Simple, anything belonging to art or craftmanship - that is, made by man - is artificial. I'm not arguing that it means unnatural, after all we do speak of "the nature of man". The use of 'artificial' to mean fake is really only applicable when you're referring to something that is an imitation.
TFA said that chimps evolved more, not that they were more evolved. If they're right, that would only mean that chimps have changed more, not that they've advanced more. Could be that they've adapted to more changes in their environment, could be that they had a larger population with a larger diversity for natural selection to act on, could be a lot of things, but TFA doesn't state that they're better adapted or more highly evolved. You're setting up a straw man, then knocking it down.
"As far as I can make out the only difference is it supports DRM for new technology.
At the moment, you have no alternative, as in, without that DRM being supported, you cannot even PLAY media from those new technologies (hd-dvd, bluray).
"Hell, the US government couldn't convert its citizens to the metric system and they're the ones that control the measurements"
In the US, the inch is defined as 2.54 centimeters.
In that sense, the US has been on the metric system since about 1865 +/-. At that time, the US scrapped the traditional, inaccurate, British definitions of distance, mass, etc. and redefined them in terms of meters, kilograms, etc.
http://lamar.colostate.edu/~hillger/laws/metric-ac t.html
And, by the way, the citizens are supposed to control, not "the government".
Here in Illinois, there are lots of different rate structures. Many of the charge a certain amount per kWh up to a threshold and less per kWh above that. This is not called a subsidy, but it is an advantage to large industrial/corporate users (i.e. a disadvantage to individual residential consumers.)
Due to deregulation, rate structures may be changing, but the incentive is still to lower the cost to your larger, more energy using customers in order to keep them your customers.
According TFA, doubleclick had $300,000,000 of revenue last year. So, even if that was all profit, Google might not expect to get it's money back in 10 years. They either think that it'll grow fast under them, or they bought it to keep others from buying it.
The better educated managers not only use positive reinforcement ("good job Codie, here's a donut"), and punishment ("bad job Codie, stay all night till you fix it"), but also negative reinforcement ("that Codie is doing better, I'm going to quit yelling at him") and extinction ("Codie never submits any useful patches, let's ignore him")
http://www.mcli.dist.maricopa.edu/proj/nru/opcond. html/
Really, it won't be that blatant, and they might not even realize it, but they'll treat you that way.
Large dinosaurs may have been fast (certainly they took big strides, which would tend to make them faster than me) but there's good reasons to think that they weren't that quick and agile.
The compression/tension/shear forces on the leg are roughly proportional to the weight (i.e. proportional to L^3) of the animal, and the strength of the leg against those stresses is only proportional to the cross sectional area (L^2). Legs can only get so thick, proportionately, and at some point they will break too easily. Bending moments are a little more complicated, but stresses still increase faster than strength as size increases.
The smaller dinos were undoubtedly quick and agile, though.
The computer doesn't seem to actually track the people, it tracks the communicators. The communicators act like simple rfid tags. You don't don't get a response unless you make an inquiry, then if you get no response, they're "not on the ship".
The Enterprise is a science/exploration vessel, not a military ship. Still, the accommodations are way larger and more luxurious than you'd ever expect on a starship, where mass and size would be precious commodities.
"make it completely transparent to the user " You said transparent, which would imply that the user could see what was going on under the hood. But from the rest of your comment, I gather you really meant opaque to the user.
No, the USA has about 160% of Brazil's population and uses a lot more energy per capita compared to Brazil. But I don't disagree with your point about money interests in the USA driving bad policy. We could be nearly energy independent if we wanted to be.
"* Implemented cycle collection in XPCOM, which detects cases where two released objects hold one another, but neither is held by anyone else. In this scenario, both objects can safely be purged. Previously, the holds each has on the other would have prevented them from being purged."
Read TFA, or at least the post you responded to. They are aknowledging and correcting at least one potential source of memory leaks.
In Darwinian terms, there is no goal needed. What makes sense is the survival and adaptation of the species. Survival of individuals is readily sacrificed if that means survival of the species. It is easy to see how this sort of altruism could evolve if species that exhibit this sort of behavior avoid extinction in desparate times better than those made up from purely selfish individuals.
Would you consider the actions of social insects altruistic? They are more than willing to die for the community (if you can ascribe will to such a lowly creature)
You miss the pint. Evolution is not about survival of the fittest individual. Evolution couldn't give a rat's ass whether any particular individual survives or not. It is about the survival and adaptation of the species.
Typical compression raises the temperature as well as the pressure in a process relatively close to adiabatic. Storage would lose energy as the compressed air cools to an equilibrium temperature. Intercoolers can help, but significant thermal inefficiencies still exist. (Thermal energy is still not typically recycled, maybe efficiencies could be raised if that approach was developed). And the same sorts of thermodynamic constraints apply on the decompression/power cycle.
By my math, 6,000 feet elevation has about 80% of the air density of sea level, and the same 3.7 to 1 ratio of N2 to O2 as sea level. A 15% oxygen environment has about 71% to 72% of the O2 that sea level air naturally has, equivalent oxygen per unit volume to over 9,000 ft above sea level. Also, it would have a ratio of 5.6 parts N2 to 1 part O2, I think this ratio could be important, which is why scuba gear often has helium in place of some or all the nitrogen.
I've worked on large data centers located at 4,200 feet above sea level. So would this be the equivalent to 13,000 ft abve sea level there? (13,000 feet has given me altitude sickness in the past)
So I don't believe this would be quite as safe as they say.
And another point I haven't seen mentioned yet: I've seen gaseous fire suppresion systems (FM200, Halon) fail inspection because the space was too leaky to hold the charge for several minutes. I think it would be VERY DIFFICULT to ensure the continuous integrity of the room's envelope in order to keep oxygen from diffusing in - remember we're typically dealing with the lowest bidders.
Maybe if you limit the car's speed to your bicyclist's 20 km/h. Actual energy req'd to overcome various losses are approximately proportional to factors between the speed and the speed squared.
Also, an output of 225 watts is almost 1/3 HP, I think that would be hard for an "average cyclist" to maintain.
Slashdot Mirror
"Seriously, what's artificial?"
Simple, anything belonging to art or craftmanship - that is, made by man - is artificial.
I'm not arguing that it means unnatural, after all we do speak of "the nature of man".
The use of 'artificial' to mean fake is really only applicable when you're referring to something that is an imitation.
TFA said that chimps evolved more, not that they were more evolved. If they're right, that would only mean that chimps have changed more, not that they've advanced more. Could be that they've adapted to more changes in their environment, could be that they had a larger population with a larger diversity for natural selection to act on, could be a lot of things, but TFA doesn't state that they're better adapted or more highly evolved. You're setting up a straw man, then knocking it down.
"As far as I can make out the only difference is it supports DRM for new technology.
At the moment, you have no alternative, as in, without that DRM being supported, you cannot even PLAY media from those new technologies (hd-dvd, bluray).
so, what's the problem?"
That IS the problem
"Hell, the US government couldn't convert its citizens to the metric system and they're the ones that control the measurements"
c t.html
In the US, the inch is defined as 2.54 centimeters.
In that sense, the US has been on the metric system since about 1865 +/-. At that time, the US scrapped the traditional, inaccurate, British definitions of distance, mass, etc. and redefined them in terms of meters, kilograms, etc.
http://lamar.colostate.edu/~hillger/laws/metric-a
And, by the way, the citizens are supposed to control, not "the government".
"here electric isn't subsidized for business"
Here in Illinois, there are lots of different rate structures. Many of the charge a certain amount per kWh up to a threshold and less per kWh above that. This is not called a subsidy, but it is an advantage to large industrial/corporate users (i.e. a disadvantage to individual residential consumers.)
Due to deregulation, rate structures may be changing, but the incentive is still to lower the cost to your larger, more energy using customers in order to keep them your customers.
I doubt that anything in the human brain could not be accurately described as representational.
The attempt to build a computer that works like a brain is one thing that will help them learn how a brain works.
According TFA, doubleclick had $300,000,000 of revenue last year. So, even if that was all profit, Google might not expect to get it's money back in 10 years. They either think that it'll grow fast under them, or they bought it to keep others from buying it.
The better educated managers not only use positive reinforcement ("good job Codie, here's a donut"), and punishment ("bad job Codie, stay all night till you fix it"), but also negative reinforcement ("that Codie is doing better, I'm going to quit yelling at him") and extinction ("Codie never submits any useful patches, let's ignore him"). html/
http://www.mcli.dist.maricopa.edu/proj/nru/opcond
Really, it won't be that blatant, and they might not even realize it, but they'll treat you that way.
Large dinosaurs may have been fast (certainly they took big strides, which would tend to make them faster than me) but there's good reasons to think that they weren't that quick and agile.
The compression/tension/shear forces on the leg are roughly proportional to the weight (i.e. proportional to L^3) of the animal, and the strength of the leg against those stresses is only proportional to the cross sectional area (L^2). Legs can only get so thick, proportionately, and at some point they will break too easily. Bending moments are a little more complicated, but stresses still increase faster than strength as size increases.
The smaller dinos were undoubtedly quick and agile, though.
The computer doesn't seem to actually track the people, it tracks the communicators. The communicators act like simple rfid tags. You don't don't get a response unless you make an inquiry, then if you get no response, they're "not on the ship".
The Enterprise is a science/exploration vessel, not a military ship.
Still, the accommodations are way larger and more luxurious than you'd ever expect on a starship, where mass and size would be precious commodities.
FTFA: ". . . and Hamilton notes that large generators are also available in trailers."
Has he ever priced out the cost for generator trailers or A/C trailers? Good for emergencies, but not a long term strategy.
"make it completely transparent to the user "
You said transparent, which would imply that the user could see what was going on under the hood. But from the rest of your comment, I gather you really meant opaque to the user.
I wish 9 to 5 was voluntary, it'd be a lot better than the 8:00 to 5:00 plus overtime I have to be at work.
Let's get rid of of this summer/winter time switching. Just pick a time zone and stick to it already
No, the USA has about 160% of Brazil's population and uses a lot more energy per capita compared to Brazil.
But I don't disagree with your point about money interests in the USA driving bad policy. We could be nearly energy independent if we wanted to be.
You mean goatherd
You're not seriously comparing getting passwords stolen with a child's death, are you?
"* Implemented cycle collection in XPCOM, which detects cases where two released objects hold one another, but neither is held by anyone else. In this scenario, both objects can safely be purged. Previously, the holds each has on the other would have prevented them from being purged."
Read TFA, or at least the post you responded to. They are aknowledging and correcting at least one potential source of memory leaks.
In Darwinian terms, there is no goal needed. What makes sense is the survival and adaptation of the species. Survival of individuals is readily sacrificed if that means survival of the species. It is easy to see how this sort of altruism could evolve if species that exhibit this sort of behavior avoid extinction in desparate times better than those made up from purely selfish individuals.
Would you consider the actions of social insects altruistic? They are more than willing to die for the community (if you can ascribe will to such a lowly creature)
You miss the pint.
Evolution is not about survival of the fittest individual. Evolution couldn't give a rat's ass whether any particular individual survives or not. It is about the survival and adaptation of the species.
Typical compression raises the temperature as well as the pressure in a process relatively close to adiabatic. Storage would lose energy as the compressed air cools to an equilibrium temperature. Intercoolers can help, but significant thermal inefficiencies still exist. (Thermal energy is still not typically recycled, maybe efficiencies could be raised if that approach was developed). And the same sorts of thermodynamic constraints apply on the decompression/power cycle.
By my math, 6,000 feet elevation has about 80% of the air density of sea level, and the same 3.7 to 1 ratio of N2 to O2 as sea level.
A 15% oxygen environment has about 71% to 72% of the O2 that sea level air naturally has, equivalent oxygen per unit volume to over 9,000 ft above sea level. Also, it would have a ratio of 5.6 parts N2 to 1 part O2, I think this ratio could be important, which is why scuba gear often has helium in place of some or all the nitrogen.
I've worked on large data centers located at 4,200 feet above sea level. So would this be the equivalent to 13,000 ft abve sea level there? (13,000 feet has given me altitude sickness in the past)
So I don't believe this would be quite as safe as they say.
And another point I haven't seen mentioned yet: I've seen gaseous fire suppresion systems (FM200, Halon) fail inspection because the space was too leaky to hold the charge for several minutes. I think it would be VERY DIFFICULT to ensure the continuous integrity of the room's envelope in order to keep oxygen from diffusing in - remember we're typically dealing with the lowest bidders.
Maybe if you limit the car's speed to your bicyclist's 20 km/h. Actual energy req'd to overcome various losses are approximately proportional to factors between the speed and the speed squared.
Also, an output of 225 watts is almost 1/3 HP, I think that would be hard for an "average cyclist" to maintain.
I believe that 50% for engine and pressurizing losses is optimistic, not pessimistic.