Huh? No, no WMDs were found. 50 shells capable of being filled with chemicals eventually turned up, months after the invasion - but there were still no chemical weapons to put in them.
I don't think those in power in the US/UK were seriously looking to avoid the invasion. If they were, why invade just after the weapons inspectors had been allowed in? They could've afforded a few weeks to let Hans Blix & co. reach a conclusion (even if that conclusion was just "Saddam's not given us full access, again, so we don't know").
The processor isn't going to be a substantial proportion of the power usage on a full-scale system like that; it's not (commercially) worth going non-x86 for the proportionally small savings. VIA makes systems very much like what you're describing, but they run x86.
Yeah, you're a Luddite all right. The very act of writing is intrinsically unnatural; there's no reason to assume using a computer would be any harder or easier.
I spent over an hour a day latexing up all my maths notes while at university; it was well worth it for the ability to ctrl-f any given subject/theorem/etc. and jump to the notes for it instantly, rather than rummaging back and forth.
It's an easy way to invite a bunch of people to a party; it handles reminding people rather than you having to worry about it. That's the main thing I use it for.
If I go into more controversial usage, it's helpful to hear when a friend and I happen to be going to the same event (or just the same town at the same time), meaning we can meet up when I wouldn't otherwise have realised. And it's a less intrusive way to say hi to old friends I might want to see again than a 'phone call or even an email would be.
But if you want a track listing for Led Zeppelin IV, or just want to do some personal research like I did before my eye surgeries, or for a slashdot argument, Wikipedia is the place to go.
These days it isn't, actually. It's tried too hard to be an encyclopaedia, with the notability rules and citations. Other wikis are better at giving you that kind of info.
Go on, what is modern philosophy going to achieve? Is it going to make the science of 100 years from now better (the way the mathematics of today might)? Serious question, yes is a perfectly valid answer.
Yes, science aka natural philosophy grew out of philosophy - but as far as I can see it overtook what we now call "philosophy", which seems like the leftovers of early history of science. The question of how we know science works needs to be asked, but it's asked better by HPS. Logic needs to be done, but it's done better in mathematics than in philosophy. I attended a few philosophy lectures as a student, it seemed to be about 1/3 logic etc. and 2/3 history. Where's the interesting research in contemporary philosophy?
Nobody wants discrete resume objects. The computer has to then search through each discrete resume object, and they're hard to index because they can be variable sizes because of repeated structured data that you happen to want to search on. You can either structure that data with all other data of that type and index it;
Of course you need to structure it. It's just that you can structure it in a way that makes sense for a resume, rather than cramming it into a set of 2d tables the way you have to if you're using SQL. Look at the performance of modern non-sql databases; I think you'll be pleasantly surprised.
The problem is you're thinking like a human, dealing with data a human wants to deal with in the way a human will deal with it. You're forgetting you need to work with a computer, and the computer needs to do certain logical operations. The only fast, scalable way to do this is to store the data suitable for a machine and index it with a data structure a machine can traverse quickly. The interface can make it look human-readable
The computer is perfectly capable of indexing it as a structured document - it's just that structure doesn't have to be SQL. Sure, the internal representation is probably some big bunch of tables - just as the internal representation of those is ultimately a big block of bytes. And you can do your own mapping from the logical resume to a set of sql tables if you want - but this leads to writing repetitive code to solve a problem that's already been solved, much like writing your own database would.
How does it compare to Gnunet? That's unique among anonymous/encrypted filesharing clients I've tried in that it's actually usable for decent-speed downloads.
I've seen what having a "foundation" did to wikipedia. No thanks. While the site has a clear leader that means there's someone accountable for when it goes wrong.
Please. It's never "vitally important"; no-one will die if you don't. I wonder how much difference your "vital demographic analysis" has actually made to anything, ever.
Hell, even in South Africa, one of the more developed nations, it's still believed by many, many people that having sex with a virgin will cure AIDS...resulting in the rape of young girls, even infants. Broadband isn't going to help with that.
Actually it might, by making accurate information more readily available.
How are you going to implement science and technology in an area that's been ravaged by warfare for years? How are you going to set this up when warlords and dictators just love to seize it for their own profit?
It won't be easy, but it's the only way. Any form of aid will have these problems; unlike food handouts, technology has a chance of actually getting these people out of their situation.
What's going to reduce corruption and produce stable infrastructure? Democracy, an interested populace, and prosperity through economic growth. All things that getting broadband out there is going to help with.
Sure, you could try and bring them up by going through the exact same development path we did - but that's going to leave those nations permanently x years behind. The best way to bring a society forward rapidly is investment in science and technology, and there's no sense going for anything but the best.
I was going to mention that, but that's much easier to deny - we've never actually observed Hawking evaporation, the only reason we think it exists is because it comes out of the current theories.
Again, you have it backwards - traditional SQL ends up *more* like a "blob of text" than the modern nosql systems. Your resumes are a very good example - it'd be much more effective to use something like couchDB, where you can store them in a resume data structure that makes sense for a resume, than an SQL database that thinks everything is a 2D table.
So you can't create them in everyday life, sure. But it would seem to just be a matter of engineering to forcibly squash some matter that small; if you want to say the fundamental laws of physics make it impossible, you're going to need more than that.
It's not relevant. Goedel proves that it's possible to pose questions in the language of mathematics that are undecideable. But there's no reason to assume that you need the answers to these particular questions to do physics.
Except you're talking about the universe here. We may not have built a flying car, but it is possible to have a very small black hole. Unless you're suggesting that it isn't possible, but that's really just another theory that you're going to have to justify in the same way.
I always wonder - for (say) pure arithmetic workloads, the kind that the fancy do-more-per-tick stuff isn't going to help with, are the Pentium 4s going to be the fastest CPU you can get forever?
What does it mean? Why do some people 'have' more resources? Are they stronger? Do they plow larger fields? Or maybe they have better-bred cows?
They've contributed more to society, in some way or another; that's the way economics works. (Or they were lucky, or whatever - sure, the system is far from perfect. But it's not meaningless either)
Buying extra content - new levels and the like - makes sense. Buying virtual stuff rather than "earning" it through the mechanism of the game - skipping some of the game, really - is like using cheat codes in a previous generation of games: lame. Only you also pay for the privilege.
You're looking at this precisely backwards. The problem is that the programming-language representation is richer than the SQL one; SQL can only store tables (raw data), not, say, documents, which are more informational.
The law should be rigorous; it's used to imprison people. If you know all the facts (which can be hard, but that's why we have juries) there should be no doubt about whether or not you're breaking a law.
Slashdot Mirror
I don't think those in power in the US/UK were seriously looking to avoid the invasion. If they were, why invade just after the weapons inspectors had been allowed in? They could've afforded a few weeks to let Hans Blix & co. reach a conclusion (even if that conclusion was just "Saddam's not given us full access, again, so we don't know").
The processor isn't going to be a substantial proportion of the power usage on a full-scale system like that; it's not (commercially) worth going non-x86 for the proportionally small savings. VIA makes systems very much like what you're describing, but they run x86.
Well, except you'd be subject to the other thing VLC is famous for - its poor-quality softsub rendering.
I spent over an hour a day latexing up all my maths notes while at university; it was well worth it for the ability to ctrl-f any given subject/theorem/etc. and jump to the notes for it instantly, rather than rummaging back and forth.
If I go into more controversial usage, it's helpful to hear when a friend and I happen to be going to the same event (or just the same town at the same time), meaning we can meet up when I wouldn't otherwise have realised. And it's a less intrusive way to say hi to old friends I might want to see again than a 'phone call or even an email would be.
These days it isn't, actually. It's tried too hard to be an encyclopaedia, with the notability rules and citations. Other wikis are better at giving you that kind of info.
Yes, science aka natural philosophy grew out of philosophy - but as far as I can see it overtook what we now call "philosophy", which seems like the leftovers of early history of science. The question of how we know science works needs to be asked, but it's asked better by HPS. Logic needs to be done, but it's done better in mathematics than in philosophy. I attended a few philosophy lectures as a student, it seemed to be about 1/3 logic etc. and 2/3 history. Where's the interesting research in contemporary philosophy?
Of course you need to structure it. It's just that you can structure it in a way that makes sense for a resume, rather than cramming it into a set of 2d tables the way you have to if you're using SQL. Look at the performance of modern non-sql databases; I think you'll be pleasantly surprised.
The problem is you're thinking like a human, dealing with data a human wants to deal with in the way a human will deal with it. You're forgetting you need to work with a computer, and the computer needs to do certain logical operations. The only fast, scalable way to do this is to store the data suitable for a machine and index it with a data structure a machine can traverse quickly. The interface can make it look human-readable
The computer is perfectly capable of indexing it as a structured document - it's just that structure doesn't have to be SQL. Sure, the internal representation is probably some big bunch of tables - just as the internal representation of those is ultimately a big block of bytes. And you can do your own mapping from the logical resume to a set of sql tables if you want - but this leads to writing repetitive code to solve a problem that's already been solved, much like writing your own database would.
How does it compare to Gnunet? That's unique among anonymous/encrypted filesharing clients I've tried in that it's actually usable for decent-speed downloads.
I've seen what having a "foundation" did to wikipedia. No thanks. While the site has a clear leader that means there's someone accountable for when it goes wrong.
Please. It's never "vitally important"; no-one will die if you don't. I wonder how much difference your "vital demographic analysis" has actually made to anything, ever.
Actually it might, by making accurate information more readily available.
How are you going to implement science and technology in an area that's been ravaged by warfare for years? How are you going to set this up when warlords and dictators just love to seize it for their own profit?
It won't be easy, but it's the only way. Any form of aid will have these problems; unlike food handouts, technology has a chance of actually getting these people out of their situation.
What's going to reduce corruption and produce stable infrastructure? Democracy, an interested populace, and prosperity through economic growth. All things that getting broadband out there is going to help with.
Sure, you could try and bring them up by going through the exact same development path we did - but that's going to leave those nations permanently x years behind. The best way to bring a society forward rapidly is investment in science and technology, and there's no sense going for anything but the best.
I was going to mention that, but that's much easier to deny - we've never actually observed Hawking evaporation, the only reason we think it exists is because it comes out of the current theories.
Again, you have it backwards - traditional SQL ends up *more* like a "blob of text" than the modern nosql systems. Your resumes are a very good example - it'd be much more effective to use something like couchDB, where you can store them in a resume data structure that makes sense for a resume, than an SQL database that thinks everything is a 2D table.
So you can't create them in everyday life, sure. But it would seem to just be a matter of engineering to forcibly squash some matter that small; if you want to say the fundamental laws of physics make it impossible, you're going to need more than that.
It's not relevant. Goedel proves that it's possible to pose questions in the language of mathematics that are undecideable. But there's no reason to assume that you need the answers to these particular questions to do physics.
Except you're talking about the universe here. We may not have built a flying car, but it is possible to have a very small black hole. Unless you're suggesting that it isn't possible, but that's really just another theory that you're going to have to justify in the same way.
It's a question of correcting someone when they're clearly wrong - it's no better or worse than the grammar correction it was done in response to.
I always wonder - for (say) pure arithmetic workloads, the kind that the fancy do-more-per-tick stuff isn't going to help with, are the Pentium 4s going to be the fastest CPU you can get forever?
Don't emulators do the light gun? If not, why not? I should be able to hook up my wiimote to my PC and use that for the same effect.
They've contributed more to society, in some way or another; that's the way economics works. (Or they were lucky, or whatever - sure, the system is far from perfect. But it's not meaningless either)
Buying extra content - new levels and the like - makes sense. Buying virtual stuff rather than "earning" it through the mechanism of the game - skipping some of the game, really - is like using cheat codes in a previous generation of games: lame. Only you also pay for the privilege.
You're looking at this precisely backwards. The problem is that the programming-language representation is richer than the SQL one; SQL can only store tables (raw data), not, say, documents, which are more informational.
The law should be rigorous; it's used to imprison people. If you know all the facts (which can be hard, but that's why we have juries) there should be no doubt about whether or not you're breaking a law.