if they had them, do you think they'd be in a position to launch them? this seems like a problem (hopefully) only if they're queued up and ready to lanch (nd thus connected to a computer). there's a computer on board there, but I'm hoping like hell that either a) people can turn the triggering off or b) it's not date dependent. (I can think of schemes where it's a counter that starts at launch or something.
question is what would happen if one of them went off. would it trigger automagical antimissile defense?
Computer: Hey Ivan, look. Nuclear blast way the hell out in Siberia. Looks like de Capeetaleest Runeeng Dog United States must have blasted us. Weapons systems arming... Ivan: Oh, &^^#@! I thought I fixed that bug.
actually, I could see it being a good thing if certain countries made their weapons systems a lot more docile for those few days... humans may be slow, but we're also not having Y2K bugs... at least not yet. Lea
it seemed to me that it wasn't a matter of being "mad" at anybody. it doesn't matter who India is mad at, if, come New Year, dem missiles go bang by themselves.
I agree that it's a good thing to monitor them in general, and Y2K seems like a great excuse to get this started. It's an ill wind that blows nobody good.:)
that would have been my point. I love the movie, but that bothers me (and the people I argue it with)
however, since I'm a perfectionist, my small arguments to your arments: #3, #4 -- they were liquifing dead people and feeding then to the live ones. however, this still does not solve the problem entirely, but with some food stores (which people tend to build up anyways) this could last for a while on starvation rations
#5 -- that's what we're for. we're good at it:)
#7, #8 -- actually, if I remember correctly, it took the electric impulses from the brain/etc. problem with this is the same as with taking the current generated by inductive brakes (see Great America's Drop Zone): that current is being used for something, and if you take it away, then whatever was using it wouldn't work anymore. there would be no need for the Matrix, since we wouldn't be ALIVE or have brain signals anyways...
I think #1 is all you need. if there were (for example) a lotof grain or dead bodies, you could feed those to aerobic prokariotes and take the ATP and use it for something -- it's more efficent...
it's a neat chemical trick, yes, but sort of on the order of what we're going to have to do until we have a programmable assembler (I only wish). anyways, if you have an entire machine 100+ nanomers across, you don't want the whole thing to be a giant motor. probably don't need a huge amount of power out of the thing either.
and you have to leave room for all those mechanical logic gates!:P
my guess is that it's made out of carbon (or that's what the proposals for nanites that haven't been built yet are) it's generally accepted that diamond is the best material -- doesn't react (with anything that I know of -- but I'm an EECS, not a ChemE) and is REALLY hard.
it's not just us who can be used for batteries -- any eukariotic animal that engages in phosphoralation (sp?) is a source of energy. however, using the human/animal as a battery is rediculous on a large basis (think Matrix here). every time you run through a level of the food chain, you lose a LOT of energy. it would be FAR more efficient to just have mitochondria supported -- not an entire organism. if that was impractical, then cells -- any cells, just about -- could be used far more efficently than an entire organism, who uses energy for transport/growing hair/living. (Matrix always bothered me -- I loved the movie, but the premise is completely impractical. if you suck the electricity out of the brain, then the brain can't DO anything. you die. you can't be in "the Matrix" anyways)
however, the nanites could refuel from your cells if they were in there for something else. convenient food source:) personally, I'd be more than willing to have nanites running around and using a bit of my ATP while they destroyed a cancer or something similarly threatening.
my guess is that Mozilla, although "Netscape," is not AOL. I've seen Jabber before -- it's supposed to be an implementation of EVERY IM protocol -- but they're not going from the official AOL docs. (assuming there are some somewhere) AOL might still end up locking it out and/or putting pressure on Mozilla to have it removed. personally, I think this technique would backfire (check me on this here -- I haven't read the NPL all that carefully) if someone is allowed to fork the source tree. of course, AOL could end up blocking it anyways (if they still have anything up their sleeve) but it's horrible public relations (although mostly with people not likely to use AOL) and I don't see them risking it. They might say "well, Microsoft is a company and so we have a problem with them, but this is a "community project" and so we're ok with it." kind of a cop-out, but there you are. then their only recourse to blocking Microsoft would be legal and not technological.
offtopic amusement: when I went to MozillaZine, there was a banner for MSN Instant Messager. Hmm...
Mr. AC, look at what you're quoting. professionals are different from enthusiasts. I'm not denying that professional facilities are not where Sony wanted it, but it's better than "enthusiasts."
for one thing, professionals tend to have a lot more money:)
has anyone ported the SDK (Java 1.2.2)? the Sun site says it's only available for Windows and Solaris, so it's either ssh into an overloaded Solaris box, or use Windows (never!):)
>And of course, Linux may have bugs, but once >found, they are generally squashed and patched >within a week, if not shorter. No other company >on the planet can promise that.
if I'm not mistaken, no one/does/ promise that. "Linux" is not a company either. both things serve to make certain people quite nervous. like many businesses. it doesn't matter if the "pointee" doesn't give a rat's @$$ about it, it feels better to them to have someone to blame. human nature:)
>Sure, you could go off and make your own >modifications, but that's got to be a lot of work >to do those. It could conviecibly happen but I >doubt anyone wants to undertake it.
really? where do all the kernel hackers come from, then? perhaps you mean no one has forked the source into a separate kernel? (not counting the different architectures...)
>And save for the libc5 to glibc2 switch, nearly >every problem works under every version of the >kernel.
unfortunately true... luckily, nearly every correct, debugged piece of code works as well!:)
sorry a bit about the nit-picking. I agree with the basic thrust of your argument, but those things just jumped out at me.
you can't forget one of the best things about Java -- it's awfully pretty. and now that I'm writing a compiler for it, I'm starting to appreciate it...
well, in this case, I think that StarOffice will contribute to complacency no matter what licence it's released under. (well, if it stops crashing so.... much) if Sun maintains a straglehold on the source, then some people will work on AbiWord, etc. because they believe in free speech. however, a main motivation to work will be gone. there will be something compatible with MS Office.
now, before I get flamed to a crisp: yes, I know that there are other office packages out there. personally, I haven't been satisfied with them (WP managed to have a little argument with Gnome. not that most things cooperate with it.)
of course, if Sun neglects StarOffice and won't let the open source community take it over, people might get frustrated enough to take on office software with a vengence:) (the "scrath an itch" motivation)
now, I have to admit that, in this area, I am one of the slackers. (no pun intended) office software is so peripheral to my life (except for the occasional english paper) that I never worked up enough enthusiasm to work on AbiWord, even though it looked interesting. I guess robots are more to my taste:)
unless you get a crap one... mine died pretty fast, but it was fun upgrading every single piece in the old computer except for the motherboard.:)
Re:Benefits of DVD on a desktop machine?
on
DVD for Linux
·
· Score: 1
well, I'm a student. I also have a TV... I also don't want to pay the $200+ for a player that I would otherwise spend on food...
I've been getting fairly desperate -- I'm about to start experimenting with WINE and software decoders, but I have this odd feeling that it's not going to work in the least...
what is this guy THINKING??? so far, the only thing I have gotten out of being female is the odd bit of sexism. I may be unusual, but it's not a helpful thing, in many ways.
we shall see what happens when I need a job for more than a summer...
hmm. well. now that I know that what I want is $$, I guess I should go dump my bf for someone who makes more $$, yes?
yes, money helps grease some wheels. it is hard to be romantic if you're not eating or worrying about the rent. however, what I really want and need is a little bit of time and affection. I don't give a damn about money or fancy presents, except as a token of thoughtfulness (and I like no-cost thoughtful things much better). I'm sure I'm not alone, especially in the geek community. Not only do we make our OWN money to buy our OWN toys, but we are not trophies.
most of my guy friends agree that we're the best kind:)
well, I think whether you're single or not has a lot to do with your attitude, Egon. I'm female, and while I'm not single, and haven't been for a while, I can tell you that there are single, attractive (as far as the guys tell me what is attractive.. personally I don't really notice or care at all) and smart women out there. Not all of them will be CS majors, but there are people who are interested in a lot of things, and chose to pursue something besides CS. I have a mechE as a bf, and he teases me about loving to hack, and I tease him right back.
I guess all I'm trying to say is open your horizons! we are out there, but it's quite true that you'll stay single for the rest of your life if you always act like that. for now I'm willing to give you the benefit of the doubt, but if you act like that, trust me, you won't get what you want.
I am a woman. Hope I could be referred to as a hacker:)
but to be truthful, there aren't that many out there. I may have to room with a guy friend (of course there's always my boyfriend:) ) simply because I don't know any girls at UC Berkeley that hack/anything/. I'm sure they're out there, but I just haven't met any of them, though I have to admit that I don't have much of a social life, as I just keep working until my bf reminds me to stop and eat or something. Signifigant MOTAS's are essential simply to keep one from working/all/ the time. Now I have a life, and a job too:)
well, I don't own a trademark on ANYTHING, so it's wrong for me to get a domain name, according to your reasoning. I am a squatting fool for registering nanoxxxxxxxxx.com, because I hold no trademark -- never mind that my personal research is well described by that domain name. so if some company comes along (and nanotech is achieved:) and names some product nanoxxxxxx, then I am in the wrong, and should give my domain to them.
hmm. well. I guess Rob should never have registered slashdot.org. it didn't start out as a trademark, one would suppose, and so he has no claim on it.
interesting reasoning. personally, I think I'm going to go register a domain name, so when I move around, my domain can move with me, and people who might happen to be interested can find my work. yes, my untrademarked work. and yes, maybe I'll have pictures of my dog there.
Slashdot Mirror
question is what would happen if one of them went off. would it trigger automagical antimissile defense?
Computer: Hey Ivan, look. Nuclear blast way the hell out in Siberia. Looks like de Capeetaleest Runeeng Dog United States must have blasted us. Weapons systems arming...
Ivan: Oh, &^^#@! I thought I fixed that bug.
actually, I could see it being a good thing if certain countries made their weapons systems a lot more docile for those few days... humans may be slow, but we're also not having Y2K bugs... at least not yet. Lea
yeah. and if a missile goes off, antimissile defense goes off, and there won't be much gov't left to say Y2K...
not to mention not much left of us to hear it.
Lea
it seemed to me that it wasn't a matter of being "mad" at anybody. it doesn't matter who India is mad at, if, come New Year, dem missiles go bang by themselves.
:)
I agree that it's a good thing to monitor them in general, and Y2K seems like a great excuse to get this started. It's an ill wind that blows nobody good.
Lea
that would have been my point. I love the movie, but that bothers me (and the people I argue it with)
:)
however, since I'm a perfectionist, my small arguments to your arments:
#3, #4 -- they were liquifing dead people and feeding then to the live ones. however, this still does not solve the problem entirely, but with some food stores (which people tend to build up anyways) this could last for a while on starvation rations
#5 -- that's what we're for. we're good at it
#7, #8 -- actually, if I remember correctly, it took the electric impulses from the brain/etc. problem with this is the same as with taking the current generated by inductive brakes (see Great America's Drop Zone): that current is being used for something, and if you take it away, then whatever was using it wouldn't work anymore. there would be no need for the Matrix, since we wouldn't be ALIVE or have brain signals anyways...
I think #1 is all you need. if there were (for example) a lotof grain or dead bodies, you could feed those to aerobic prokariotes and take the ATP and use it for something -- it's more efficent...
Lea
so true. I guess I haven't taken bio for too long. I was thinking only of anaerobic prokaryotes...
:)
so there's something even better to use than humans -- and easier to culture as well!
Lea
it's a neat chemical trick, yes, but sort of on the order of what we're going to have to do until we have a programmable assembler (I only wish). anyways, if you have an entire machine 100+ nanomers across, you don't want the whole thing to be a giant motor. probably don't need a huge amount of power out of the thing either.
:P
and you have to leave room for all those mechanical logic gates!
Lea
my guess is that it's made out of carbon (or that's what the proposals for nanites that haven't been built yet are) it's generally accepted that diamond is the best material -- doesn't react (with anything that I know of -- but I'm an EECS, not a ChemE) and is REALLY hard.
:)
read some Drexler
Lea
just about everything (including prokariotes) makes ATP. we just make a lot more of it per glucose.
Lea
it's not just us who can be used for batteries -- any eukariotic animal that engages in phosphoralation (sp?) is a source of energy. however, using the human/animal as a battery is rediculous on a large basis (think Matrix here). every time you run through a level of the food chain, you lose a LOT of energy. it would be FAR more efficient to just have mitochondria supported -- not an entire organism. if that was impractical, then cells -- any cells, just about -- could be used far more efficently than an entire organism, who uses energy for transport/growing hair/living. (Matrix always bothered me -- I loved the movie, but the premise is completely impractical. if you suck the electricity out of the brain, then the brain can't DO anything. you die. you can't be in "the Matrix" anyways)
:) personally, I'd be more than willing to have nanites running around and using a bit of my ATP while they destroyed a cancer or something similarly threatening.
however, the nanites could refuel from your cells if they were in there for something else. convenient food source
Lea
my guess is that Mozilla, although "Netscape," is not AOL. I've seen Jabber before -- it's supposed to be an implementation of EVERY IM protocol -- but they're not going from the official AOL docs. (assuming there are some somewhere) AOL might still end up locking it out and/or putting pressure on Mozilla to have it removed. personally, I think this technique would backfire (check me on this here -- I haven't read the NPL all that carefully) if someone is allowed to fork the source tree. of course, AOL could end up blocking it anyways (if they still have anything up their sleeve) but it's horrible public relations (although mostly with people not likely to use AOL) and I don't see them risking it. They might say "well, Microsoft is a company and so we have a problem with them, but this is a "community project" and so we're ok with it." kind of a cop-out, but there you are. then their only recourse to blocking Microsoft would be legal and not technological.
offtopic amusement: when I went to MozillaZine, there was a banner for MSN Instant Messager. Hmm...
Lea
it's not just 1.2 that I need -- it's a perfect copy of 1.2.2... compiler class, ya know :)
Mr. AC, look at what you're quoting. professionals are different from enthusiasts. I'm not denying that professional facilities are not where Sony wanted it, but it's better than "enthusiasts."
:)
for one thing, professionals tend to have a lot more money
Lea
has anyone ported the SDK (Java 1.2.2)? the Sun site says it's only available for Windows and Solaris, so it's either ssh into an overloaded Solaris box, or use Windows (never!) :)
Lea
>And of course, Linux may have bugs, but once
/does/ promise that. "Linux" is not a company either. both things serve to make certain people quite nervous. like many businesses. it doesn't matter if the "pointee" doesn't give a rat's @$$ about it, it feels better to them to have someone to blame. human nature :)
:)
>found, they are generally squashed and patched
>within a week, if not shorter. No other company >on the planet can promise that.
if I'm not mistaken, no one
>Sure, you could go off and make your own
>modifications, but that's got to be a lot of work
>to do those. It could conviecibly happen but I
>doubt anyone wants to undertake it.
really? where do all the kernel hackers come from, then? perhaps you mean no one has forked the source into a separate kernel? (not counting the different architectures...)
>And save for the libc5 to glibc2 switch, nearly
>every problem works under every version of the
>kernel.
unfortunately true... luckily, nearly every correct, debugged piece of code works as well!
sorry a bit about the nit-picking. I agree with the basic thrust of your argument, but those things just jumped out at me.
you can't forget one of the best things about Java -- it's awfully pretty. and now that I'm writing a compiler for it, I'm starting to appreciate it...
Lea
well, in this case, I think that StarOffice will contribute to complacency no matter what licence it's released under. (well, if it stops crashing so .... much) if Sun maintains a straglehold on the source, then some people will work on AbiWord, etc. because they believe in free speech. however, a main motivation to work will be gone. there will be something compatible with MS Office.
:) (the "scrath an itch" motivation)
:)
now, before I get flamed to a crisp: yes, I know that there are other office packages out there. personally, I haven't been satisfied with them (WP managed to have a little argument with Gnome. not that most things cooperate with it.)
of course, if Sun neglects StarOffice and won't let the open source community take it over, people might get frustrated enough to take on office software with a vengence
now, I have to admit that, in this area, I am one of the slackers. (no pun intended) office software is so peripheral to my life (except for the occasional english paper) that I never worked up enough enthusiasm to work on AbiWord, even though it looked interesting. I guess robots are more to my taste
Lea
unless you get a crap one... mine died pretty fast, but it was fun upgrading every single piece in the old computer except for the motherboard. :)
well, I'm a student. I also have a TV... I also don't want to pay the $200+ for a player that I would otherwise spend on food...
I've been getting fairly desperate -- I'm about to start experimenting with WINE and software decoders, but I have this odd feeling that it's not going to work in the least...
Lea
that's one way to look at it. I always kinda envied bisexuals for that :)
:)
well, I guess I can get consolation from all the guys I work with. and my bf
Lea
I agree, sue.
what is this guy THINKING??? so far, the only thing I have gotten out of being female is the odd bit of sexism. I may be unusual, but it's not a helpful thing, in many ways.
we shall see what happens when I need a job for more than a summer...
Lea
hmm. well. now that I know that what I want is $$, I guess I should go dump my bf for someone who makes more $$, yes?
:)
yes, money helps grease some wheels. it is hard to be romantic if you're not eating or worrying about the rent. however, what I really want and need is a little bit of time and affection. I don't give a damn about money or fancy presents, except as a token of thoughtfulness (and I like no-cost thoughtful things much better). I'm sure I'm not alone, especially in the geek community. Not only do we make our OWN money to buy our OWN toys, but we are not trophies.
most of my guy friends agree that we're the best kind
Lea
well, I think whether you're single or not has a lot to do with your attitude, Egon. I'm female, and while I'm not single, and haven't been for a while, I can tell you that there are single, attractive (as far as the guys tell me what is attractive.. personally I don't really notice or care at all) and smart women out there. Not all of them will be CS majors, but there are people who are interested in a lot of things, and chose to pursue something besides CS. I have a mechE as a bf, and he teases me about loving to hack, and I tease him right back.
I guess all I'm trying to say is open your horizons! we are out there, but it's quite true that you'll stay single for the rest of your life if you always act like that. for now I'm willing to give you the benefit of the doubt, but if you act like that, trust me, you won't get what you want.
Lea
I am a woman. Hope I could be referred to as a hacker :)
:) ) simply because I don't know any girls at UC Berkeley that hack /anything/. I'm sure they're out there, but I just haven't met any of them, though I have to admit that I don't have much of a social life, as I just keep working until my bf reminds me to stop and eat or something. Signifigant MOTAS's are essential simply to keep one from working /all/ the time. Now I have a life, and a job too :)
but to be truthful, there aren't that many out there. I may have to room with a guy friend (of course there's always my boyfriend
Lea
well, I don't own a trademark on ANYTHING, so it's wrong for me to get a domain name, according to your reasoning. I am a squatting fool for registering nanoxxxxxxxxx.com, because I hold no trademark -- never mind that my personal research is well described by that domain name. so if some company comes along (and nanotech is achieved :) and names some product nanoxxxxxx, then I am in the wrong, and should give my domain to them.
hmm. well. I guess Rob should never have registered slashdot.org. it didn't start out as a trademark, one would suppose, and so he has no claim on it.
interesting reasoning. personally, I think I'm going to go register a domain name, so when I move around, my domain can move with me, and people who might happen to be interested can find my work. yes, my untrademarked work. and yes, maybe I'll have pictures of my dog there.
Lea
my parents read that
it's a good thing for me I'm over 18 and they can't yank me back home
Lea
metacrawler does this (but from several engines) and though (I believe) they've been challenged, they're still up... (though acquired by go2net)
Lea