a lot of regression. In theory at least, every fix to ReactOS makes it closer and closer to what Windows is, so regressions should only happen due to programming errors, and not because of fundamental differences in the kernel.
The way that you do a clean room reverse engineering of undocumented APIs is to have one group that taints themselves by looking at the original, and that group documents the API and behavior for a different group that stays clean on the implementation. The 'clean' group can then write the compatible software without risk of copyright infringement.
The statement that it is Linux indicates that you are not really familiar with what ReactOS is. ReactOS doesn't need to be on par with the current version of Windows. If it is stable and can run just the one piece of software you need it to run, it is 100% usable for that task. Consider how many people would be just fine with it if it could run 95% of Windows XP software. Even if it was 95% of the initial release of Windows XP. That would be huge! So, they can be 10+ years behind in Windows compatibility, and still be incredibly important.
The ability to include it as part of the various x86 Virtual machines would make a major splash.
There seems to be a myth that bullies are always weak cowardly people. That just isn't the case. Sometimes they are people that just like to fight, and enjoy the rush of a fight more than the dislike the pain of the fight.
Your definition ends up as, "You can only be bullied if you are willing to kill the bully". Bullying situation can and do escalate. They can and often do escalate to physical violence of a level where people end up dead.
It is kind of naive to claim that "in order to be bullied you have to allow it to happen" without considering that dealing with murder charges is a real possibility when following your advice.
And it does this after the fact. Exactly as the AC said. Your comment doesn't change the fact that China fits the description that tehcyder gave for free speech.
Kind of off topic, but I find it interesting that this line of reasoning is not used when it comes to disciplining children. Specifically, the slightest spanking is considered "abuse", but pretty much any action that only effects them mentally, abusive or not, is considered OK.
I'm not going to say you are all wrong, but you must also acknowledge that the American rights only go into effect when they "Arrest you". If they don't say "Your are under arrest", you lose all those rights. In fact, you can be, and people are regularly arrested for exercising the right to remain silent while being held by the police, prior to being "Arrested". There are legal terms, and there are normal language terms. An "arrest" (legal term) happens well after an "arrest" (American English).
People are selfish, self serving animals that would happily throw a stranger under a bus if it made their life easier. So, yes. Police are people, and thus you must expect them to behave as anyone else would, except with guns and a large powerful organization behind them that will lose face if the person is found to be abusing other people.
You are making a very big assumption that any of the rest of us are human, and that you are not posting to a site generated by a sentient supercomputer bent on destroying the human race or using them as biological generators.
Predicting who will get cancer wouldn't be a breakthrough. It's been done with very high accuracy already. If they live long enough, it will be close to 100% of the population.
You can be that if this treatment worked, there would be heavy work in making it a vaccine. Why get paid for the slow stream of patients when you can just tell parents that they must have the treatment administered to their children before they can be enrolled in Kindergarten?
Of course, if we are worried about destroying the human race by performing poorly tested inoculations, we are already there. The flu vaccines that are administered at drug stores around the country are new formulas each year, and don't even attempt to do what they imply to the public that they do. The chicken pox vaccine is another vaccine that has been tested in the field through mass inoculation of 95% of the population as they reach the age of 3. Both of these have been done to combat diseases with very low mortality rates.
The runny nose and puffy eyes had no correlation to the times he ate peanut butter. They did have a correlation to times of year, amount of wind, and county we were in.
Correlation may not imply causation, but lack of correlation DOES imply a lack of causation.