well, but the computer simulated toys should be also living according to that definition.
why not be living just because running insiode a computer?
I wwould consider a really sentient consciouss AI (also running inside a computer, without physical body) a living being.
can your computer respond to a temperature or salinity change in a meaningful way? i.e., would it be able to sense danger to itself and move away? would it seek out nutrients, such as electricity?
If it is programmed an equipped with appropriate sensors.. then yes. And it doesn't make it alive. Beside, many living things cannot do such things (eg. sense danger and move away). There are organisms that cannot reproduce (not species, but individuals) - and they are living too... I would say my fried she is not alive because she cannot have children...
if you make something limited (out of Lego bricks, say) that can do all of the above, you'll have created a very rudimentary form of life.
I do not think so. I think that it would soon be feasible to construct mechanical/electronical... device that could accomplish all things simple bacteria can. I am not sure whether it would be alive. I cannot define life, but I not agree with this simple definition. It is an ad hoc definition appropriate at the time when it was developed. Our technical abilities changed since then, but our toys are still not alive.
And about the consciousness - yes I see the problems. And I am an atheist. When I am saying "soul" I do not mean "eternal soul" or something like that. I just feel that there is something that differs living things from technical devices we can imagine now (however advanced). And I also think that this difference can be scientifically described in the future (and we would be able to create real living things then).
high school buiology is oversimplified and to large extent obsolete.
imagine a simple electronic thingie which can respond to stimuli (my computer can do that), but is it alive?
imagine a robotic factory programmed to replicate itself - is it alive just because it replicates itself and not cars or whatever? i think not.
defining life is not that easy
consciousness may be? but i am one of those that are sure that animals have "souls" and are consciouss as well as plants and may be even bacteria... but... we cannot mesure level of consciousness
Some vendors, for example Novell, ship and support 2.0 (beta) as a stable release. OO.o 2.0 Novell edition was included in winter in SUSE Linux 9.3, and it is included in the current SUSE Linux 10 (aka openSUSE). I use it the whole year 2005 and I hadnt any problem with it. It is rock solid and much better than the 1.x line.
try it. for example search for "swans" : you got 1 510 000 results, the first one is the SWANS rock band site. search for "swan" then - 8 550 000 results, the first is some SWAN social network - the rockers are not on the first page at all
what does that mean? creative commons offer many different licences, from public domain like, through open source, to closed, proprietary licences. That statement does not convey any useful info.
may be shooting nigerian diplomats to death by victims of this fraud (as actually happened in Prague) helped to resolve the issue
but i do not think that even such crimes give an excuse for killing
linux may be a democratic/anarchistic pile of crap, but windows is a totalitarian nightmare.
whether i am looking at it from purely practical POV or ideological POV, i choose that democratic crap. it works and doesnt take away my freedom
I am not afraid of such attacks but their consequences. Well, there are 3 solutions:
1) remove the cause of terrorism (whatever it is)
2) live in constant dager of such attacks
3) remove our freedoms, human rights, create safe, police states..
I am somewhat afraid our governments will choose the number 3.
what a troll you are, not only linux _users_, but also mac os users and many others wont use longhorn. most importantly windows 9x and xp users. i see about a dozen bfu computers a week. most of them still use win 98. what is a chance of upgrading to longhorn there? zero.
it was quite a stupid name, because medulla is a feminine name. americans really do not learn a bit of latin? seems like a real bad system of education.
you may redefine shortcuts in gimp as you like - like in photoshop for example. you may define them on the fly - which makes them much more useful than photoshop shortcuts in fact
Governments of the Industrial World, you weary giants of flesh and steel, I come from Cyberspace, the new home of Mind. On behalf of the future, I ask you of the past to leave us alone. You are not welcome among us. You have no sovereignty where we gather.
We have no elected government, nor are we likely to have one, so I address you with no greater authority than that with which liberty itself always speaks. I declare the global social space we are building to be naturally independent of the tyrannies you seek to impose on us. You have no moral right to rule us nor do you possess any methods of enforcement we have true reason to fear.
Governments derive their just powers from the consent of the governed. You have neither solicited nor received ours. We did not invite you. You do not know us, nor do you know our world. Cyberspace does not lie within your borders. Do not think that you can build it, as though it were a public construction project. You cannot. It is an act of nature and it grows itself through our collective actions.
You have not engaged in our great and gathering conversation, nor did you create the wealth of our marketplaces. You do not know our culture, our ethics, or the unwritten codes that already provide our society more order than could be obtained by any of your impositions.
You claim there are problems among us that you need to solve. You use this claim as an excuse to invade our precincts. Many of these problems don't exist. Where there are real conflicts, where there are wrongs, we will identify them and address them by our means. We are forming our own Social Contract . This governance will arise according to the conditions of our world, not yours. Our world is different.
Cyberspace consists of transactions, relationships, and thought itself, arrayed like a standing wave in the web of our communications. Ours is a world that is both everywhere and nowhere, but it is not where bodies live.
We are creating a world that all may enter without privilege or prejudice accorded by race, economic power, military force, or station of birth.
We are creating a world where anyone, anywhere may express his or her beliefs, no matter how singular, without fear of being coerced into silence or conformity.
Your legal concepts of property, expression, identity, movement, and context do not apply to us. They are all based on matter, and there is no matter here.
Our identities have no bodies, so, unlike you, we cannot obtain order by physical coercion. We believe that from ethics, enlightened self-interest, and the commonweal, our governance will emerge . Our identities may be distributed across many of your jurisdictions. The only law that all our constituent cultures would generally recognize is the Golden Rule. We hope we will be able to build our particular solutions on that basis. But we cannot accept the solutions you are attempting to impose.
In the United States, you have today created a law, the Telecommunications Reform Act, which repudiates your own Constitution and insults the dreams of Jefferson, Washington, Mill, Madison, DeToqueville, and Brandeis. These dreams must now be born anew in us.
You are terrified of your own children, since they are natives in a world where you will always be immigrants. Because you fear them, you entrust your bureaucracies with the parental responsibilities you are too cowardly to confront yourselves. In our world, all the sentiments and expressions of humanity, from the debasing to the angelic, are parts of a seamless whole, the global conversation of bits. We cannot separate the air that chokes from the air upon which wings beat.
In China, Germany, France, Russia, Singapore, Italy and the United States, you are trying to ward off the virus of liberty by erecting guard posts at the frontiers of Cyberspace. These may keep out the contagion for a small time, but they will not work in a world that will soon be blanketed in bit-bearing media.
Y'CbCr, also known as YUV, is the color space used by film editing equipment. Y represents luminance, while Cb and Cr are color difference signals.
Consumer DV (digital video) cameras typically use a 4:1:1 Y'CbCr format, in which luminance is sampled for each pixel, while Cb and Cr are sampled at every fourth pixel. SD (standard definition) cameras use a 4:2:2 format. HD cameras can use 4:2:2, or a 4:2:0 format based on "spatial" samples of 2x2-pixel squares. Dual Link, however, uses a 4:4:4 technique."
Slashdot Mirror
well, but the computer simulated toys should be also living according to that definition. why not be living just because running insiode a computer? I wwould consider a really sentient consciouss AI (also running inside a computer, without physical body) a living being.
can your computer respond to a temperature or salinity change in a meaningful way? i.e., would it be able to sense danger to itself and move away? would it seek out nutrients, such as electricity? If it is programmed an equipped with appropriate sensors.. then yes. And it doesn't make it alive. Beside, many living things cannot do such things (eg. sense danger and move away). There are organisms that cannot reproduce (not species, but individuals) - and they are living too... I would say my fried she is not alive because she cannot have children... if you make something limited (out of Lego bricks, say) that can do all of the above, you'll have created a very rudimentary form of life. I do not think so. I think that it would soon be feasible to construct mechanical/electronical... device that could accomplish all things simple bacteria can. I am not sure whether it would be alive. I cannot define life, but I not agree with this simple definition. It is an ad hoc definition appropriate at the time when it was developed. Our technical abilities changed since then, but our toys are still not alive. And about the consciousness - yes I see the problems. And I am an atheist. When I am saying "soul" I do not mean "eternal soul" or something like that. I just feel that there is something that differs living things from technical devices we can imagine now (however advanced). And I also think that this difference can be scientifically described in the future (and we would be able to create real living things then).
high school buiology is oversimplified and to large extent obsolete. imagine a simple electronic thingie which can respond to stimuli (my computer can do that), but is it alive? imagine a robotic factory programmed to replicate itself - is it alive just because it replicates itself and not cars or whatever? i think not. defining life is not that easy consciousness may be? but i am one of those that are sure that animals have "souls" and are consciouss as well as plants and may be even bacteria... but... we cannot mesure level of consciousness
Some vendors, for example Novell, ship and support 2.0 (beta) as a stable release. OO.o 2.0 Novell edition was included in winter in SUSE Linux 9.3, and it is included in the current SUSE Linux 10 (aka openSUSE). I use it the whole year 2005 and I hadnt any problem with it. It is rock solid and much better than the 1.x line.
try it. for example search for "swans" : you got 1 510 000 results, the first one is the SWANS rock band site. search for "swan" then - 8 550 000 results, the first is some SWAN social network - the rockers are not on the first page at all
what does that mean? creative commons offer many different licences, from public domain like, through open source, to closed, proprietary licences. That statement does not convey any useful info.
by simply opening an airlock to already evacuated vacuum chamber?
it happens other way around too. victims killing nigerian diplomats...
may be shooting nigerian diplomats to death by victims of this fraud (as actually happened in Prague) helped to resolve the issue but i do not think that even such crimes give an excuse for killing
linux may be a democratic/anarchistic pile of crap, but windows is a totalitarian nightmare. whether i am looking at it from purely practical POV or ideological POV, i choose that democratic crap. it works and doesnt take away my freedom
nope. anonymity is important. static IPs for everyone that wants one. anonymity for anyone who needs it
only few things are more annoing than to have watch on your arm. i hate that feeling.
I am not afraid of such attacks but their consequences. Well, there are 3 solutions: 1) remove the cause of terrorism (whatever it is) 2) live in constant dager of such attacks 3) remove our freedoms, human rights, create safe, police states.. I am somewhat afraid our governments will choose the number 3.
is a list of representatives voting FOR the patents available somewhere? I would like to know who voted YES
whats wrong with having sex with 17 yo girl? i am amazed! i do that every other day!
what a troll you are, not only linux _users_, but also mac os users and many others wont use longhorn. most importantly windows 9x and xp users. i see about a dozen bfu computers a week. most of them still use win 98. what is a chance of upgrading to longhorn there? zero.
it was quite a stupid name, because medulla is a feminine name. americans really do not learn a bit of latin? seems like a real bad system of education.
not in all countries, not all music is played in the usa
if you want to make Eris laugh, make plans
you may redefine shortcuts in gimp as you like - like in photoshop for example. you may define them on the fly - which makes them much more useful than photoshop shortcuts in fact
Governments of the Industrial World, you weary giants of flesh and steel, I come from Cyberspace, the new home of Mind. On behalf of the future, I ask you of the past to leave us alone. You are not welcome among us. You have no sovereignty where we gather.
We have no elected government, nor are we likely to have one, so I address you with no greater authority than that with which liberty itself always speaks. I declare the global social space we are building to be naturally independent of the tyrannies you seek to impose on us. You have no moral right to rule us nor do you possess any methods of enforcement we have true reason to fear.
Governments derive their just powers from the consent of the governed. You have neither solicited nor received ours. We did not invite you. You do not know us, nor do you know our world. Cyberspace does not lie within your borders. Do not think that you can build it, as though it were a public construction project. You cannot. It is an act of nature and it grows itself through our collective actions.
You have not engaged in our great and gathering conversation, nor did you create the wealth of our marketplaces. You do not know our culture, our ethics, or the unwritten codes that already provide our society more order than could be obtained by any of your impositions.
You claim there are problems among us that you need to solve. You use this claim as an excuse to invade our precincts. Many of these problems don't exist. Where there are real conflicts, where there are wrongs, we will identify them and address them by our means. We are forming our own Social Contract . This governance will arise according to the conditions of our world, not yours. Our world is different.
Cyberspace consists of transactions, relationships, and thought itself, arrayed like a standing wave in the web of our communications. Ours is a world that is both everywhere and nowhere, but it is not where bodies live.
We are creating a world that all may enter without privilege or prejudice accorded by race, economic power, military force, or station of birth.
We are creating a world where anyone, anywhere may express his or her beliefs, no matter how singular, without fear of being coerced into silence or conformity.
Your legal concepts of property, expression, identity, movement, and context do not apply to us. They are all based on matter, and there is no matter here.
Our identities have no bodies, so, unlike you, we cannot obtain order by physical coercion. We believe that from ethics, enlightened self-interest, and the commonweal, our governance will emerge . Our identities may be distributed across many of your jurisdictions. The only law that all our constituent cultures would generally recognize is the Golden Rule. We hope we will be able to build our particular solutions on that basis. But we cannot accept the solutions you are attempting to impose.
In the United States, you have today created a law, the Telecommunications Reform Act, which repudiates your own Constitution and insults the dreams of Jefferson, Washington, Mill, Madison, DeToqueville, and Brandeis. These dreams must now be born anew in us.
You are terrified of your own children, since they are natives in a world where you will always be immigrants. Because you fear them, you entrust your bureaucracies with the parental responsibilities you are too cowardly to confront yourselves. In our world, all the sentiments and expressions of humanity, from the debasing to the angelic, are parts of a seamless whole, the global conversation of bits. We cannot separate the air that chokes from the air upon which wings beat.
In China, Germany, France, Russia, Singapore, Italy and the United States, you are trying to ward off the virus of liberty by erecting guard posts at the frontiers of Cyberspace. These may keep out the contagion for a small time, but they will not work in a world that will soon be blanketed in bit-bearing media.
Your increasingly obsolete in
CS as in Creative Suite. CS = "8", CS2 = "9"
have you read the article?
"But what about "4:4:4 Y'CbCr"?!
Y'CbCr, also known as YUV, is the color space used by film editing equipment. Y represents luminance, while Cb and Cr are color difference signals.
Consumer DV (digital video) cameras typically use a 4:1:1 Y'CbCr format, in which luminance is sampled for each pixel, while Cb and Cr are sampled at every fourth pixel. SD (standard definition) cameras use a 4:2:2 format. HD cameras can use 4:2:2, or a 4:2:0 format based on "spatial" samples of 2x2-pixel squares. Dual Link, however, uses a 4:4:4 technique."
you haven't closed head tag! use VIM ;)
all ... except europa ? where it is from?