Did you see this one that hypothesizes that modifications to microtubules inside neurons are the mechanism for memory (and possibly computation), with each neuron possibly storing many "bytes" of information?
Pressure sensors come in different number of bits, I see everything from 9 to 24 bits with a user-configurable one that can be set to 9, 10, 11, up to 16. They don't have to be in multiples of 8.
Some quick googling reveals sensors of 9 bits, 10 bits, 12 bits, 14 bits, 16 bits, 18 bits, 20 bits, 22 bits, 24 bits, etc. I see a pressure sensor with a user-configurable range of 9 to 16 bits.
If your internal app has so many bugs that reporting bugs efficiently is a problem, then the problem is yours. Anything we do internally gets rolled out with very few bugs because we dev and test properly. Yes there are still some that get through but the volume is so low that we can personally walk through it with the users and see what is happening.
I'm normally not into this type of stuff (collecting), but I saw a movie at his house once and he had a display with some items from some movies - it was actually kind of fun to see the originals on display. And I liked that it was just a few select items - when I go to museums there is so much stuff the novelty seems to be diminished for each individual item.
Ok, here is a challenge for you then: can you name one single software patent that rises to the level of patentability?
I can't (there may be some in cryptography, optimization or image identification types of areas, but not in run of the mill applications that we all use).
And don't take this as egotistical, but myself and other skilled developers churn out these solutions in our sleep and we don't think anything of it because to a skilled developer it's almost all "average", it's just what we do.
You can't just focus on neurons and their connections. There are 10x more glial cells in the brain and more and more research is discovering that they not only perform their basic role to support metabolism and structure, they also communicate with themselves, communicate with neurons and are an integral part of cognition.
In addition, they are finding that chemical communication between cells is not point to point contained within the synapse only. Cells are swimming in chemical and electrical communication that is most likely far more complex than a neural network represents.
I you go read the magnitude of articles surrounding the basic building blocks of these problems, I think you will change your tune. After spending the last decade doing hobby work in this same area and reading any published article that looked interesting, I have come away with a better understanding of the magnitude of the problems that need to be solved and the amount of time people are devoting to these things, and the shear amount of smart brain power being used to tackle these problems. There is no one person in the world that has any where close to the mental bandwidth to properly understand and solve all of the "intelligence" problems that evolution has been working on for the last few hundred million years. It's a big job.
I agree but understand the sentiment. If you want to create something, and you want to be the person who created it, it's frustrating to see others doing the same because maybe they will get there first.
I work on this same stuff as a hobby (simulated creatures with evolved neural nets, etc.) and it's fun, but a few things I've learned over the last decade:
1) There are a ton of people researching basic building block stuff and making progress and we won't be able to jump to the higher levels (of "intelligence") without those basic building blocks. In other words, I would be naive if I thought I was personally going to suddenly evolve a basic breakthrough in my simulations.
2) Math. Ultimately you can't escape the fact that math is at the heart of real progress. Sure I can construct something and evolve it and see some excellent results, but every time I read about progress in things like recurrent neural networks, it's clear that a mathematical understanding of what is going on is critical to logging something away as a useful building block.
3) It's a huge problem and takes lots of people. For my stuff, I purposely set my goals low and achievable, in other words, I'm not trying to create AI, just want to evolve a reasonable dynamic problem solving creature within a very limited domain. Even that requires a number of tricky problems to be solved that I could spend most of my life on and maybe never get there - for example: how do you encode a brain structure through a DNA like mechanism in a way that it isn't completely explicit regarding every single neuron and connection, yet the structure is substantially "close enough" that the brain can quickly learn the details from the environment it's placed in and function properly. Even on a small scale this is a difficult problem.
The 'Recycle Bin' or 'Trash' is not used properly by anyone because it adds an unnecessary step.
I just want to cry when I read posts like this. You really think you are qualified to say whether the recycle bin is "not properly used by anyone"? Is there a mathematical proof showing that your way is the one and only proper way to interact with a computer?
He also presented a valid and functional reason to disable it.
No, he presented a ridiculous reason. If he worked for me and didn't immediately grasp why it's a poor idea once I explained it, then he would be on his way out the door.
so if an admin is pissing you off stop bitching and send it up the tree. They are not your boss.
I am the admin's boss and I'm saying the same thing I tell my employees: we serve the user, it is our job to empower them to get their job done more efficiently. Making the decision for the users that the trash can icon is no longer allowed on the desktop is not a good use of time and makes the incorrect assumption that any one person in the organization can know the best way for each person to do their job.
Note that this is not the same as saying there should be no controls, just that this particular example is just plain wrong.
Nothing you said is a contradiction to my post. "Serving" the user means assisting and empowering the user to do their job more efficiently (which has nothing to do with Bonzi Buddy).
Furthermore, company policy is different from a misguided admin creating their own policy.
As I said:
"There are some things that each side is correct in putting their foot down and drawing a line in the sand - and this one is firmly owned by the users."
Slashdot Mirror
Did you see this one that hypothesizes that modifications to microtubules inside neurons are the mechanism for memory (and possibly computation), with each neuron possibly storing many "bytes" of information?
http://www.ploscompbiol.org/article/info:doi/10.1371/journal.pcbi.1002421
60% of the time
Maybe a tsunami is rare, but they still have Mothra and Godzilla over there, so it's probably worth it
Good point.
Pressure sensors come in different number of bits, I see everything from 9 to 24 bits with a user-configurable one that can be set to 9, 10, 11, up to 16. They don't have to be in multiples of 8.
Some quick googling reveals sensors of 9 bits, 10 bits, 12 bits, 14 bits, 16 bits, 18 bits, 20 bits, 22 bits, 24 bits, etc. I see a pressure sensor with a user-configurable range of 9 to 16 bits.
Maybe "that guy" was right.
If your internal app has so many bugs that reporting bugs efficiently is a problem, then the problem is yours. Anything we do internally gets rolled out with very few bugs because we dev and test properly. Yes there are still some that get through but the volume is so low that we can personally walk through it with the users and see what is happening.
WOT is showing that link is "red"...get it...
I'm normally not into this type of stuff (collecting), but I saw a movie at his house once and he had a display with some items from some movies - it was actually kind of fun to see the originals on display. And I liked that it was just a few select items - when I go to museums there is so much stuff the novelty seems to be diminished for each individual item.
Other names they considered that were equally bad:
1) FreEble
2) !!_//[%%%
3) Bing
3) xkCQQT
As Sony president I can see you are aggressively utilizing all avenues of communication and I applaud your efforts!
If you don't even know what city WWU is in, why would you post on slashdot? Please respond and explain yourself, thank you.
If you are unable to think of examples in which a GUI is better suited to configuration than a CLI, then I think you have TTV syndrome.
The rest of us see pros/cons on both sides of the issue.
Oh yes of course now that you explain it that way it's clear how totally patentable that should be.
"That's it. The end. Respectfully, your complaint is out of pure ignorance of how patent law DOESN'T work." - fixed that for you
Ok, here is a challenge for you then: can you name one single software patent that rises to the level of patentability?
I can't (there may be some in cryptography, optimization or image identification types of areas, but not in run of the mill applications that we all use).
And don't take this as egotistical, but myself and other skilled developers churn out these solutions in our sleep and we don't think anything of it because to a skilled developer it's almost all "average", it's just what we do.
Agreed. That was the first movie that came to mind for me.
You can't just focus on neurons and their connections. There are 10x more glial cells in the brain and more and more research is discovering that they not only perform their basic role to support metabolism and structure, they also communicate with themselves, communicate with neurons and are an integral part of cognition.
In addition, they are finding that chemical communication between cells is not point to point contained within the synapse only. Cells are swimming in chemical and electrical communication that is most likely far more complex than a neural network represents.
I you go read the magnitude of articles surrounding the basic building blocks of these problems, I think you will change your tune. After spending the last decade doing hobby work in this same area and reading any published article that looked interesting, I have come away with a better understanding of the magnitude of the problems that need to be solved and the amount of time people are devoting to these things, and the shear amount of smart brain power being used to tackle these problems. There is no one person in the world that has any where close to the mental bandwidth to properly understand and solve all of the "intelligence" problems that evolution has been working on for the last few hundred million years. It's a big job.
I agree but understand the sentiment. If you want to create something, and you want to be the person who created it, it's frustrating to see others doing the same because maybe they will get there first.
I work on this same stuff as a hobby (simulated creatures with evolved neural nets, etc.) and it's fun, but a few things I've learned over the last decade:
1) There are a ton of people researching basic building block stuff and making progress and we won't be able to jump to the higher levels (of "intelligence") without those basic building blocks. In other words, I would be naive if I thought I was personally going to suddenly evolve a basic breakthrough in my simulations.
2) Math. Ultimately you can't escape the fact that math is at the heart of real progress. Sure I can construct something and evolve it and see some excellent results, but every time I read about progress in things like recurrent neural networks, it's clear that a mathematical understanding of what is going on is critical to logging something away as a useful building block.
3) It's a huge problem and takes lots of people. For my stuff, I purposely set my goals low and achievable, in other words, I'm not trying to create AI, just want to evolve a reasonable dynamic problem solving creature within a very limited domain. Even that requires a number of tricky problems to be solved that I could spend most of my life on and maybe never get there - for example: how do you encode a brain structure through a DNA like mechanism in a way that it isn't completely explicit regarding every single neuron and connection, yet the structure is substantially "close enough" that the brain can quickly learn the details from the environment it's placed in and function properly. Even on a small scale this is a difficult problem.
The 'Recycle Bin' or 'Trash' is not used properly by anyone because it adds an unnecessary step.
I just want to cry when I read posts like this. You really think you are qualified to say whether the recycle bin is "not properly used by anyone"? Is there a mathematical proof showing that your way is the one and only proper way to interact with a computer?
Just because you can't control your own behavior doesn't mean that there is a problem with the UI or that your experiences are close to universal.
He also presented a valid and functional reason to disable it.
No, he presented a ridiculous reason. If he worked for me and didn't immediately grasp why it's a poor idea once I explained it, then he would be on his way out the door.
so if an admin is pissing you off stop bitching and send it up the tree. They are not your boss.
I am the admin's boss and I'm saying the same thing I tell my employees: we serve the user, it is our job to empower them to get their job done more efficiently. Making the decision for the users that the trash can icon is no longer allowed on the desktop is not a good use of time and makes the incorrect assumption that any one person in the organization can know the best way for each person to do their job.
Note that this is not the same as saying there should be no controls, just that this particular example is just plain wrong.
Nothing you said is a contradiction to my post. "Serving" the user means assisting and empowering the user to do their job more efficiently (which has nothing to do with Bonzi Buddy).
Furthermore, company policy is different from a misguided admin creating their own policy.
As I said:
"There are some things that each side is correct in putting their foot down and drawing a line in the sand - and this one is firmly owned by the users."