My senators don't have jurisdiction in the USA. I'm Australian, and if you think the influence of US culture is pervasive in France, you should try it in an English-speaking country. However, as many Americans have found to their surprise, Australia is *not* the same as America, despite 50 years of US "cultural imperialism".
As for having to become a wannabe American, it is you that are trying to force a culture on to people. If you're so confident in French culture, why are you so rigid about "defending" it?
I'm glad you're proud of your country and your culture. However, if it's so great, don't you think it can survive on its own without being so paranoid?
Sorry for the trollish nature of the title, but it's true. They are fanatically protective of their language and culture, and particularly dislike American culture, both because it's in English, and is, by their standards, incredibly unsophisticated, but annoyingly successful. They throw millions of dollars at subsidising their film industry (which produces some great arthouse stuff that unfortunately only a relatively small fraction of the population watch), fighting Englishisms in their language, and other angst-ridden rejections of American influence. They also suffer from the twin delusions that they are a superpower and that they can legislate the rest of the world away. This is yet another example.
Non-deterministic FSA have the same capabilities as deterministic FSA. However, the minimal DFA with the same language as a minimal NFA may have an exponentially greater number of states. Neither have anything much to do with quantum computing, nor NP. In any case, nobody has demonstrated that a quantum computer can be used to solve any NP-hard problems in polynomial time (factoring is *not* NP-hard).
This stuff gets rather confusing, and you need to be very specific in your terminology. My textbook on the topic was Languages and Machines, by Thomas A. Sudkamp. There are others that might be a little more accessible.
I've seen a few comments talking about this as if it were a new generation of DVD that just needed a few manufacturers to agree on a standard. It's not. This isn't an engineering exercise. This isn't applied research. This looks like basic science to me.
Basic science is the cutting-edge stuff. It's where you do stuff because it's interesting, it's totally new, and it's got maybe a one in 50 chance of leading to a new product. But sometimes, just sometimes, it gets you semiconductors, penicillin, and the theory of relativity. The timeline between such research beginning and products arriving on the shelves is typically a decade, sometimes generations. To use a contemporary computer-related example, research into nanocomputing and quantum computing falls into this category.
Applied research covers the majority of research done by companies (but not all - very large companies do a fair bit of pure research). This is often directed by companies who want to investigate things closely related to their existing products. It typically runs under shorter timelines of maybe 2 - 5 years between research and outcomes. Intel's work on say 0.07-micron processes would probably fall into this category.
Engineering is what happens when companies turn basic and applied research into products.
Now, while these are fairly rough categories (really they represent a continuum rather than strict definitions, and there is feedback in both directions) they are good to keep in mind when examining new developments. Criticising the latest product on the market for really just being a slight refinement on the last one is missing the point. Conversely, criticising this for being "vapourware" is equally silly. It may well take ten years to appear on the market. More likely, you'll never hear of this again. But then again, it might be the foundation of ultra-high-density storage for the computers of 2015.
Quantum computers, though they (will) have some wacky, wacky capabilities, in a sense don't have any more abilities than a standard Turing machine.
Why? Becuase, as I understand things, quantum computers have a strict subset of the capabilities of what's called a non-deterministic Turing machine (to a first approximation, a Turing machine that can fork itself every time it needs to make a decision). Now, the really interesting thing about NDTM's is that everything you can do on one can also be done on your bog-standard deterministic Turing machine (by putting each fork call on a queue and executing one step of the "virtual turing machine" at a time). Now, this is a slow process (and some things that are currently computationally infeasible become tractable if a real analogue to a NDTM became available), but the point is if you ignore time, NDTM's don't give you any more abilities.
Roger Penrose is perhaps the latest of a long line of individuals who have argued the brain has powers beyond a Turing Machine. Despite his claims, the jury is definitely still out on this.
Speculation has suggested that US spy satellites can just about read number plates.
However, the ultimate resolution of the spy satellites is not the only measure of their capabilities. For instance, can they image the exact same area continuously? Every 5 minutes? Every hour? Once a day? How large an area can they image at the highest possible resolution? How large an area can they image at a lower, but still useful resolution (for instance, for counting tanks or airplanes)?
My guess is that "scope time" or whatever the in-house jargon at the spy satellite agency is, would be very hard to get, and consequently ruthlessly rationed. I'd imagine perving on people sunbathing nude is generally ranked fairly low in the priority list.
If I learned one thing from The Matrixit's that the human body gives off more energy than it takes in.
Was it just me, or did other people want to throw things at the screen when this vital plot point that unfortunately defies the laws of conservation of energy was revealed? Like, a little suspension of disbelief I can handle, but this was just so *ludicrous* . . .
If you do any AI or theorem-proving subjects you'll run right into philosophy. Turing's test, Searle's Chinese Room, and so on, are intensely philosophical.
In my (laypersons) understanding of this stuff, there's supposed to be a fundamental limit at or around 0.1 microns. Why is this - is it a limit that we can't etch the circuits accurately enough beyond this because of diffraction or other optical effects (which you could conceivably overcome with shorter wavelengths)? Is it that the channels are so narrow that the electrons start doing weird-ass quantum things in them?
Anyway, it seems Intel's reasonably confident of doing 0.07-micron (and to do it in production in 2005, they must already be doing it in the research lab now). I wonder how confident they are of going smaller again in 2007-8?
I know you're joking, but I'd like to point out that the "outback" covers most of the Australian continent. To paraphrase the pythons, it's big,really really big, and ginourmously huge all at once. Imagine two-thirds of the United States with a total population of about half a million people, and 400,000 of them located in a dozen towns/cities.
By the way, don't believe all the hype about survivor II's "isolated outback location". By US or European standards, it's isolated. By Australian standards, it's actually pretty close to a reasonably large town/small city. It's less than 200 miles from a popular coastal resort!
If you really want isolation, might I suggest the Canning Stock Route.
Why does this old tech last so long, while later gee whizz probes plummet into Mars?
Lots of the early probes failed, IIRC, it's just that nobody remembers the early failures.
Incidentally, the Russians probably had a lot more, including manned ones.
Ok,let me get this straight... Malaysia is NOT Indonesia.
No, I never said you were, and I didn't mean to imply that. However, as you yourself pointed out, you do share similar languages, culture, religion, and history - actually, just like Australia and New Zealand share those things. You also have the situation of a one dominant political party in power for many years held together by a charismatic, but aging, leader, and corruption fraying its edges, and ethnic and religious minorities who sometimes aren't all that happy with rule from the capital. That's the parallel I was drawing.
In most cases, it is very much exaggerated. For some reason Australian media tend to hit the Malaysian government very hard.
The Australian media tend to be *much* harder on their own government. We have a tradition of our media being extremely forthright. They don't pick on Malaysia specifically.
Recently, I attended this lecture which groups Malaysia with Indonesia as countries who burn their forest for agriculture... oh please! The last thing we need is to add to the smog created by forest fire in Indonesia. Trust me, we are cursing left and right of the air pollution thanks go Indonesia and we don't intend to contribute more.
Yeah, I'd be angry with them too, and it is annoying when people misunderstand the differences between neighbouring countries - as you have undoubtedly found out if you call a New Zealander "Australian" or a Canadian "American".
And, finally, don't confuse the fact that I'm not impressed with your Prime Minister with that I hate Malaysia or Malaysians. I don't. There are many admirable things about your country. And feel perfectly free to say what you like about Australia and its politicians. If you think that our prime minister is an ignorant little man who isn't fit to lead a primary school, go ahead and say it. About 50% of the Australian population says so regularly:)
Perhaps I should explain how it looks from our end. As reported in the Australian media (which, for all its faults, is *not* significantly influenced by the government and takes a far more international perspective than, say, the American media), Malaysia has fought very hard to keep Australia out of pan-Asian forums, fighting the formation of APEC and, once introduced, has tried to render it irrelevant. Secondly, despite Australia bending over backwards to be nice to the leaders of the region, they seem to feel free to insult us as a convenient target who isn't big enough, unlike the US, to do anything about it. Thirdly, your deputy prime minister was thrown in jail on ridiculous charges on ludicrous evidence. If you want your country to be taken seriously as a modern democracy, that sort of thing doesn't wash too well - with governments, but even more so with the general populace of Australia who haven't learned how to hold their nose when this kind of crap goes on.
Don't get me wrong - I understand your perspective too - the West *doesn't* have all the answers, and the west does have a tendancy to assume that its solutions are the only ones worth considering, even when we manifestly have our own problems to solve. However, it doesn't change my belief that Malaysia's international image would improve immensely if Dr Mahathir started preparing for a transition to real democracy gracefully rather than repeating what has happened in Indonesia over the past couple of years.
IANAM either, but while all those things are important, but Malaysia is in a different category to, say, Sierra Leone or Papua New Guinea (to pick a couple of random examples). As I understand it, Malaysia is industrializing rapidly and it's getting to the point where the country is ready and needs IT skills, and this looks like a cost-effective way of allowing the more remote and impoverished areas of the country in on that.
BTW, Malaysia could also do with a Prime Minister who isn't so racist, anti-Western (he did his doctorate in Australia and he's hated us ever since), and inclined to throw his political opponents in prison on trumped-up charges, if it wants to convince the world it's a modern democracy.
Anybody who knows *anything* about computer security (including reading the PGP documentation) should know this is possible.
If this guy really was a Mafioso and didn't realize this kind of thing was possible the Mafia really need to hire somebody who knows the fundamentals of information security. My hourly rates are reasonable, and I'll take payment in the Cayman Islands if it suits:)
Amongst other obscure Australian listings, Khancoban is a tiny village of about 300 people, and while it's one of the nicest places to waterski or catch trout I've ever been, it's not exactly a hotbed of astronomy or space science. Can somebody explain to me what the criteria were for entry to the list posted above?
If you watch ESPN2, especially late at night, you'll see sports that exist primarily not to be played or even to be watched, but to be turned into video games. Motocross and BMX are the best examples of this.
Obviously you've never ridden an off-road motorcycle, or been to a supercross or motorcross event. Just as a small example, where I live there is an annual supercross series, one round of which is held in the same venue as the Australian Open tennis, which nearly fills the 15,000 capacity arena at $20 USD per ticket. As for participating, I suggest you try riding a motorcross bike one day - you'll either come back with a huge smile plastered across your face or you'll fall off. Probably both:)
This was a link to a bylined item in a reasonably reputable magazine, and the summary on slashdot is a fair summation of the article itself - not the selective quoting that has happened sometimes in the past. In this case, the blame would have to go to the original article for getting it wrong.
And the nice thing about/. is that you've been able to hose down the misinformation by posting here yourself:)
Consumers want to share music; corporations want to share personal information databases. Why should only one or the other be allowed to?
Firstly:s/consumers/citizens/g.
Now that I've gotten that bugbear out of the way. My answer to the question you pose is simply: because I, and many others around here, think that a corporation's rights are subisidiary to citizens ' rights.
You're quite right. Car manufacturers have basically given the chemical-battery pure electric car the flick after decades of research because they simply couldn't make a chemical battery efficient enough to give the desired range and performance.
Personally I think it's a shame that while we all wait for these technologies to get economically viable the suburbs of the US, Canada and Australia are being filled with fuel-guzzling gasoline-powered four wheel drives, despite the fact their owners never take them off road:(
Very similar, but it leaves you with the restrictions of the JVM which I'm told (and I don't know enough about the JVM or architectural design to verify the comment) is not particularly well designed for fast execution.
I just don't think there's going to be much of a way around it until we figure out how to store more energy in a light, safe way.
Given that the automotive industry, amongst others, has been throwing money at battery research for decades and hasn't made any order-of-magnitude breakthroughs suggests that making more efficient batteries is extremely difficult.
In the '80s, he was just about tied with Douglas Adams in my estimation as the funniest writer alive. Like Adams, his work has slipped somewhat, but every so often, he writes a column that still makes me laugh out loud when reading it.
What about P.J. O'Rourke? Jeez, if I were American I'd rather eat live ants than vote Republican but I still found his writing hilarious.
Slashdot Mirror
As for having to become a wannabe American, it is you that are trying to force a culture on to people. If you're so confident in French culture, why are you so rigid about "defending" it?
I'm glad you're proud of your country and your culture. However, if it's so great, don't you think it can survive on its own without being so paranoid?
Sorry for the trollish nature of the title, but it's true. They are fanatically protective of their language and culture, and particularly dislike American culture, both because it's in English, and is, by their standards, incredibly unsophisticated, but annoyingly successful. They throw millions of dollars at subsidising their film industry (which produces some great arthouse stuff that unfortunately only a relatively small fraction of the population watch), fighting Englishisms in their language, and other angst-ridden rejections of American influence. They also suffer from the twin delusions that they are a superpower and that they can legislate the rest of the world away. This is yet another example.
This stuff gets rather confusing, and you need to be very specific in your terminology. My textbook on the topic was Languages and Machines, by Thomas A. Sudkamp. There are others that might be a little more accessible.
Basic science is the cutting-edge stuff. It's where you do stuff because it's interesting, it's totally new, and it's got maybe a one in 50 chance of leading to a new product. But sometimes, just sometimes, it gets you semiconductors, penicillin, and the theory of relativity. The timeline between such research beginning and products arriving on the shelves is typically a decade, sometimes generations. To use a contemporary computer-related example, research into nanocomputing and quantum computing falls into this category.
Applied research covers the majority of research done by companies (but not all - very large companies do a fair bit of pure research). This is often directed by companies who want to investigate things closely related to their existing products. It typically runs under shorter timelines of maybe 2 - 5 years between research and outcomes. Intel's work on say 0.07-micron processes would probably fall into this category.
Engineering is what happens when companies turn basic and applied research into products.
Now, while these are fairly rough categories (really they represent a continuum rather than strict definitions, and there is feedback in both directions) they are good to keep in mind when examining new developments. Criticising the latest product on the market for really just being a slight refinement on the last one is missing the point. Conversely, criticising this for being "vapourware" is equally silly. It may well take ten years to appear on the market. More likely, you'll never hear of this again. But then again, it might be the foundation of ultra-high-density storage for the computers of 2015.
Roger Penrose is perhaps the latest of a long line of individuals who have argued the brain has powers beyond a Turing Machine. Despite his claims, the jury is definitely still out on this.
However, the ultimate resolution of the spy satellites is not the only measure of their capabilities. For instance, can they image the exact same area continuously? Every 5 minutes? Every hour? Once a day? How large an area can they image at the highest possible resolution? How large an area can they image at a lower, but still useful resolution (for instance, for counting tanks or airplanes)?
My guess is that "scope time" or whatever the in-house jargon at the spy satellite agency is, would be very hard to get, and consequently ruthlessly rationed. I'd imagine perving on people sunbathing nude is generally ranked fairly low in the priority list.
If you do any AI or theorem-proving subjects you'll run right into philosophy. Turing's test, Searle's Chinese Room, and so on, are intensely philosophical.
Anyway, it seems Intel's reasonably confident of doing 0.07-micron (and to do it in production in 2005, they must already be doing it in the research lab now). I wonder how confident they are of going smaller again in 2007-8?
By the way, don't believe all the hype about survivor II's "isolated outback location". By US or European standards, it's isolated. By Australian standards, it's actually pretty close to a reasonably large town/small city. It's less than 200 miles from a popular coastal resort!
If you really want isolation, might I suggest the Canning Stock Route.
Lots of the early probes failed, IIRC, it's just that nobody remembers the early failures. Incidentally, the Russians probably had a lot more, including manned ones.
No, I never said you were, and I didn't mean to imply that. However, as you yourself pointed out, you do share similar languages, culture, religion, and history - actually, just like Australia and New Zealand share those things. You also have the situation of a one dominant political party in power for many years held together by a charismatic, but aging, leader, and corruption fraying its edges, and ethnic and religious minorities who sometimes aren't all that happy with rule from the capital. That's the parallel I was drawing.
The Australian media tend to be *much* harder on their own government. We have a tradition of our media being extremely forthright. They don't pick on Malaysia specifically.Yeah, I'd be angry with them too, and it is annoying when people misunderstand the differences between neighbouring countries - as you have undoubtedly found out if you call a New Zealander "Australian" or a Canadian "American".
And, finally, don't confuse the fact that I'm not impressed with your Prime Minister with that I hate Malaysia or Malaysians. I don't. There are many admirable things about your country. And feel perfectly free to say what you like about Australia and its politicians. If you think that our prime minister is an ignorant little man who isn't fit to lead a primary school, go ahead and say it. About 50% of the Australian population says so regularly :)
Don't get me wrong - I understand your perspective too - the West *doesn't* have all the answers, and the west does have a tendancy to assume that its solutions are the only ones worth considering, even when we manifestly have our own problems to solve. However, it doesn't change my belief that Malaysia's international image would improve immensely if Dr Mahathir started preparing for a transition to real democracy gracefully rather than repeating what has happened in Indonesia over the past couple of years.
BTW, Malaysia could also do with a Prime Minister who isn't so racist, anti-Western (he did his doctorate in Australia and he's hated us ever since), and inclined to throw his political opponents in prison on trumped-up charges, if it wants to convince the world it's a modern democracy.
If this guy really was a Mafioso and didn't realize this kind of thing was possible the Mafia really need to hire somebody who knows the fundamentals of information security. My hourly rates are reasonable, and I'll take payment in the Cayman Islands if it suits :)
That's all? I heard that it would effect the Space-Time continuum and Biff would take over the world :)
Amongst other obscure Australian listings, Khancoban is a tiny village of about 300 people, and while it's one of the nicest places to waterski or catch trout I've ever been, it's not exactly a hotbed of astronomy or space science. Can somebody explain to me what the criteria were for entry to the list posted above?
Obviously you've never ridden an off-road motorcycle, or been to a supercross or motorcross event. Just as a small example, where I live there is an annual supercross series, one round of which is held in the same venue as the Australian Open tennis, which nearly fills the 15,000 capacity arena at $20 USD per ticket. As for participating, I suggest you try riding a motorcross bike one day - you'll either come back with a huge smile plastered across your face or you'll fall off. Probably both :)
And the nice thing about /. is that you've been able to hose down the misinformation by posting here yourself :)
Firstly:s/consumers/citizens/g.
Now that I've gotten that bugbear out of the way. My answer to the question you pose is simply: because I, and many others around here, think that a corporation's rights are subisidiary to citizens ' rights.
Personally I think it's a shame that while we all wait for these technologies to get economically viable the suburbs of the US, Canada and Australia are being filled with fuel-guzzling gasoline-powered four wheel drives, despite the fact their owners never take them off road :(
Very similar, but it leaves you with the restrictions of the JVM which I'm told (and I don't know enough about the JVM or architectural design to verify the comment) is not particularly well designed for fast execution.
Given that the automotive industry, amongst others, has been throwing money at battery research for decades and hasn't made any order-of-magnitude breakthroughs suggests that making more efficient batteries is extremely difficult.
What about P.J. O'Rourke? Jeez, if I were American I'd rather eat live ants than vote Republican but I still found his writing hilarious.