A typical computer simulation of a neuron generally resembles an N-input gate, where the combinations of inputs that would trigger an output could be likened to a user-definable truth table. Inputs are either there or absent, and certain combinations of input would produce an output.
On the contrary, modern artificial neural nets often use not binary (on or off) but real (to the limit of computer representation) number inputs, outputs, and connections weights, that vary in time and include feedback.
"It [the human brain] can't even do slightly complicated math by itself."
Since the human brain invented all that complicated math in the first place, I'd have to disagree.
(though not very many people can do the really sophisticated math)
I think you may be confusing computation with math.
I personally know a woman in a band that makes all of their money touring. That's a full time band, not people that wait tables during the week and do gigs on the weekend. True, they would love to get a recording contract and a shot at making it big, but even then, the recording contract would probably be less money net than their touring.
Also, the parent to your post never said that musicians shouldn't be paid for their recordings.
"Visual Basic for all of it's proprietary nature did let a lot more people write code for Windows. Of course it let a lot of people that should have never been allowed to code to write code but that is another story."
""No, it's the crux of the story. Might be innovative, but was a terribly bad idea.""
No. BASIC was an innovation, as far as computer languages go, easy to learn. But it was was not an MS innovation: "The original BASIC was designed in 1963, by John George Kemeny and Thomas Eugene Kurtz at Dartmouth College, to provide access for non-science students to computers"(Wikipedia). That MS got it's start porting a language donated to the public domain to PCs was not really innovative. That they created a GUI for it and made a drag and drop interface at a time when WYSIWYG was a catch phrase was not really innovative, either.
I believe that MS has done a lot of innovating in their labs, after all they have the $$$ to hire great minds and let them do their thing. But with the current state of patent review by the PTO their patent portfolio does not demonstrate innovation, and neither does Visual Basic qualify.
The bad idea about Visual Basic was not that it let noobs program, but that Windows gave thosee programs, even little MS Office macros, full access to the the users computer, and worse, often ran them by default without even requiring user input,.
"So is evolution, the common ancestral parts, a fact? . . . " Yes. There is plenty of evidence to conclude that there are common ancestors among different species. If, however, you mean to say that all life comes from a single common ancestor, then, no, there is not enough evidence to prove that. But it's not necessary to believe in that in order to believe in evolution.
" . . . we don't have any showing the big bang as fact. " I agree, the big bang is not a fact, which is why I left that out of my original response.
"Religions, at least the ones I am familiar with, don't have a problem with the majority of evolution, just the parts that say god didn't exist and that god didn't make things." Unfortunately, many people do have a religious problem with the majority of evolution. Second, nothing in evolution requires you to disbelieve in God, nor does it require you to disbelieve that God made things; it does require you to not worship the creation stories of the Bible as literal scientific facts, which is what upsets so many. As a God-believing religious person, myself, I don't have a problem with evolution, and I would not agree with anyone who says that evolution says that 'god didn't exist and that god didn't make things'.
"If anyone is attempting to blur the issue, you are too. It isn't that complicated in the end though." My point was just that the phrase "just a theory" underestimates what a theory is and somewhat conflates it with the concept of a hypothesis; a theory is not an unproven fact.
"I understand that people think it is absurd to downplay something like evolution . . . because they incorrectly think it is a fact that has been proven."
In the context of science A hypothesis is a proposed fact that is, hopefully, to be proven or disproven. A theory is an overall view and understanding of the subject that informs the facts and hypothesis. Disproving a fact predicted by a theory (e.g. a hypothesis) will cause the theory to be changed or abandoned. Evolution is a fact, as much as the fact that the earth revolves around the sun is a fact. Study of the fossil records, of the ecology, of living species, of artificial evolution caused by farming and husbandry over the last few thousand years, and of direct observations of fast breeding creatures like fruit flies and disease-producing microbes all make it abundantly clear that evolution happens. "The" theory of evolution is actually a set of overlapping and competing theories of how evolution happens and has happened in nature, Darwin's theories of natural selection being the most notable. (To continue the analagy, "the" theory of gravity explains the earth revolving around the sun, but Einstein's relativity gives a better understanding than Newton's theory.)
Calling evolution "just a theory" is a red herring that relies on confusions of theories, facts, and hypotheses.
Actually, I did read the article before I clicked submit, and it shed some light on the subject that I was previously in the dark about, else I might've said something more ignorant ; ).
But, if I get it correctly, (and IANAL, let alone a mojority on the Supreme Court, so I could easily be wrong) the fourth amendment doesn't explicitly require warrants because it was already established by Magna Carta and British common law that warrants are required: "A man's house is his castle" If you look at the exceptions, they are mostly common sense things: situations where direct, obvious eveidence that a crime is being commtted, things like hot pursuit; and definitions of where that "man's house is his castle" applies, not to his car, not to an open field, but to the area immediatley surrounding his house, etc.
"Note that the constitution doesn't require warrants to enter somebody's house, it requires that a search be reasonable"
But the fourth amendment seems to assume that a warrant is required: "The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized."
"A search or seizure is generally unreasonable, i.e., unconstitutional, if conducted without a valid warrant,[35] and the police must obtain a warrant whenever practicable.[36]"
In the context of military housing, I doubt that it would be considered unreasonable for the military to conduct a warrantless search. But I'm a civilian, and if the military came and searched my house without a warrant, I sure would see that as unreasonable. Anything less would be a step towards a military government, rather than a military governed by the civil laws of the republic.
Peak oil does not imply that there are no new sources found. Peak oil is the point where the rate of pumping oil out of the ground is greater than the rate at which proven reserves are being discovered.
Peak oil could turn out to be temporary. Higher prices can lead to more exploration, prove more known deposits feasible, and drive consumption (hence production) down. And there's always the (remote) possibility that a surprise discovery can be large enough to have a significant impact on the average rate of new discovery. But with the rapid increases in new demand from devloping economies, and the inelastic nature of demand in developed countries, my bet is that we're already reached peak oil for the long term.
The one thing certain is that the natural reserves of fossil fuels are finite, and unless we stop using fossil fuels, they will eventually be exhausted. Eventually we will develop a sustainable way of creating oil and oil substitutes; wewill be better off if we start now.
The temperature of Antartica 100 million years ago compared to today has no bearing on the global temperature, as Antartica was not located at the South pole back then, so it of course was warmer than it is now.
". . . if you open a document on a different computer with the same version of MS Office, it sometimes has the formatting changed."
Some of the formatting, like details of kerning and line spacing, is tied to the printer, so it can change even on the same computer. But, really, formatting problems between versions can be largely avoided if you can avoid things like smart quotes and other annoying automatic formatting options.
One of my dogs can open the door to her crate (if it's unlocked), get in and close it behind her, which she often does to get away if another dog is annoying her. The only training she got for that is that I showed her how to do it. Another can close a door behind him if told after he noses it open to get through, however, he is not good at opening it against the swing, which my cat naturally does by pawing it towrds him.
Even difficult dogs don't need spirit-breaking intensive training. Though, in my opinion, you still need to be willing to give a "correction" (positive punishment) if the dog is being bad, most behaviors can be taught by giving rewards (positive reinforcment) and withholding them (negative punishment) together with behavior shaping. Tactics such as releasing the pressure on the leash when the dog relaxes and quits straining to get away (negative reinforcment) are also a factor used. My dogs know about 25 to 50 tricks each, ranging from the usual sit, beg, shake, to things like "find the remote" (men like that one), "get the puppy's leash and pull her here", and "climb a ladder and slide down the slide" (kids love that one). They were trained (by my wife) without any spirit-breaking measures, mostly reward based. Google "clicker training".
TFA isn't about dogs recognizing dogs, it's about dogs recognizing pictures.
I have three dogs (and a cat) in my house, sometimes more, as my wife is a dog trainer who sometimes boards the dogs she trains. One of our dogs recognizes pictures of dogs on TV and reacts to them, but the other dogs almost never notice, except perhaps to cock their ears at the sound of barking. So the result of the experiments is not as obvious as many posters are making it out to be.
Well, I get paid a little over $40/hour and my company charges $140/hour. Even after accounting for payroll costs like FICA, unemployment, health insurance, and worker's comp, plus vacation days, holidays, sick days, etc., that's still more than 200% markup.
"Anyway, I believe these types of incidents are due to a technologically defunct generation working in a technologically advanced world, and soon the iGeneration will take the reins and bring to the work force basic computing knowledge"
It may take you 5 or 10 years or more, but eventually you'll realize how far from reality that statement was.
You are way off base with your examples. You do have a right to remain anonymous in your exercise of free speech. Without that right of anonymity, "free" speech would be not that free. (read the 9th and 10th amendments for the founders opinions on rights) This has nothing to do with paying real estate taxes, getting mail delivered, or getting a driver's license. This has to do with the ability to criticize the powers that be, especially the government, without fear of punishment.
Wrong. When it comes to free speech, there is necessarily a right to anonymity.
And the Constitution of the USA includes both an explicit right to free speech, as well as other named and unamed natural rights: "The enumeration in the Constitution, of certain rights, shall not be construed to deny or disparage others retained by the people." (Amendment 9)
There is a higher bar for slander or libel of public figures. IIRC, you not only have to prove that the statements were untrue and harmful, you also have to prove that there was an intent to slander or libel.
YMMV, the above is about typical US law. Your laws, for example in the UK, may be much tougher against the potentail libelous and slanderous.
From TFA: "Previous work by Jirtle and others shows the environment can reprogram how some genes operate, making them speed up or slow down or work at the wrong time. In a groundbreaking 2003 experiment, Jirtle fed pregnant mice different nutrients to alter the coat color of their babies. The feed affected chemical signals that control how hard a certain gene worked, determining when the babies had yellow coats like mom or brown ones."
So were Lamarck's dismissed theories partly right?
If you can measure the actual draws, you'll have a reasonable number to go by. But if you simply add up the volt*amp ratings, you'll end up with way more cooling than you need, since rated amps is typically a peak draw, somtimes only achieved for an instant at startup, and for cooling you want to use an average power consumption. Usually 50% of rated amp draws is safe, but you really should consult an HVAC engineer to determine your needs.
"so why not use conditioned external air to cool the equipment and then exhaust it "
Short answer, because the outdoor air is not conditioned.
A simple back-up I've used on some small server rooms is an exhaust fan that draws air from the open offices. The offices will heat up much slower during a loss of air conditioning than a server room, so you'll be pulling conditioned iar through the server room. But if you are serious about back-up, you need redundant air conditioning systems powered by a backed-up power source.
The issue isn't dehumidification of outside air, as, if the outside air is below 55F+/- at 100% humidity, you won't need to dehumidify it, and if the outside air is above 60F+/- you'll still need at least some mechanical refrigeration. It's when the outside air is really cold, and you're trying to directly cool the data center with it, you could end up with less than 10% RH in your data center, great conditions if you want static electricity. So you end up needing humidification, usually by heating water to produce steam. Rather than using air directly, most computer room "free cooling" systems use a glycol solution in the chilled water, with a loop to a drycooler on the roof, so you can turn off the chillers in cold enough weather.
Slashdot Mirror
The Ferrari is the reference model
(though not very many people can do the really sophisticated math)
I think you may be confusing computation with math.
I aqree with this completely.
The only thing that still makes me mad is: Cut me off if you must, but don't hit your brakes immediately after.
Piffle.
I personally know a woman in a band that makes all of their money touring. That's a full time band, not people that wait tables during the week and do gigs on the weekend. True, they would love to get a recording contract and a shot at making it big, but even then, the recording contract would probably be less money net than their touring.
Also, the parent to your post never said that musicians shouldn't be paid for their recordings.
"Visual Basic for all of it's proprietary nature did let a lot more people write code for Windows. Of course it let a lot of people that should have never been allowed to code to write code but that is another story."
""No, it's the crux of the story. Might be innovative, but was a terribly bad idea.""
No. BASIC was an innovation, as far as computer languages go, easy to learn. But it was was not an MS innovation: "The original BASIC was designed in 1963, by John George Kemeny and Thomas Eugene Kurtz at Dartmouth College, to provide access for non-science students to computers"(Wikipedia). That MS got it's start porting a language donated to the public domain to PCs was not really innovative. That they created a GUI for it and made a drag and drop interface at a time when WYSIWYG was a catch phrase was not really innovative, either.
I believe that MS has done a lot of innovating in their labs, after all they have the $$$ to hire great minds and let them do their thing. But with the current state of patent review by the PTO their patent portfolio does not demonstrate innovation, and neither does Visual Basic qualify.
The bad idea about Visual Basic was not that it let noobs program, but that Windows gave thosee programs, even little MS Office macros, full access to the the users computer, and worse, often ran them by default without even requiring user input,.
"So is evolution, the common ancestral parts, a fact? . . . "
Yes. There is plenty of evidence to conclude that there are common ancestors among different species. If, however, you mean to say that all life comes from a single common ancestor, then, no, there is not enough evidence to prove that. But it's not necessary to believe in that in order to believe in evolution.
" . . . we don't have any showing the big bang as fact. "
I agree, the big bang is not a fact, which is why I left that out of my original response.
"Religions, at least the ones I am familiar with, don't have a problem with the majority of evolution, just the parts that say god didn't exist and that god didn't make things."
Unfortunately, many people do have a religious problem with the majority of evolution. Second, nothing in evolution requires you to disbelieve in God, nor does it require you to disbelieve that God made things; it does require you to not worship the creation stories of the Bible as literal scientific facts, which is what upsets so many.
As a God-believing religious person, myself, I don't have a problem with evolution, and I would not agree with anyone who says that evolution says that 'god didn't exist and that god didn't make things'.
"If anyone is attempting to blur the issue, you are too. It isn't that complicated in the end though."
My point was just that the phrase "just a theory" underestimates what a theory is and somewhat conflates it with the concept of a hypothesis; a theory is not an unproven fact.
"I understand that people think it is absurd to downplay something like evolution . . . because they incorrectly think it is a fact that has been proven."
In the context of science
A hypothesis is a proposed fact that is, hopefully, to be proven or disproven.
A theory is an overall view and understanding of the subject that informs the facts and hypothesis.
Disproving a fact predicted by a theory (e.g. a hypothesis) will cause the theory to be changed or abandoned.
Evolution is a fact, as much as the fact that the earth revolves around the sun is a fact. Study of the fossil records, of the ecology, of living species, of artificial evolution caused by farming and husbandry over the last few thousand years, and of direct observations of fast breeding creatures like fruit flies and disease-producing microbes all make it abundantly clear that evolution happens.
"The" theory of evolution is actually a set of overlapping and competing theories of how evolution happens and has happened in nature, Darwin's theories of natural selection being the most notable. (To continue the analagy, "the" theory of gravity explains the earth revolving around the sun, but Einstein's relativity gives a better understanding than Newton's theory.)
Calling evolution "just a theory" is a red herring that relies on confusions of theories, facts, and hypotheses.
Actually, I did read the article before I clicked submit, and it shed some light on the subject that I was previously in the dark about, else I might've said something more ignorant ; ).
But, if I get it correctly, (and IANAL, let alone a mojority on the Supreme Court, so I could easily be wrong) the fourth amendment doesn't explicitly require warrants because it was already established by Magna Carta and British common law that warrants are required: "A man's house is his castle" If you look at the exceptions, they are mostly common sense things: situations where direct, obvious eveidence that a crime is being commtted, things like hot pursuit; and definitions of where that "man's house is his castle" applies, not to his car, not to an open field, but to the area immediatley surrounding his house, etc.
"Note that the constitution doesn't require warrants to enter somebody's house, it requires that a search be reasonable"
But the fourth amendment seems to assume that a warrant is required: "The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized."
According to http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fourth_Amendment_to_the_United_States_Constitution:"A search or seizure is generally unreasonable, i.e., unconstitutional, if conducted without a valid warrant,[35] and the police must obtain a warrant whenever practicable.[36]"
In the context of military housing, I doubt that it would be considered unreasonable for the military to conduct a warrantless search. But I'm a civilian, and if the military came and searched my house without a warrant, I sure would see that as unreasonable. Anything less would be a step towards a military government, rather than a military governed by the civil laws of the republic.
"Look, new sources are found all the time . . . "
Peak oil does not imply that there are no new sources found. Peak oil is the point where the rate of pumping oil out of the ground is greater than the rate at which proven reserves are being discovered.
Peak oil could turn out to be temporary. Higher prices can lead to more exploration, prove more known deposits feasible, and drive consumption (hence production) down. And there's always the (remote) possibility that a surprise discovery can be large enough to have a significant impact on the average rate of new discovery. But with the rapid increases in new demand from devloping economies, and the inelastic nature of demand in developed countries, my bet is that we're already reached peak oil for the long term.
The one thing certain is that the natural reserves of fossil fuels are finite, and unless we stop using fossil fuels, they will eventually be exhausted. Eventually we will develop a sustainable way of creating oil and oil substitutes; wewill be better off if we start now.
The temperature of Antartica 100 million years ago compared to today has no bearing on the global temperature, as Antartica was not located at the South pole back then, so it of course was warmer than it is now.
". . . if you open a document on a different computer with the same version of MS Office, it sometimes has the formatting changed."
Some of the formatting, like details of kerning and line spacing, is tied to the printer, so it can change even on the same computer. But, really, formatting problems between versions can be largely avoided if you can avoid things like smart quotes and other annoying automatic formatting options.
One of my dogs can open the door to her crate (if it's unlocked), get in and close it behind her, which she often does to get away if another dog is annoying her. The only training she got for that is that I showed her how to do it. Another can close a door behind him if told after he noses it open to get through, however, he is not good at opening it against the swing, which my cat naturally does by pawing it towrds him.
Even difficult dogs don't need spirit-breaking intensive training. Though, in my opinion, you still need to be willing to give a "correction" (positive punishment) if the dog is being bad, most behaviors can be taught by giving rewards (positive reinforcment) and withholding them (negative punishment) together with behavior shaping. Tactics such as releasing the pressure on the leash when the dog relaxes and quits straining to get away (negative reinforcment) are also a factor used.
My dogs know about 25 to 50 tricks each, ranging from the usual sit, beg, shake, to things like "find the remote" (men like that one), "get the puppy's leash and pull her here", and "climb a ladder and slide down the slide" (kids love that one). They were trained (by my wife) without any spirit-breaking measures, mostly reward based.
Google "clicker training".
TFA isn't about dogs recognizing dogs, it's about dogs recognizing pictures.
I have three dogs (and a cat) in my house, sometimes more, as my wife is a dog trainer who sometimes boards the dogs she trains. One of our dogs recognizes pictures of dogs on TV and reacts to them, but the other dogs almost never notice, except perhaps to cock their ears at the sound of barking.
So the result of the experiments is not as obvious as many posters are making it out to be.
Well, I get paid a little over $40/hour and my company charges $140/hour.
Even after accounting for payroll costs like FICA, unemployment, health insurance, and worker's comp, plus vacation days, holidays, sick days, etc., that's still more than 200% markup.
"Anyway, I believe these types of incidents are due to a technologically defunct generation working in a technologically advanced world, and soon the iGeneration will take the reins and bring to the work force basic computing knowledge"
It may take you 5 or 10 years or more, but eventually you'll realize how far from reality that statement was.
"He said the time it takes to make decisions has been cut by 25 to 30 percent because it's easier to round up the team, . . . "
How the hell is it easier to round up the team when no one has a known location?
You are way off base with your examples.
You do have a right to remain anonymous in your exercise of free speech.
Without that right of anonymity, "free" speech would be not that free.
(read the 9th and 10th amendments for the founders opinions on rights)
This has nothing to do with paying real estate taxes, getting mail delivered, or getting a driver's license. This has to do with the ability to criticize the powers that be, especially the government, without fear of punishment.
"But there's also no right to that anonymity."
Wrong.
When it comes to free speech, there is necessarily a right to anonymity.
And the Constitution of the USA includes both an explicit right to free speech, as well as other named and unamed natural rights:
"The enumeration in the Constitution, of certain rights, shall not be construed to deny or disparage others retained by the people." (Amendment 9)
More than that, though.
There is a higher bar for slander or libel of public figures. IIRC, you not only have to prove that the statements were untrue and harmful, you also have to prove that there was an intent to slander or libel.
YMMV, the above is about typical US law. Your laws, for example in the UK, may be much tougher against the potentail libelous and slanderous.
From TFA: "Previous work by Jirtle and others shows the environment can reprogram how some genes operate, making them speed up or slow down or work at the wrong time. In a groundbreaking 2003 experiment, Jirtle fed pregnant mice different nutrients to alter the coat color of their babies. The feed affected chemical signals that control how hard a certain gene worked, determining when the babies had yellow coats like mom or brown ones."
So were Lamarck's dismissed theories partly right?
If you can measure the actual draws, you'll have a reasonable number to go by. But if you simply add up the volt*amp ratings, you'll end up with way more cooling than you need, since rated amps is typically a peak draw, somtimes only achieved for an instant at startup, and for cooling you want to use an average power consumption. Usually 50% of rated amp draws is safe, but you really should consult an HVAC engineer to determine your needs.
"so why not use conditioned external air to cool the equipment and then exhaust it "
Short answer, because the outdoor air is not conditioned.
A simple back-up I've used on some small server rooms is an exhaust fan that draws air from the open offices. The offices will heat up much slower during a loss of air conditioning than a server room, so you'll be pulling conditioned iar through the server room.
But if you are serious about back-up, you need redundant air conditioning systems powered by a backed-up power source.
The issue isn't dehumidification of outside air, as, if the outside air is below 55F+/- at 100% humidity, you won't need to dehumidify it, and if the outside air is above 60F+/- you'll still need at least some mechanical refrigeration.
It's when the outside air is really cold, and you're trying to directly cool the data center with it, you could end up with less than 10% RH in your data center, great conditions if you want static electricity. So you end up needing humidification, usually by heating water to produce steam.
Rather than using air directly, most computer room "free cooling" systems use a glycol solution in the chilled water, with a loop to a drycooler on the roof, so you can turn off the chillers in cold enough weather.