It's more like using a GPLed compiler to write proprietary software - improvements to the tool itself must be released under the same license, but things built with the tool can be released under more restrictive licenses.
Dr. Jefferson said that while users of the gene-splicing technology would be required to put any improvements they made into the common pool, companies and universities would be allowed to patent any products they made using the technology, like a genetically modified crop.
I guess BIOS is at the stage GNU was at 20 years ago: first create the assembler, then the compiler, then the basic utilities, then the applications... hopefully someone will use your compiler (and your text editor) to write a kernel.:-) But I wonder how far GNU would have got if AT&T or Sun had had an army of aggressive lawyers brandishing software patents?
I'm inclined to agree - a sniffer dog barking gives probable cause for a search. But I don't agree with the court's conclusion that there's less expectation of privacy if you're committing a crime. Probable cause is based on what the officer knows, not on what you know, otherwise it becomes a meaningless concept. There should only be a reduced expectation of privacy if the officer has reason to suspect that you're involved in a crime... which, of course, is already the law and doesn't require a new precedent.
Besides, that'll just push ip-layer encryption (IPSec) into production faster.
The problem is that most people don't know why they should care about privacy (former East Germans excepted), so there's not much demand for ubiquitous encryption. People are more scared of "hackers" stealing credit card numbers than they are of the government. Unfortunately, this means that the few people who use encryption for anything but shopping automatically attract attention. How long before encrypting your personal communication becomes probable cause for a search?
Not double-precision as in IEEE, double-precision as in SIMD. An AltiVec instruction can operate on sixteen 8-bit elements, eight 16-bit elements or four 32-bit elements. Cell instructions always operate on four 32-bit elements, so Cell has one level of SIMD precision compared to Altivec's three. If the 8- and 16-bit AltiVec instructions aren't used much, it makes sense to simplify the hardware and increase the clock speed for the more common 32-bit operations.
The (slightly) complicated part is working out the value of PROGRAMX. I love apt-get but I usually have to search packages.debian.org before I know which package to install.
perhaps you should open your country up to weapons inspectors and get out of their way
The US has also refused UN weapons inspections.
as you agreed to when we let you keep your country earlier?
Taking and holding Baghdad was judged impossible in 1991, and it's probably impossible now. The difference is that Bush Sr. had the sense to listen to his military advisers.
Perhaps you should heed one of the last 200 warnings of "No, really, you need to let us in, like you agreed to do."
Warning someone 200 times that you're going to kill them doesn't make it legal to do so. The same principle applies to nations.
they have stated straight up that they want to *convert or kill* all non-mohammedans.
The extremity of their threats is not related to the probability of their success. If a mad old tramp declares that he'll kill everyone who wears brown shoes on a Thursday, how many billions should we spend on monitoring and fighting him? How many freedoms should we give up to make sure he can't possibly kill a single innocent person?
The threat from extremists must be weighed against the threat from reactionaries, and the numbers are pretty clear: terrorists have killed thousands of people, but repressive governments have killed millions.
in Sweden (IIRC), where in some cities, police have admitted that they no longer have control due to hordes of Islamic immigrants causing chaos.
Thank you for making the real (racial) motivation for your argument completely clear. Please name a single Swedish city where the police "no longer have control". I would have thought that widespread anarchy, riots and looting in Scandinavia would have made the news. Or perhaps you're just talking about ordinary inner-city crime, which you'd never mention in the same breath as terrorism if the criminals weren't Muslims?
How can you claim that it's "highly likely" without even knowing what kind of support was supposedly provided? You're not making an assessment of probability, you're just stating your beliefs. If you want to claim that something's objectively true, provide evidence. Otherwise be honest and say "I believe" rather than "it is highly likely".
Is access to Fox News and nothing but Fox News better, or worse, than no access at all?
If your PC is provided by Google and News Corporation, do you expect them to make it easy for you to access other sources of information? A quick look at the history of cooperation between Google, News Corporation and the Chinese government should be enough to worry you.
Once the Chinese government has access to cheap computers from companies that understand its attitude to controlling information, it can phase out and eventually ban general-purpose PCs.
Re:I'd be happy to pay that without a display
on
The Hundred-Buck PC
·
· Score: 1
Agreed, it sounds like they just had a show of hands for "who wants to be the Microsoft of the developing world?" Not surprising to see Google on the list.
Re:I'd be happy to pay that without a display
on
The Hundred-Buck PC
·
· Score: 1
The problem with using a TV would be resolution. The resolution of a PAL TV is 720x576, but TV screens are blurrier than monitors so you'd have to increase the font size compared to a monitor of the same size - the effective resolution would be more like 640x480. That's fine if the software's designed for low resolutions, but try running Windows XP or Gnome at 640x480 - most of the screen is taken up by toolbars and titlebars and many dialogs don't fit on the screen; it's barely usable.
On the other hand, software developed for PDAs could make use of a low-resolution TV screen while being compatible with modern file formats, protocols etc. Maybe we'll see a new generation of sub-PC desktop devices running the same software as PDAs?
I share your opinion that people should be treated equally under the law, should be allowed to speak and congregate freely, and should have the power to replace government officials in regular elections. However, thinking that this is somehow 'not a world view' is incredibly naive. Democracy and human rights are good ideas, but they're still just ideas. Treating them as mystical revealed truths does a disservice to the tradition of rational debate and mutual respect that allowed those ideas to emerge in the first place.
I dunno but I've got this image in my head of a wild-eyed man in a white coat standing over a chip with millions of volts coursing through it, shouting "Viiv! Viiiiiiiv!"
56,000 Americans died in Vietnam for something that was just a policing effort, and never actually at war.
It was Korea and not Vietnam that was referred to as a "police action". Go and read the Pentagon Papers if you want to know why the US was involved in Vietnam.
The US never declared war on Vietnam because the Gulf of Tonkin resolution gave the President the power to attack Vietnam without declaring war. But I dare you to tell a Vietnamese man who lost his parents to American carpet bombing and his children to birth defects caused by American exfoliants that it wasn't actually a war.
Anyway, seems the Americans are getting pretty good at fighting wars, and not actually having anyone die.
Reputable, independent sources estimate that 100,000 Iraqi civilians have died in the current war. Nobody contests that more than 15,000 have died.
The fact that warming has been occurring at an accelerating rate since 1800 (industrial revolution in Europe) strongly suggests a link with fossil fuels. Mechanisms by which fossil fuels could cause global warming have also been presented. It is not exactly witchcraft to suggest that reducing our consumption of fossil fuels is a prudent strategy in the face of accelerating global warming. Even if fossil fuels are only one factor contributing to the observed changes, it is in our interest to reduce the size of that contribution.
I'm not sure if it's the level of emotion so much as the level of shock - one of my early "flashbulb" memories is of the Challenger shuttle explosion, which was a very shocking experience for me but not necessarily a very emotional one.
In information theory, the amount of information an event carries depends on how unexpected it is - predictable outcomes carry little information. If the function of learning is to model an unpredictable world in order to make predictions, then it makes sense that a surprising event should be given more weight than a routine event. Of course, surprising events will often be emotional too, so maybe I'm wrong to separate the two.
I wonder if there are any experiments relating the information content (entropy) of a neuron's inputs to the strength of various factors associated with learning? Do neurons tend to adapt to ignore predictable signals?
Slashdot Mirror
Interesting suggestion, I wish I had mod points.
I'm inclined to agree - a sniffer dog barking gives probable cause for a search. But I don't agree with the court's conclusion that there's less expectation of privacy if you're committing a crime. Probable cause is based on what the officer knows, not on what you know, otherwise it becomes a meaningless concept. There should only be a reduced expectation of privacy if the officer has reason to suspect that you're involved in a crime... which, of course, is already the law and doesn't require a new precedent.
The problem is that most people don't know why they should care about privacy (former East Germans excepted), so there's not much demand for ubiquitous encryption. People are more scared of "hackers" stealing credit card numbers than they are of the government. Unfortunately, this means that the few people who use encryption for anything but shopping automatically attract attention. How long before encrypting your personal communication becomes probable cause for a search?
Presumably the officers saw something "in plain view" that gave them probable cause to search the car.
Not double-precision as in IEEE, double-precision as in SIMD. An AltiVec instruction can operate on sixteen 8-bit elements, eight 16-bit elements or four 32-bit elements. Cell instructions always operate on four 32-bit elements, so Cell has one level of SIMD precision compared to Altivec's three. If the 8- and 16-bit AltiVec instructions aren't used much, it makes sense to simplify the hardware and increase the clock speed for the more common 32-bit operations.
Read them? Damn, I thought they just weighed them. I'd better buy some toner.
Those who study history are also doomed to repeat it, but with a greater sense of foreboding.
The (slightly) complicated part is working out the value of PROGRAMX. I love apt-get but I usually have to search packages.debian.org before I know which package to install.
The mean IQ is defined as 100.
The US has also refused UN weapons inspections.
as you agreed to when we let you keep your country earlier?
Taking and holding Baghdad was judged impossible in 1991, and it's probably impossible now. The difference is that Bush Sr. had the sense to listen to his military advisers.
Perhaps you should heed one of the last 200 warnings of "No, really, you need to let us in, like you agreed to do."
Warning someone 200 times that you're going to kill them doesn't make it legal to do so. The same principle applies to nations.
Can't... move... legs! *nnnng* Too... many... tractors!
The extremity of their threats is not related to the probability of their success. If a mad old tramp declares that he'll kill everyone who wears brown shoes on a Thursday, how many billions should we spend on monitoring and fighting him? How many freedoms should we give up to make sure he can't possibly kill a single innocent person?
The threat from extremists must be weighed against the threat from reactionaries, and the numbers are pretty clear: terrorists have killed thousands of people, but repressive governments have killed millions.
in Sweden (IIRC), where in some cities, police have admitted that they no longer have control due to hordes of Islamic immigrants causing chaos.
Thank you for making the real (racial) motivation for your argument completely clear. Please name a single Swedish city where the police "no longer have control". I would have thought that widespread anarchy, riots and looting in Scandinavia would have made the news. Or perhaps you're just talking about ordinary inner-city crime, which you'd never mention in the same breath as terrorism if the criminals weren't Muslims?
The dictionary disagrees.
If your PC is provided by Google and News Corporation, do you expect them to make it easy for you to access other sources of information? A quick look at the history of cooperation between Google, News Corporation and the Chinese government should be enough to worry you.
Once the Chinese government has access to cheap computers from companies that understand its attitude to controlling information, it can phase out and eventually ban general-purpose PCs.
Agreed, it sounds like they just had a show of hands for "who wants to be the Microsoft of the developing world?" Not surprising to see Google on the list.
On the other hand, software developed for PDAs could make use of a low-resolution TV screen while being compatible with modern file formats, protocols etc. Maybe we'll see a new generation of sub-PC desktop devices running the same software as PDAs?
Thanks for the information. Could you point me to somewhere I can find out more about variations in solar and geothermal warming?
I share your opinion that people should be treated equally under the law, should be allowed to speak and congregate freely, and should have the power to replace government officials in regular elections. However, thinking that this is somehow 'not a world view' is incredibly naive. Democracy and human rights are good ideas, but they're still just ideas. Treating them as mystical revealed truths does a disservice to the tradition of rational debate and mutual respect that allowed those ideas to emerge in the first place.
I dunno but I've got this image in my head of a wild-eyed man in a white coat standing over a chip with millions of volts coursing through it, shouting "Viiv! Viiiiiiiv!"
Ice cream trucks have killed more U.S. citizens in the last ten years than terrorism.
Anyway, seems the Americans are getting pretty good at fighting wars, and not actually having anyone die.
Reputable, independent sources estimate that 100,000 Iraqi civilians have died in the current war. Nobody contests that more than 15,000 have died.
The fact that warming has been occurring at an accelerating rate since 1800 (industrial revolution in Europe) strongly suggests a link with fossil fuels. Mechanisms by which fossil fuels could cause global warming have also been presented. It is not exactly witchcraft to suggest that reducing our consumption of fossil fuels is a prudent strategy in the face of accelerating global warming. Even if fossil fuels are only one factor contributing to the observed changes, it is in our interest to reduce the size of that contribution.
Why? If the sea level rises due to 'natural' temperature variations you'll still drown.
In information theory, the amount of information an event carries depends on how unexpected it is - predictable outcomes carry little information. If the function of learning is to model an unpredictable world in order to make predictions, then it makes sense that a surprising event should be given more weight than a routine event. Of course, surprising events will often be emotional too, so maybe I'm wrong to separate the two.
I wonder if there are any experiments relating the information content (entropy) of a neuron's inputs to the strength of various factors associated with learning? Do neurons tend to adapt to ignore predictable signals?