Well, I tried. The C&T 65555 video driver had a really bad habit of turning the backlight off on my laptop monitor, so I could see *nothing*. Worse, it switched to that driver 1/3 of the way through the GUI part of the install, so I thought it had died or something. Pretty that was not.
Apparently we have forgotten that GNU does *not* mean GNU/Linux. The point I think that is trying to be put across is this: 1. Linux should not be dumbed down to the point where the elite no longer like it. 2. (This is the ugly one here) Linux should not be used by a computer newbie who is not willing to learn. Therefore a *new* OS based on the GNU utilities should be made. Then there would be Linux, HURDS, and, oh, GNUI (GNUI's not a User Interface), which would be an X-compatible GUI based kernel with all the easyness that Windows users are supposed to be receiving.
Idunno. The neat thing about brains (and neural nets) is that no two people/nets will learn exactly the same things. Yes, they would have to be trained seperately; the idea is to make three different nets, not three identical nets (although, given a little time, these nets should start thinking differently anyway). Besides, while you would teach each net everything, in a real application you would stress different aspects to each net. That way, one really knows navigation, one really knows life support, one really knows maintenance, etc. But, since they all know a little bit of everything, if the main one screws up, the other two can point it out.
If we model a computer after a brain, it will make mistakes.
The whole "flying into the sun" thing could be averted by installing three such nets, and have them try to agree. Then, one of three things would happen:
1. One would think, "hey, let's fly into the sun." It tells the other two, because the ship is programmed to get instructions from two nets, and the other two say, "wowe, buddy, that's a square, not a planet. Were you off the day they said planets were shaped like spheres?" Or vice versa, and into the sun we go.
2. One would think, "hey, let's fly into the sun." The other two say no, so it takes over and flies into the sun while the other two desperately try to save themselves somehow.
3. One would think, "hey, let's fly into the sun." The second one would say no, and the third would say Idunno. The whole net freezes, and the ship keeps going straight until it runs into Alpha Centauri.
This is sort of like putting three people in charge of flying the ship. I would still trust this more than putting a normal computer in charge, because if something happens that the programmers haven't thought of, you are bound to die.
The Lord DebtAngel, Lord and Sacred Prince of all you owe
The WWW *will* become self limiting. Yes, geeks like us will be building more and more web pages. But more and more normal people (you didn't think you were normal, did you?) will not. Also, as resources start getting tight, some of those wonderful "calling cards" will get wiped. You may no longer need them. Somebody may be willing to pay you for the domain name (okay, that would cause more sites). The admin may decide one day that since the site got no hits in six months, it's gone (think GeoCities).
Using the tree analogy: - Yes, the tree will get a *lot* bigger. - Yes, the tree can only get so big. - Yes, leaves (pages) and branches (sites) will fall off and hit the WWG (world-wide ground). - Yes, there is a gardener, but he's only interested in a branch or two. - No, I haven't gotten much sleep lately:).
The Lord DebtAngel Lord and Sacred Prince of all you owe
I am really tired of the whole ST big ship thing. The Defiant, their smallest whooping ship, needs 50 crew, and even Voyager's Delta Flyer needs four people. Let's get us a show in North America based on the "one over many" concept, where one man/woman/furry blue creature from Alpha Centauri (oops, some Hitch-Hiker slipped in there) can make a real difference to the universe.
Oh, and nowhere in the universe should I be able to find Minmei.
I take it you never watched Babylon 5. The sheer amount of ripoffs (DS9 was a ripoff of B5, by the way) is astounding:
Paraphrased quote from jms (the creator of B5):
"We pitch the idea of a space station. They reject it, but then there's a Star Trek with a Space Station. We give them a ship (the White Star), they get a ship (the Defiant), we get a telepath named Lyta, they get a Dabo girl named Leeta. We use all CGI FX, they use the same FX house. It's just scary."
The whole Dominion conflict was the last straw for me, the big B5 fan. I stopped watching DS9 after that (mostly because instead of a fight of good vs. evil turned evil vs. evil vs. the little guy) it was a fight of us vs. them, which is boring as hell, especially after the second year of it.
Blizzard's games just take a long time, period. Since their games take a long time to make, their ports take a long time to make. Whether this is because of high Quality Assurance, low programmer productivity, or both is anybody's guess.
Oh okay, I thought the CBSC actually kicked them out. My bad.
On a side note, the South Park movie was only rated AA (about the same as PG13) in Canada. Apparently our regulators have a sense of humour, and aren't as insulted by potty mouths. Unless, of course, there are racial slurs involved; mind you, racial slurs are not funny, they're just stupid (I, being half Japanese, have been called a Paki far too much for my liking. You figure that one out).
Just thought I'd reply to help clear up some stuff I've already said:
1. The Berne convention is not that new. All kinds of countries (70 some-odd, including Canada) were on board in 1985, when the book I was referencing from in my previous posts was published.
This may or may not be true, but I remember reading it in a legal book about copyrights:
If you live in a country that supports the Berne convention, you have a copyright to any materials you ever write. Canada is part of the Berne Convention; The United States is not.
In order to have your works copyrighted in the United States, you have to put the following:
Otherwise, you have no copyright to the information. You probably still have the right to sue, because in North America you can sue for anything. And since you posted to/. , I should think a formal apology is forthcoming (or the site will be/.'d to death).
Well, it's safe to assume that nobody takes this guy seriously. I also think he hopes that's true, because if somebody at GeoCities takes this thing seriously they're gonna boot him off and tell him to pay stupid amounts of money to his ISP to get a commercial account:).
--- A person is smart. People are stupid. --- (and no, I don't know what that's from)
Only one problem with that post: Canadian regulators are not that smart either. Sure, this is more of a problem with the CRTC than with the CBSC, but still...
...and I thought that because of Howard Stern Q107 is no longer a part of the CBSC. Oh well.
--- A person is smart. People are stupid. --- (and no, I have no idea where that is from)
Slashdot Mirror
Well, I tried. The C&T 65555 video driver had a really bad habit of turning the backlight off on my laptop monitor, so I could see *nothing*. Worse, it switched to that driver 1/3 of the way through the GUI part of the install, so I thought it had died or something. Pretty that was not.
Apparently we have forgotten that GNU does *not* mean GNU/Linux. The point I think that is trying to be put across is this: 1. Linux should not be dumbed down to the point where the elite no longer like it. 2. (This is the ugly one here) Linux should not be used by a computer newbie who is not willing to learn. Therefore a *new* OS based on the GNU utilities should be made. Then there would be Linux, HURDS, and, oh, GNUI (GNUI's not a User Interface), which would be an X-compatible GUI based kernel with all the easyness that Windows users are supposed to be receiving.
Idunno. The neat thing about brains (and neural nets) is that no two people/nets will learn exactly the same things. Yes, they would have to be trained seperately; the idea is to make three different nets, not three identical nets (although, given a little time, these nets should start thinking differently anyway). Besides, while you would teach each net everything, in a real application you would stress different aspects to each net. That way, one really knows navigation, one really knows life support, one really knows maintenance, etc. But, since they all know a little bit of everything, if the main one screws up, the other two can point it out.
Okay, so basically what you're saying is:
If we model a computer after a brain, it will make mistakes.
The whole "flying into the sun" thing could be averted by installing three such nets, and have them try to agree. Then, one of three things would happen:
1. One would think, "hey, let's fly into the sun." It tells the other two, because the ship is programmed to get instructions from two nets, and the other two say, "wowe, buddy, that's a square, not a planet. Were you off the day they said planets were shaped like spheres?" Or vice versa, and into the sun we go.
2. One would think, "hey, let's fly into the sun." The other two say no, so it takes over and flies into the sun while the other two desperately try to save themselves somehow.
3. One would think, "hey, let's fly into the sun." The second one would say no, and the third would say Idunno. The whole net freezes, and the ship keeps going straight until it runs into Alpha Centauri.
This is sort of like putting three people in charge of flying the ship. I would still trust this more than putting a normal computer in charge, because if something happens that the programmers haven't thought of, you are bound to die.
The Lord DebtAngel, Lord and Sacred Prince of all you owe
The WWW *will* become self limiting. Yes, geeks like us will be building more and more web pages. But more and more normal people (you didn't think you were normal, did you?) will not. Also, as resources start getting tight, some of those wonderful "calling cards" will get wiped. You may no longer need them. Somebody may be willing to pay you for the domain name (okay, that would cause more sites). The admin may decide one day that since the site got no hits in six months, it's gone (think GeoCities).
:).
Using the tree analogy:
- Yes, the tree will get a *lot* bigger.
- Yes, the tree can only get so big.
- Yes, leaves (pages) and branches (sites) will fall off and hit the WWG (world-wide ground).
- Yes, there is a gardener, but he's only interested in a branch or two.
- No, I haven't gotten much sleep lately
The Lord DebtAngel
Lord and Sacred Prince of all you owe
I am really tired of the whole ST big ship thing. The Defiant, their smallest whooping ship, needs 50 crew, and even Voyager's Delta Flyer needs four people. Let's get us a show in North America based on the "one over many" concept, where one man/woman/furry blue creature from Alpha Centauri (oops, some Hitch-Hiker slipped in there) can make a real difference to the universe.
Oh, and nowhere in the universe should I be able to find Minmei.
Crazy anime fan, the Lord DebtAngel
I take it you never watched Babylon 5. The sheer amount of ripoffs (DS9 was a ripoff of B5, by the way) is astounding:
Paraphrased quote from jms (the creator of B5):
"We pitch the idea of a space station. They reject it, but then there's a Star Trek with a Space Station. We give them a ship (the White Star), they get a ship (the Defiant), we get a telepath named Lyta, they get a Dabo girl named Leeta. We use all CGI FX, they use the same FX house. It's just scary."
The whole Dominion conflict was the last straw for me, the big B5 fan. I stopped watching DS9 after that (mostly because instead of a fight of good vs. evil turned evil vs. evil vs. the little guy) it was a fight of us vs. them, which is boring as hell, especially after the second year of it.
Blizzard's games just take a long time, period. Since their games take a long time to make, their ports take a long time to make. Whether this is because of high Quality Assurance, low programmer productivity, or both is anybody's guess.
(Yes, I know this is really off topic)
Oh okay, I thought the CBSC actually kicked them out. My bad.
On a side note, the South Park movie was only rated AA (about the same as PG13) in Canada. Apparently our regulators have a sense of humour, and aren't as insulted by potty mouths. Unless, of course, there are racial slurs involved; mind you, racial slurs are not funny, they're just stupid (I, being half Japanese, have been called a Paki far too much for my liking. You figure that one out).
Just thought I'd reply to help clear up some stuff I've already said:
1. The Berne convention is not that new. All kinds of countries (70 some-odd, including Canada) were on board in 1985, when the book I was referencing from in my previous posts was published.
2. I had not realized that the US had signed on.
3. Throwing on a © is always a good idea. If nothing else, it makes your work look a lot more professional, and makes lawsuits a hell of a lot easier to win (lawyers can be such a pain at times).
--- A person is smart. People are dumb. ---
I already posted this to another thread, but I think it bears repeating (especially if it's true; I only read it in a legal text):
:).
If the original poster is an American, and didn't throw a © notice on it, it's not copyrighted! Mind you, I don't think the plagiarist can turn around and claim © without the original person's permission. This wil certainly make an excellent precedent case
This post © 1999 The Lord DebtAngel. Permission is given to quote from this post, so long as the respondent gives The Lord DebtAngel reasonable acknowledgement, and does not claim copyright to said post.
--- A person is smart. People are dumb. ---
This may or may not be true, but I remember reading it in a legal book about copyrights:
/. , I should think a formal apology is forthcoming (or the site will be /.'d to death).
If you live in a country that supports the Berne convention, you have a copyright to any materials you ever write. Canada is part of the Berne Convention; The United States is not.
In order to have your works copyrighted in the United States, you have to put the following:
Copyright © 1999 The Lord DebtAngel (use your real name of course).
Otherwise, you have no copyright to the information. You probably still have the right to sue, because in North America you can sue for anything. And since you posted to
--- A person is smart. People are stupid. ---
Well, it's safe to assume that nobody takes this guy seriously. I also think he hopes that's true, because if somebody at GeoCities takes this thing seriously they're gonna boot him off and tell him to pay stupid amounts of money to his ISP to get a commercial account :).
--- A person is smart. People are stupid. ---
(and no, I don't know what that's from)
1. This was not a lawsuit (but that has been said before). This is a complaint.
2. The regulators tore into this woman like a fresh piece of meat. They basically called her a bloody idiot and told her to go away.
3. There are an awful lot of Southern Baptists that are just as bad. Only they come in groups.
--- A person is smart. People are stupid. ---
(and no, I don't know what that is from)
Only one problem with that post: Canadian regulators are not that smart either. Sure, this is more of a problem with the CRTC than with the CBSC, but still...
...and I thought that because of Howard Stern Q107 is no longer a part of the CBSC. Oh well.
--- A person is smart. People are stupid. ---
(and no, I have no idea where that is from)