In my experience BSODs appear when network interface drivers get thrown for a loop. I've seen a few blue screens for those drivers on different computers with different drivers and different versions of Windows.
It's difficult to judge when a task is too complicated for a computer to run. It's also difficult to be 100% sure a driver you think is reliable really is. I wouldn't want to worry about it in a hospital, or when controlling freight trains.
Similarly, I believe an MRI machine at my local hospital runs Windows.
While getting an MRI of my knee after an injury, the tech gave me a pair of headphones to listen to music from a CD I brought in, which was piped in from the control room along with audio from the technician ("almost done, dolly, just one more scan")
About halfway through the second track, the music abruptly switchd to the "BUHBUHBUHBUHBUHBUHBUHBUHBUHNNNNNN" sound of Windows freaking out, followed by silence, and then by the Windows startup sound. The MRI seemed to keep running, but at least the communications were using Windows.
Voting is a privilege, not a right as some would have us believe.
No. Voting is a responsibility. Every person should have the right to vote, as long as they are responsible citizens. That means not committing felonies, of course, but it also means paying attention to the elections, and keeping informed about the issues relevant to you as a citizen.
...so the only user-specific data available on public canvas pages will be first name and profile picture...
What about information that is included from your account in part of the application? Does this mean that information from Photos, Videos, etc., which Facebook now considers "applications" are indexable in Google or available to non-Facebook users?
I'm not sure that would be a good idea. There is a critical difference between staple items like rice and flour, and goods like digital media. A person has no reason to take more than one copy of the digital media, but plenty of reasons to stockpile an exorbitant amount of the staple items (save for later, take more than they would ever use and sell it, etc). It's the same idea behind newspaper and soda vending machines--you can feasibly take as many newspapers out of the machine as you want once its open, but theres no reason to take more than one (unlike the soda, where if the machine just opened up instead of dispensing one it would be empty *real* soon).
Nope, it's possible. Penn State already did it, and I'm sure other schools have as well. Students are only allowed 2GB of upload and 2GB of download per week.
Similarly, the high school I just graduated from has started using SmartBoards in place of regular whiteboards. Students still take notes, etc., and the class operates largely the same way. However, the touch-sensitive board is interfaced with the computer and vica-versa. Notes can be saved, websites or other displays can be pulled up, and so forth. I don't think it has ever hindered the learning environment, except perhaps in the first few weeks of class when teachers were still learning how to use it.
I wonder if, at least in the United States, the internet and its "freedoms" are already too interlaced in people's lives for a censorship program to be successfully implemented now. What would happen if suddenly school students could not get reliable information on subjects like Guantanamo? Or, if John Q. Public can't get his free porno? Also, what would large media networks do--especially those with other outlets besides their website, such as television stations--if their content is censored online, but not elsewhere?
Even if it were more altruistic, like censorship of terrorist web pages or even malware sites, there would be a huge outcry from an otherwise free media.
The brains of different animals, humans included, evolved (yes EVOLVED;) for different purposes so comparing is apples and oranges.
Scientific American had an interesting article in the April 2007 issue called "Just How Smart Are Ravens?" (subscribers-only link, sorry). It touched on determining why animals evolve intelligence, especially considering the sheer number of species that respond instinctively at best, or, in the case of the majority of species, simply to taxis (think bacteria, insects, etc.) The article defined intelligence as the ability to reason and display logic. It seemed to conclude that the more "intelligent" animals--birds, primates, humans--lived in more social environments and needed to be able to adapt (short-term, not in terms of evolution) to different situations.
Current robots, however, have highly specific roles and do not need to adapt much. They clearly are highly logical, and thus somewhat intelligent by SciAm's standards, but the breadth of their intelligence is limited. And a mine-sweeping robot isn't about to "adapt" itself to start avoiding damage from mines, becoming its controller's friend, or taking over the world.
Please do not read this as an insult or affront on your page design. The page is certainly less obnoxious than almost all of the MySpace pages I have seen elsewhere, and is actually readable.
However, the page does not validate for any of the standards that are linked to in the footer. Also, although it looks pretty, the layout is still not what I would call "functional." The links in the "Contacting Tom" section are difficult to read, there's a lot of whitespace that isn't very effective at easing eye strain, and the blog posts are oddly spaced. I recognize a lot of this isn't your fault, but I think it's tough to claim a "slashdotter can primp to his heart's delight." Even if he can (I don't have a MySpace; I don't know), it seems that MySpace makes it more difficult if validation and "good" design are your goals.
Bear it mind that I can't call myself a good page designer--I just used a default template on my blog, which I'm sure doesn't validate. Basically, I'm trying to say that the "typical slashdotter" per say, wouldn't want to use a MySpace if he were looking for fully validated or otherwise "good" designs. OTOH, MySpace isn't targeting that demographic, and is intended as a social-networking service.
I think that's a lot like what Blogger did with their new Beta. Old users could keep the original Blogger templates, but were notified that an upgrade exists to the Blogger Beta. New users automatically adopt Blogger Beta.
Although I don't think Blogger is nearly as bad as MySpace, there is a lot of crap that comes up if you hit the "Random Blog" button at the top of a Blogger page. Unfortunately, the new templates do little to prevent crap, though they add some nice new functionalities. My own opinion, though, is that Blogger is generally used by a slightly more computer-literate demographic than MySpace, resulting in fewer junk sites. I would be interested to see, however, the percentage of Blogger sites that are spam or otherwise violate their Terms of Service.
I agree. I think there is a difference between caution and paranoia. As long as you aren't stupid, and don't make available information such as credit card numbers, social security numbers, and so forth, I don't see much wrong with posting basic demographics like age, sex, and even locations. It's the type of information that can be obtained by someone who wants it, anyways, and can potentially add to the sense of the online "community." I don't have a MySpace, but I do have a Facebook profile. I keep it private, but still recognize that the information in it, including cell phone numbers, AIM screennames, and pictures, are online and thus potentially available to an unauthorized party.
I'm sure my phone number, email address, and even postal address are circulating around without my knowledge offline. Putting it online may expose me to spammers, but hey, I've got a good email filter, I'm not afraid to hang up on people, and who really sends junk mail on paper anymore anyways? Besides, it's in the phone book. And I'm not too afraid of sexual predators--I don't fit the demographic, and I'm not stupid enough to meet some unknown person at a shady coffee shop either.
And my picture? Big deal, check last month's newspaper, because there's a photo of me. What I'm trying to illustrate is the availability of information about me away from the internet, and the futility of trying to protect basic information in the first place. If an attacker (social, sexual, political, or even a government assassin because I heard the wrong conversation somewhere) wants to learn about me, he can. There's risk everywhere, as the parent pointed out.
Water, as any liquid, only freezes at 0c at 1 atmosphere of pressure and no dissolved contaminants. For every ion in a dissolved compound (for example, sodium chloride consists of Na+ and Cl- when dissolved. This makes it have what is called a "van't Hoff factor" of 2.), the freezing point of the solvent drops. The actual depression is a function of the solvent's heat of fusion and freezing point under 1atm of pressure, as well as the concentration of the solute and its van't Hoff factor. This is why we salt roads in the winter.
Also, substances may freeze at substantially lower temperatures than normal if there is nearly perfect purity, due to a phenomenon known as nucleation. The substance's molecules need some form of particle to act as a "seed" to start forming crystals on.
sent it over a single optical fiber channel in a 100 mile-long (161-kilometre) U.S. network
After 100 miles, how much does the throughput degrade? The technology might be limited if, after 200, 500, or even 1000 miles, its speed drops significantly. Or does it reach a hub of some sort that re-sends the signal every 100 miles? I should admit now that I'm not very familiar with how large telecom networks are set up.
jd:
More effective use of power for the purpose intended is something you see virtually everywhere - gears, levers, springs, virtually all mechanical devices that have ever existed are all simply ways of putting in the same amount but utilizing it better.
Yes, I didn't use "power" correctly from a physics standpoint, instead using it as a synonym for exertable (sp?) strength. Regardless, the BBC article that the posted article links to refers to the usage of "pneumatic muscles or deformable magnets." I don't know what deformable magnets are, but I don't think pneumatics increase efficiency. There's probably a lot of lost energy--think of truck brakes.
Essentially, to get the human to move faster or transfer heavier loads (and, by extension, be able to jump higher), more energy needs to be put in, because no matter how efficient the machines in the bionic leg are, you can't create energy. And it takes more work (in the physics sense, i.e., a force over distance) to move a heavier load the same distance, because the force required is greater. And to move faster, power would need to be increased as well, meaning an increase in work, and thus an increase in required energy.
I searched "powered exoskeleton" on YouTube and found this project from Berkley. I guess, if this is what the article was talking about, then the device would serve as more of a weight supporter than a strengthening tool. It also seems a bit too sluggish to execute a rapid maneuver like jumping, despite the BBC article in TFA claiming higher leaps is a goal. Would it end up hindering a troop in combat, considering the rapidity needed to move in today's guerrilla and urban warfare?
On the other hand, the video shows the man wearing a huge backpack. As a backpacker myself, I know that the best way to carry the weight is on your hips, so that your leg muscles bear the load. This exoskeleton seems well fit for bearing that load; the man in the video looks like he is hardly straining.
The technology looks like it may be ready for work on bases, but is hardly ready for the front line. The BBC article points out more limitations.
I'm curious about how well that exoskeleton works. So, if I attach it to my thigh and calve, and try to jump, and it increases the power in that muscle motion, can I jump higher? Now what, how do I land?
But let's say practice makes perfect, and I eventually become adept enough to land it. What type of power source is on my back that can lift my weight, plus the weight of the power source, plus the bionic leg, plus any equipment I may be carrying. We're talking at least 200lbs.
No, I think the parent poster is correct. I heard it was first used to close wounds in Vietnam, but was developed for other reasons. See cyanoacrylate, the compound in most super glues.
but why not make the outside servers the ones that contact the inside clients, instead of the other way round?
Sure, it could open the way for easy detection of people on the inside, but there's more than one way to skin a cat.
What if the connections were encrypted? The outside client would send an encrypted "ping" sort of deal that inside clients wait for, and when received, the client establishes a connection. Then there is no list of outside servers that can be sent via IM or email, and received by the censor. If the censor sets up a client, then the outside server could turn the tables and stop pinging the censor's client. It takes the control away from the censor.
Although I'm sure there's something wrong with this idea, or it would have been implemented by now.
So then, how often is ActionScript used on its own, separately from Flash? I don't develop for the web, but wouldn't someone who does be more likely to use Javascript or even ASP.net?
KmN:
that it doesn't come with Flash or Java. So much for browsing any page. Didn't Adobe release Flash as open-source? I think that there is a Mozilla project called Tamarin to integrate Flash as a open-source Firefox plug-in, too.
And I think Java is becoming open-source now, as well. So maybe it won't be so long until distributions like Debian (on which Ubuntu is based), which limit packages to those that are strictly free, start including Flash and Java.
Well what are human actions? If you consider fighting through survival by fishing, then that may or may not be nature. I'm not sure if you would call using motorized boats "natural" actions or not.
However, I think it's fair to argue that ideas such as "economy," "jobs," and "government" , and the industrialization that comes with them, are far from natural. So if we as a race are going to disrupt things that are clearly natural (i.e., species survival), we can't justify those actions through natural selection.
As an aside, and I haven't read Darwin's Origin of Species, but I don't think that's how natural selection works anyways. I was under the (perhaps mistaken) impression that natural selection is the thinning of inferior populations over the course of many generations, and evolution is the modification through random (and most probably favorable) genetic changes, of a population. Thus, when the White Dolphin is forced extinct over the course of (depending on the life-span of the specie) 1-6 generations, it is hardly "Natural Selection."
And if it comes to "moral duties," why does it matter who said it's the morally correct thing to do? Me? Certainly not, but I still feel the obligation. You? Apparently not, but then, by the same token, why are you right? God? I'm of the belief that God is another artificial human construct used as a channel for our "moral values." But that's a whoooooole other issue.
Not necessarily. Eventually, computers in your house may be "dumb terminals" like those used on old UNIX mainframes, but instead connect to the server with your net-based operating system. Already, net-based applications depend on server-side technologies such as Javascript.
Slashdot Mirror
In my experience BSODs appear when network interface drivers get thrown for a loop. I've seen a few blue screens for those drivers on different computers with different drivers and different versions of Windows.
It's difficult to judge when a task is too complicated for a computer to run. It's also difficult to be 100% sure a driver you think is reliable really is. I wouldn't want to worry about it in a hospital, or when controlling freight trains.
Similarly, I believe an MRI machine at my local hospital runs Windows.
While getting an MRI of my knee after an injury, the tech gave me a pair of headphones to listen to music from a CD I brought in, which was piped in from the control room along with audio from the technician ("almost done, dolly, just one more scan")
About halfway through the second track, the music abruptly switchd to the "BUHBUHBUHBUHBUHBUHBUHBUHBUHNNNNNN" sound of Windows freaking out, followed by silence, and then by the Windows startup sound. The MRI seemed to keep running, but at least the communications were using Windows.
Or press "next image" twice. That worked for me.
No. Voting is a responsibility. Every person should have the right to vote, as long as they are responsible citizens. That means not committing felonies, of course, but it also means paying attention to the elections, and keeping informed about the issues relevant to you as a citizen.
...so that's what they call it these days...
From the article:
What about information that is included from your account in part of the application? Does this mean that information from Photos, Videos, etc., which Facebook now considers "applications" are indexable in Google or available to non-Facebook users?
I'm not sure that would be a good idea. There is a critical difference between staple items like rice and flour, and goods like digital media. A person has no reason to take more than one copy of the digital media, but plenty of reasons to stockpile an exorbitant amount of the staple items (save for later, take more than they would ever use and sell it, etc). It's the same idea behind newspaper and soda vending machines--you can feasibly take as many newspapers out of the machine as you want once its open, but theres no reason to take more than one (unlike the soda, where if the machine just opened up instead of dispensing one it would be empty *real* soon).
Nope, it's possible. Penn State already did it, and I'm sure other schools have as well. Students are only allowed 2GB of upload and 2GB of download per week.
Similarly, the high school I just graduated from has started using SmartBoards in place of regular whiteboards. Students still take notes, etc., and the class operates largely the same way. However, the touch-sensitive board is interfaced with the computer and vica-versa. Notes can be saved, websites or other displays can be pulled up, and so forth. I don't think it has ever hindered the learning environment, except perhaps in the first few weeks of class when teachers were still learning how to use it.
I wonder if, at least in the United States, the internet and its "freedoms" are already too interlaced in people's lives for a censorship program to be successfully implemented now. What would happen if suddenly school students could not get reliable information on subjects like Guantanamo? Or, if John Q. Public can't get his free porno? Also, what would large media networks do--especially those with other outlets besides their website, such as television stations--if their content is censored online, but not elsewhere?
Even if it were more altruistic, like censorship of terrorist web pages or even malware sites, there would be a huge outcry from an otherwise free media.
Scientific American had an interesting article in the April 2007 issue called "Just How Smart Are Ravens?" (subscribers-only link, sorry). It touched on determining why animals evolve intelligence, especially considering the sheer number of species that respond instinctively at best, or, in the case of the majority of species, simply to taxis (think bacteria, insects, etc.) The article defined intelligence as the ability to reason and display logic. It seemed to conclude that the more "intelligent" animals--birds, primates, humans--lived in more social environments and needed to be able to adapt (short-term, not in terms of evolution) to different situations.
Current robots, however, have highly specific roles and do not need to adapt much. They clearly are highly logical, and thus somewhat intelligent by SciAm's standards, but the breadth of their intelligence is limited. And a mine-sweeping robot isn't about to "adapt" itself to start avoiding damage from mines, becoming its controller's friend, or taking over the world.
Please do not read this as an insult or affront on your page design. The page is certainly less obnoxious than almost all of the MySpace pages I have seen elsewhere, and is actually readable.
However, the page does not validate for any of the standards that are linked to in the footer. Also, although it looks pretty, the layout is still not what I would call "functional." The links in the "Contacting Tom" section are difficult to read, there's a lot of whitespace that isn't very effective at easing eye strain, and the blog posts are oddly spaced. I recognize a lot of this isn't your fault, but I think it's tough to claim a "slashdotter can primp to his heart's delight." Even if he can (I don't have a MySpace; I don't know), it seems that MySpace makes it more difficult if validation and "good" design are your goals.
Bear it mind that I can't call myself a good page designer--I just used a default template on my blog, which I'm sure doesn't validate. Basically, I'm trying to say that the "typical slashdotter" per say, wouldn't want to use a MySpace if he were looking for fully validated or otherwise "good" designs. OTOH, MySpace isn't targeting that demographic, and is intended as a social-networking service.
I think that's a lot like what Blogger did with their new Beta. Old users could keep the original Blogger templates, but were notified that an upgrade exists to the Blogger Beta. New users automatically adopt Blogger Beta.
Although I don't think Blogger is nearly as bad as MySpace, there is a lot of crap that comes up if you hit the "Random Blog" button at the top of a Blogger page. Unfortunately, the new templates do little to prevent crap, though they add some nice new functionalities. My own opinion, though, is that Blogger is generally used by a slightly more computer-literate demographic than MySpace, resulting in fewer junk sites. I would be interested to see, however, the percentage of Blogger sites that are spam or otherwise violate their Terms of Service.
I agree. I think there is a difference between caution and paranoia. As long as you aren't stupid, and don't make available information such as credit card numbers, social security numbers, and so forth, I don't see much wrong with posting basic demographics like age, sex, and even locations. It's the type of information that can be obtained by someone who wants it, anyways, and can potentially add to the sense of the online "community." I don't have a MySpace, but I do have a Facebook profile. I keep it private, but still recognize that the information in it, including cell phone numbers, AIM screennames, and pictures, are online and thus potentially available to an unauthorized party.
I'm sure my phone number, email address, and even postal address are circulating around without my knowledge offline. Putting it online may expose me to spammers, but hey, I've got a good email filter, I'm not afraid to hang up on people, and who really sends junk mail on paper anymore anyways? Besides, it's in the phone book. And I'm not too afraid of sexual predators--I don't fit the demographic, and I'm not stupid enough to meet some unknown person at a shady coffee shop either.
And my picture? Big deal, check last month's newspaper, because there's a photo of me. What I'm trying to illustrate is the availability of information about me away from the internet, and the futility of trying to protect basic information in the first place. If an attacker (social, sexual, political, or even a government assassin because I heard the wrong conversation somewhere) wants to learn about me, he can. There's risk everywhere, as the parent pointed out.
Water, as any liquid, only freezes at 0c at 1 atmosphere of pressure and no dissolved contaminants. For every ion in a dissolved compound (for example, sodium chloride consists of Na+ and Cl- when dissolved. This makes it have what is called a "van't Hoff factor" of 2.), the freezing point of the solvent drops. The actual depression is a function of the solvent's heat of fusion and freezing point under 1atm of pressure, as well as the concentration of the solute and its van't Hoff factor. This is why we salt roads in the winter.
Also, substances may freeze at substantially lower temperatures than normal if there is nearly perfect purity, due to a phenomenon known as nucleation. The substance's molecules need some form of particle to act as a "seed" to start forming crystals on.
From the article:
sent it over a single optical fiber channel in a 100 mile-long (161-kilometre) U.S. networkAfter 100 miles, how much does the throughput degrade? The technology might be limited if, after 200, 500, or even 1000 miles, its speed drops significantly. Or does it reach a hub of some sort that re-sends the signal every 100 miles? I should admit now that I'm not very familiar with how large telecom networks are set up.
Yes, I didn't use "power" correctly from a physics standpoint, instead using it as a synonym for exertable (sp?) strength. Regardless, the BBC article that the posted article links to refers to the usage of "pneumatic muscles or deformable magnets." I don't know what deformable magnets are, but I don't think pneumatics increase efficiency. There's probably a lot of lost energy--think of truck brakes.
Essentially, to get the human to move faster or transfer heavier loads (and, by extension, be able to jump higher), more energy needs to be put in, because no matter how efficient the machines in the bionic leg are, you can't create energy. And it takes more work (in the physics sense, i.e., a force over distance) to move a heavier load the same distance, because the force required is greater. And to move faster, power would need to be increased as well, meaning an increase in work, and thus an increase in required energy.
I searched "powered exoskeleton" on YouTube and found this project from Berkley. I guess, if this is what the article was talking about, then the device would serve as more of a weight supporter than a strengthening tool. It also seems a bit too sluggish to execute a rapid maneuver like jumping, despite the BBC article in TFA claiming higher leaps is a goal. Would it end up hindering a troop in combat, considering the rapidity needed to move in today's guerrilla and urban warfare?
On the other hand, the video shows the man wearing a huge backpack. As a backpacker myself, I know that the best way to carry the weight is on your hips, so that your leg muscles bear the load. This exoskeleton seems well fit for bearing that load; the man in the video looks like he is hardly straining.
The technology looks like it may be ready for work on bases, but is hardly ready for the front line. The BBC article points out more limitations.
I'm curious about how well that exoskeleton works. So, if I attach it to my thigh and calve, and try to jump, and it increases the power in that muscle motion, can I jump higher? Now what, how do I land?
But let's say practice makes perfect, and I eventually become adept enough to land it. What type of power source is on my back that can lift my weight, plus the weight of the power source, plus the bionic leg, plus any equipment I may be carrying. We're talking at least 200lbs.
Nonetheless, I'd like to see it in action.
No, I think the parent poster is correct. I heard it was first used to close wounds in Vietnam, but was developed for other reasons. See cyanoacrylate, the compound in most super glues.
Akdor 1154:
but why not make the outside servers the ones that contact the inside clients, instead of the other way round? Sure, it could open the way for easy detection of people on the inside, but there's more than one way to skin a cat.What if the connections were encrypted? The outside client would send an encrypted "ping" sort of deal that inside clients wait for, and when received, the client establishes a connection. Then there is no list of outside servers that can be sent via IM or email, and received by the censor. If the censor sets up a client, then the outside server could turn the tables and stop pinging the censor's client. It takes the control away from the censor.
Although I'm sure there's something wrong with this idea, or it would have been implemented by now.
Oh, I see. I stand corrected.
So then, how often is ActionScript used on its own, separately from Flash? I don't develop for the web, but wouldn't someone who does be more likely to use Javascript or even ASP.net?
So, human actions are outside of nature?
Well what are human actions? If you consider fighting through survival by fishing, then that may or may not be nature. I'm not sure if you would call using motorized boats "natural" actions or not.
However, I think it's fair to argue that ideas such as "economy," "jobs," and "government" , and the industrialization that comes with them, are far from natural. So if we as a race are going to disrupt things that are clearly natural (i.e., species survival), we can't justify those actions through natural selection.
As an aside, and I haven't read Darwin's Origin of Species, but I don't think that's how natural selection works anyways. I was under the (perhaps mistaken) impression that natural selection is the thinning of inferior populations over the course of many generations, and evolution is the modification through random (and most probably favorable) genetic changes, of a population. Thus, when the White Dolphin is forced extinct over the course of (depending on the life-span of the specie) 1-6 generations, it is hardly "Natural Selection."
And if it comes to "moral duties," why does it matter who said it's the morally correct thing to do? Me? Certainly not, but I still feel the obligation. You? Apparently not, but then, by the same token, why are you right? God? I'm of the belief that God is another artificial human construct used as a channel for our "moral values." But that's a whoooooole other issue.
Not necessarily. Eventually, computers in your house may be "dumb terminals" like those used on old UNIX mainframes, but instead connect to the server with your net-based operating system. Already, net-based applications depend on server-side technologies such as Javascript.