Yes, and that's why chess didn't fall to pure processing power. If you took a chess program from 20 years ago and threw (modern) processors at it, you still wouldn't get near beating grandmasters.
I still get beaten by GNU go, so I'm not sure I'm good enough to judge. But just looking at the numbers, you'll basically need to be able to eliminate 10x as many alternatives to be able to work forward as many go moves as you can with chess.
Raid is the best backup *medium*. Data backed up on a software raid6 or 1+5 array that you're paying attention to will not die anytime soon, wheras optical discs, individual hard drives and even tapes can and do die.
Not really, because you only need for the FAT to be unreadable (CDs/DVDs don't normally have multiple copies like hard disks often do) and then the data will still be there but you'll have a helluva time trying to access it.
I feel a lot more comfortable having a full backup occasionally. Every quater is enough, just something so that if your initial one is faulty you can restore rather than relying on every single incremental record in a long sequence (and having to restore it all incrementally)
Although it's nice to think human life is more valuable than anything, in hospitals with short funds they have to make decisions about whether a certain chance of saving a life is worth the cost, because the money that is there will save lives if used in particular ways.
Process is as important as the solutions you finally reach. Programmers don't do hello world, towers of hanoi etc. because they're problems waiting to be solved, but to get good at programming. I think chess helps people be more analytical, and is worth learning for the mental effects on yourself (as are plenty of other similar games, like draughts or go).
Technically so with go as it's currently played (though I don't think we can rely on Moore's law to hold out for anything like long enough, so that doesn't make computers winning at go inevitable on its own), but it wouldn't really be a proper solution. We could make it 21x21 without altering the dynamic so much for human players, wheras that would set a brute force approach back immensely.
The programs will have to become smarter. Brute forcing does not work with go, you have on the order of 381 possibilities each move. 381^x gets very big very quickly. But I don't doubt the programs can get smart enough.
People will know it, like today people do with draughts or even noughts and crosses (tick-tack-toe to americans). But I don't think there'll be serious players like there are today. I've been the county champion in my age group for the past three years. The last one was for lack of competition. In the time I've been playing competitively I've seen a decrease by at least 75% in the number of people competing in junior tournaments. Make no mistake, competitive chess among humans is dying.
Laptops for companies who do anything sensitive, or anything with big money in it. If someone's designing a new part for a military weapon system, or a new drug, or a new processor, I can see them wanting a lot of data security.
Aren't all modern block ciphers resistant to known-plaintext attacks? The flaw as I know it allows you to mount a dictionary attack, but nothing more. There's a simple solution to that - use a strong password.
How could the filesystem check the kernel? If someone's modified the kernel they could easily get it to report a faulty checksum. The thing to do is keep your kernel on read-only media like a cdr.
It's their job to look into the future by looking at the positions of the stars and the planets. You put Mercury on a birth chart and use it to work out personality traits, and conjunctions of it with something else are of course important
You can take it traveling. You can use it on the train, you can use it in your hotel room. Those are the main advantages I see to a portable computer even if you have to plug it in. There's a type of computer that's meant to be used when moving around, running off its own power, it's called a PDA and they are already using flash drives. A laptop should be as close to a desktop in power (disk space, etc) as you can get it.
Thanks, that makes things clearer. When I said the moon I meant one of Mars' moons, I know that going to Mars is cheaper delta-v wise than our Moon, and it makes sense that Deimos would be (half the energy in orbital mechanics is the deceleration, for a smaller moon you need less of it). Getting home from Deimos takes a total of 1.8km/s, while home from Mars surface is 6.4km/s. That's the point I was trying to make.
Ah yes, you're right, I was going by what my local police officer had told me. However, you could still be charged with assault (and people are) if you were beating someone up, so I don't feel the comparison is quite right.
They're not coding to the standards, because if they were it would work in my browser (there's no way it would work in all those other browsers they list but not mine if they just coded to standards). They're coding to individual browsers one at a time.
Slashdot Mirror
I still get beaten by GNU go, so I'm not sure I'm good enough to judge. But just looking at the numbers, you'll basically need to be able to eliminate 10x as many alternatives to be able to work forward as many go moves as you can with chess.
Can't speak for those but KDE is fine in 128mb. Takes a moment to load up when you log in, but once it's running it's as smooth as anything.
Raid is the best backup *medium*. Data backed up on a software raid6 or 1+5 array that you're paying attention to will not die anytime soon, wheras optical discs, individual hard drives and even tapes can and do die.
Not really, because you only need for the FAT to be unreadable (CDs/DVDs don't normally have multiple copies like hard disks often do) and then the data will still be there but you'll have a helluva time trying to access it.
I feel a lot more comfortable having a full backup occasionally. Every quater is enough, just something so that if your initial one is faulty you can restore rather than relying on every single incremental record in a long sequence (and having to restore it all incrementally)
Although it's nice to think human life is more valuable than anything, in hospitals with short funds they have to make decisions about whether a certain chance of saving a life is worth the cost, because the money that is there will save lives if used in particular ways.
That comment is made infinitely funnier by your sig
Process is as important as the solutions you finally reach. Programmers don't do hello world, towers of hanoi etc. because they're problems waiting to be solved, but to get good at programming. I think chess helps people be more analytical, and is worth learning for the mental effects on yourself (as are plenty of other similar games, like draughts or go).
Technically so with go as it's currently played (though I don't think we can rely on Moore's law to hold out for anything like long enough, so that doesn't make computers winning at go inevitable on its own), but it wouldn't really be a proper solution. We could make it 21x21 without altering the dynamic so much for human players, wheras that would set a brute force approach back immensely.
That may be what they /actually/ do, however the /job/ is to use the position of the stars and planets to predict the future.
No, my browser is following the standards, their site isn't.
The programs will have to become smarter. Brute forcing does not work with go, you have on the order of 381 possibilities each move. 381^x gets very big very quickly. But I don't doubt the programs can get smart enough.
Why not? Advertising executive is a valid job. If you can get paid enough to live on doing it, it's a job.
There were always animals who could outpace us running. We never met anything else that could beat us at chess.
When computers beat top draughts players people said exactly that about chess. Go is going to fall, it's just a matter of time.
People will know it, like today people do with draughts or even noughts and crosses (tick-tack-toe to americans). But I don't think there'll be serious players like there are today. I've been the county champion in my age group for the past three years. The last one was for lack of competition. In the time I've been playing competitively I've seen a decrease by at least 75% in the number of people competing in junior tournaments. Make no mistake, competitive chess among humans is dying.
Laptops for companies who do anything sensitive, or anything with big money in it. If someone's designing a new part for a military weapon system, or a new drug, or a new processor, I can see them wanting a lot of data security.
Aren't all modern block ciphers resistant to known-plaintext attacks? The flaw as I know it allows you to mount a dictionary attack, but nothing more. There's a simple solution to that - use a strong password.
How could the filesystem check the kernel? If someone's modified the kernel they could easily get it to report a faulty checksum. The thing to do is keep your kernel on read-only media like a cdr.
/IANAA
Will they be offering protection against hideous orange fake tan?
You can take it traveling. You can use it on the train, you can use it in your hotel room. Those are the main advantages I see to a portable computer even if you have to plug it in. There's a type of computer that's meant to be used when moving around, running off its own power, it's called a PDA and they are already using flash drives. A laptop should be as close to a desktop in power (disk space, etc) as you can get it.
Thanks, that makes things clearer. When I said the moon I meant one of Mars' moons, I know that going to Mars is cheaper delta-v wise than our Moon, and it makes sense that Deimos would be (half the energy in orbital mechanics is the deceleration, for a smaller moon you need less of it). Getting home from Deimos takes a total of 1.8km/s, while home from Mars surface is 6.4km/s. That's the point I was trying to make.
Ah yes, you're right, I was going by what my local police officer had told me. However, you could still be charged with assault (and people are) if you were beating someone up, so I don't feel the comparison is quite right.
They're not coding to the standards, because if they were it would work in my browser (there's no way it would work in all those other browsers they list but not mine if they just coded to standards). They're coding to individual browsers one at a time.