Are you a CMU student? I am. This is certainly not a university-wide policy, and I can't think of any class that I or my friends have taken that has this policy. Indeed, many classes (such as the legendarily difficult 15-251, Great Theoretical Ideas In Computer Science) practically require you to work in groups, and woe betide anyone who goes it alone.
Do you just take completely different classes than me or anyone here that I know? Or are you delusional? Or are you just talking out of your ass?
I know the story poster in person - we're both at CMU. The story is actually an attempt to send unique IP addresses to a certain site for an academic assignment. The details of the assignment are here. (Warning, PDF.)
Point well taken. Perhaps the real problem is Legs + High Center Of Mass. Legs would work much better for robots if they were multitudinous, and the mass of the chassis was spread out and close to the ground, which I believe has been shown in some prototypes built at MIT.
I want to believe that this works, and could be mass-produced for $2,000. And I've seen the stuff about the Grizzly Suit. But "going out and making some videos" does not necessarily equate with "withstanding rigorous testing", and as far as I can tell, he hasn't done either with this new suit. I was also a little suspicious when I read this:
The whole suit -- which draws design inspiration from Star Wars, RoboCop, Batman and video games --
In general, stuff in video games is designed to look cool, rather than to be functional. I mean, look at MechWarrior for example. Why would you ever make a combat robot that walks? All you have to do is destroy one of its legs, or, hell, trip it up with a cable. (Of course, there's solid precedent for this.) I'm not saying that this is impossible, but when people announce technologies like this to the media before they undergo substantial testing, it usually means that they need venture capital. Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence, and let's not even go into the Angel Light and God Light (which can "make blind men see and lame men walk").
He gave a lecture at a summer physics program I attended. Really interesting guy, fascinating stuff, but... whatever you do, don't talk to him about the previous BLAST telescope. It also had a two-meter mirror, but this one was made out of glass, (instead of aluminum) cost a million dollars, and shattered on takeoff. He is extremely bitter about this.
"Data" is not the plural of "anecdote". Some of the things the submitter was talking about are obviously personal observations, but he was probably referring to stuff like decreasing legroom.
Apparently, the statistics for lost/stolen luggage is about 2%. Doesn't sound like much, but consider that this means that on a flight of a hundred people, two will probably have their luggage lost. Also, this means that you will likely have your luggage lost or stolen once every fifty times you fly... not an issue for me, but my dad travels frequently on business.
Looks like you're right about the prices being lower than in a while, though, according to this. I wouldn't know; I haven't flown in a while.
It's the security thing that's most worrisome to me, though. From what I heard in the other thread, people weren't allowed carry-ons, laptops or other electronics, even books. Considering other changes in aviation security in the past (metal detectors, shoes, explosive sniffers) this may become the norm rather than a temporary measure. I don't know about everyone else here, but to me a six-hour flight (hell, even a two-hour flight) would be intolerable without some of those distractions. I'd rather take the train, but this obviously isn't an option for going to Europe.
If the submitter had bothered to RTFA (I know, I know, "You must be new here") he would see that these articles are about local networks being brought down by lots of users trying to stream World Cup footage at the same, not an "Internet meltdown".
Whether such a meltdown is even possible is another question entirely, but one not covered by these articles.
My gut reaction is that this is a tragedy, but that's just because I got to see Atlantis on the launch-pad when I went to Cape Canaveral in seventh grade. On a non-personal level, this is probably a good choice for the reasons discussed in TFA.
However, I know this is a step in the long-term goal of phasing out the shuttle program altogether, but what is it going to do to NASA's ability to launch missions if it only has two shuttles? The pace is ridiculously slow as it is.
The Internet is the penultimate example of a "free market" information system. Literally anyone who has access to a computer (and this can be just about anyone who has the necessary basic skills, thanks to public access from libraries and such) can have their say in a public forum, and have others see what they've said and sometimes respond with their own opinions.
The obvious advantage of this is that there will always be multiple perspectives on any given subject, from the mainstream to the personal to the radical or absurd. Ideally, this would mean that each person who reads the news online has the ability to weigh various viewpoints, and formulate their own opinion based on these. This can also lead to situations like bloggers bringing down Dan Rather for reports on documents that were falsified. So, in an ideal world, all perspectives would be considered and eventually, the truth would emerge.
However, the problem arises when all these sources are based on something that is supposedly "common knowledge" but is in fact not true. The best example I can think of offhand is the infamous "I invented the Internet" quote from Al Gore. Even though the transcript of what he actually said is readily available, and those who had a clue figured out what it was that was actually said, the general public accepted that Al Gore said, "I invented the Internet." Even today, most people would agree that Al Gore said that. His opponents and even his supporters said it bolstered his arrogant image, and in an election that was decided by less than a thousand votes, one could argue that it cost him the election. So, even though the truth was accessible, it did not match with what is still today commonly accepted.
So, the fact is that one can find any perspective on anything through the Internet. The problem is: What happens when all those perspectives are based on some unifying falsehood?
If you feel limited by the choices offered by the iPod, why not get a different portable media player?
If you feel limited by the choices offered by the iTunes Music Store, why not use a different online music store?
This would only be a "lock-in" if, say, the iPod was the only portable media player that ran on a Mac, or if the iTunes Music Store was the only way to buy music online through a Mac... but I don't think it would even be then, because if it's that important to you, you could always go buy a Windows box.
... that this article is going two different places at once. One part of the problem is stated here:
[i] "And while students seemed to benefit from limited use of computers at school, those who used them several times per week at school saw their academic performance decline significantly as well.[/i]
And another part is here: [i]From a sample of 175,000 15-year-old students in 31 countries, researchers at the University of Munich announced in November that performance in math and reading had suffered significantly among students who have more than one computer at home.[/i]
Really, these are two separate issues. How to use computers appropriately in the classroom seems to be quickly becoming an issue of much debate, and it's important that teachers do not use computers as a substitute for real teaching.
However, the correlation between poorer grades and more computer use at home is really an issue for parents to resolve with their own children.
While I have a lot of respect for his work, some of his responses to basic questions struck me as plain silly. How is getting a cape supposed to make a big difference in the tedium of leveling? Sure, it's something to move towards, but so is pretty much everything else.
The problem here is larger. Doing stuff over and over and over again is tedious, no matter the game... hell, leveling in Pokemon is downright tedious too. The solution, methinks, lies in making things new and fresh, and making quests interesting and original.
I think he hit upon this in his interview when discussing user-created content. Within the massive user bases that these games have lies a lot of creativity and talent. Granted, most user-created stuff will suck, but there will be a LOT of stuff that is fresh, new, original, and fun to do.
If a game could integrate user-created content into the ongoing quest system, I think it could avoid the tedium of the level grind.
The thing that worries me the most about this policy is the concept of quickly "pigeonholing" customers and treating them a certain way depending on how you have categorized them.
As a young adult, I run into plenty of prejudice among employees and managers (though most of it is annoying rather than seriously detrimental). Would they look at me, and decide, "Here is a young person. He doesn't have a lot of money, so we're not going to waste time helping him find what he wants, since he probably couldn't afford it anyway."
What if they do the same thing based on ethnicity? or noticable disability? or a myriad of other potential factors that go into stereotyping?
All I can do is hope that the free market will sort things out, and prove to Best Buy that this policy is hurtful to customers.
Are LCD Displays Ready For Gaming? LCD displays? Are you going to get the money for them from an ATM machine, after entering your PIN number? Then hook up your computer to a DSL line?
Sorry, but redundant acronyms are a pet peeve of mine.
Slashdot Mirror
Are you a CMU student? I am. This is certainly not a university-wide policy, and I can't think of any class that I or my friends have taken that has this policy. Indeed, many classes (such as the legendarily difficult 15-251, Great Theoretical Ideas In Computer Science) practically require you to work in groups, and woe betide anyone who goes it alone.
Do you just take completely different classes than me or anyone here that I know? Or are you delusional? Or are you just talking out of your ass?
I know the story poster in person - we're both at CMU. The story is actually an attempt to send unique IP addresses to a certain site for an academic assignment. The details of the assignment are here. (Warning, PDF.)
Point well taken. Perhaps the real problem is Legs + High Center Of Mass. Legs would work much better for robots if they were multitudinous, and the mass of the chassis was spread out and close to the ground, which I believe has been shown in some prototypes built at MIT.
In general, stuff in video games is designed to look cool, rather than to be functional. I mean, look at MechWarrior for example. Why would you ever make a combat robot that walks? All you have to do is destroy one of its legs, or, hell, trip it up with a cable. (Of course, there's solid precedent for this.) I'm not saying that this is impossible, but when people announce technologies like this to the media before they undergo substantial testing, it usually means that they need venture capital. Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence, and let's not even go into the Angel Light and God Light (which can "make blind men see and lame men walk").
He gave a lecture at a summer physics program I attended. Really interesting guy, fascinating stuff, but... whatever you do, don't talk to him about the previous BLAST telescope. It also had a two-meter mirror, but this one was made out of glass, (instead of aluminum) cost a million dollars, and shattered on takeoff. He is extremely bitter about this.
Anyways, best of luck to 'em!
...welcome our new, omniscient, Amazonian overlords.
Death by snu-snu!
"Data" is not the plural of "anecdote". Some of the things the submitter was talking about are obviously personal observations, but he was probably referring to stuff like decreasing legroom.
Apparently, the statistics for lost/stolen luggage is about 2%. Doesn't sound like much, but consider that this means that on a flight of a hundred people, two will probably have their luggage lost. Also, this means that you will likely have your luggage lost or stolen once every fifty times you fly... not an issue for me, but my dad travels frequently on business.
Looks like you're right about the prices being lower than in a while, though, according to this. I wouldn't know; I haven't flown in a while.
It's the security thing that's most worrisome to me, though. From what I heard in the other thread, people weren't allowed carry-ons, laptops or other electronics, even books. Considering other changes in aviation security in the past (metal detectors, shoes, explosive sniffers) this may become the norm rather than a temporary measure. I don't know about everyone else here, but to me a six-hour flight (hell, even a two-hour flight) would be intolerable without some of those distractions. I'd rather take the train, but this obviously isn't an option for going to Europe.
If the submitter had bothered to RTFA (I know, I know, "You must be new here") he would see that these articles are about local networks being brought down by lots of users trying to stream World Cup footage at the same, not an "Internet meltdown".
Whether such a meltdown is even possible is another question entirely, but one not covered by these articles.
My gut reaction is that this is a tragedy, but that's just because I got to see Atlantis on the launch-pad when I went to Cape Canaveral in seventh grade. On a non-personal level, this is probably a good choice for the reasons discussed in TFA.
However, I know this is a step in the long-term goal of phasing out the shuttle program altogether, but what is it going to do to NASA's ability to launch missions if it only has two shuttles? The pace is ridiculously slow as it is.
We have to respect the Department of Justice's right to privacy.
-1, Redundant.
My tinfoil hat is off to you, sirrah! You've earned yourself a fan today.
You've got a lot of brass to be saying that around here, mister.
The Internet is the penultimate example of a "free market" information system. Literally anyone who has access to a computer (and this can be just about anyone who has the necessary basic skills, thanks to public access from libraries and such) can have their say in a public forum, and have others see what they've said and sometimes respond with their own opinions.
The obvious advantage of this is that there will always be multiple perspectives on any given subject, from the mainstream to the personal to the radical or absurd. Ideally, this would mean that each person who reads the news online has the ability to weigh various viewpoints, and formulate their own opinion based on these. This can also lead to situations like bloggers bringing down Dan Rather for reports on documents that were falsified. So, in an ideal world, all perspectives would be considered and eventually, the truth would emerge.
However, the problem arises when all these sources are based on something that is supposedly "common knowledge" but is in fact not true. The best example I can think of offhand is the infamous "I invented the Internet" quote from Al Gore. Even though the transcript of what he actually said is readily available, and those who had a clue figured out what it was that was actually said, the general public accepted that Al Gore said, "I invented the Internet." Even today, most people would agree that Al Gore said that. His opponents and even his supporters said it bolstered his arrogant image, and in an election that was decided by less than a thousand votes, one could argue that it cost him the election. So, even though the truth was accessible, it did not match with what is still today commonly accepted.
So, the fact is that one can find any perspective on anything through the Internet. The problem is: What happens when all those perspectives are based on some unifying falsehood?
If you feel limited by the choices offered by the iPod, why not get a different portable media player?
If you feel limited by the choices offered by the iTunes Music Store, why not use a different online music store?
This would only be a "lock-in" if, say, the iPod was the only portable media player that ran on a Mac, or if the iTunes Music Store was the only way to buy music online through a Mac... but I don't think it would even be then, because if it's that important to you, you could always go buy a Windows box.
However, my question to you, the readers of slashdot, is...
How do you think they could have avoided this?
Discuss.
I have a lot of trouble trusting a company with a name that's a terrible pun. "Savings and Clone"? Ow.
...but while they were going through all those 5.7 million lines of code, would it really have killed them to debug them while they were at it??
"PUNCH ME and WIN AN iPOD!"
*smash*
On the sidebar where it says "related links", the first two are "John Patrick Luethe" and "has become the state's largest polluter."
Congratulations, Mr. Luethe!
[/joke]
... that this article is going two different places at once. One part of the problem is stated here:
[i] "And while students seemed to benefit from limited use of computers at school, those who used them several times per week at school saw their academic performance decline significantly as well.[/i]
And another part is here:
[i]From a sample of 175,000 15-year-old students in 31 countries, researchers at the University of Munich announced in November that performance in math and reading had suffered significantly among students who have more than one computer at home.[/i]
Really, these are two separate issues. How to use computers appropriately in the classroom seems to be quickly becoming an issue of much debate, and it's important that teachers do not use computers as a substitute for real teaching.
However, the correlation between poorer grades and more computer use at home is really an issue for parents to resolve with their own children.
I was going to mod this, but there's nothing for "-1, Sick".
While I have a lot of respect for his work, some of his responses to basic questions struck me as plain silly. How is getting a cape supposed to make a big difference in the tedium of leveling? Sure, it's something to move towards, but so is pretty much everything else.
The problem here is larger. Doing stuff over and over and over again is tedious, no matter the game... hell, leveling in Pokemon is downright tedious too. The solution, methinks, lies in making things new and fresh, and making quests interesting and original.
I think he hit upon this in his interview when discussing user-created content. Within the massive user bases that these games have lies a lot of creativity and talent. Granted, most user-created stuff will suck, but there will be a LOT of stuff that is fresh, new, original, and fun to do.
If a game could integrate user-created content into the ongoing quest system, I think it could avoid the tedium of the level grind.
The thing that worries me the most about this policy is the concept of quickly "pigeonholing" customers and treating them a certain way depending on how you have categorized them.
As a young adult, I run into plenty of prejudice among employees and managers (though most of it is annoying rather than seriously detrimental). Would they look at me, and decide, "Here is a young person. He doesn't have a lot of money, so we're not going to waste time helping him find what he wants, since he probably couldn't afford it anyway."
What if they do the same thing based on ethnicity? or noticable disability? or a myriad of other potential factors that go into stereotyping?
All I can do is hope that the free market will sort things out, and prove to Best Buy that this policy is hurtful to customers.
Are LCD Displays Ready For Gaming?
LCD displays? Are you going to get the money for them from an ATM machine, after entering your PIN number? Then hook up your computer to a DSL line?
Sorry, but redundant acronyms are a pet peeve of mine.