How long until they insert individual-doll transmitter/sensors to determine how close one doll is to another?
Imagine waiting in line for a ride with 30 kids standing right next to eachother, each with their own doll, each of which is saying the same exact thing, only 2 seconds apart. I just might grab one and strangle it.
If they could communicate, they could tell eachother to shut the hell up. That would be pretty entertaining. Of course I only see this going in the direction of the dolls having annoying, long, drawn-out conversations about each 'interesting' aspect of the park.
Where in the world would such a thing be found in nature: The idea that there is some goal of walking or having wings or having skin instead of scales or wings instead of fins or limbs
Food.
If you get the food and survive, you have passed the fitness test.
If a species which has evolved wings (possibly stemming from a random mutation) is better abled to get the food I need to survive, it is 'fitter' than I am, and I die.
In what way was Memento a science-oriented film? How does it fit in with Good Will Hunting or A Beautiful Mind
It's not that it might be science-oriented. It is more about the fascination with fascinating brains. Many people are intrigued by brains far superior to thier own, or much different than thier own. Consider Forrest Gump. Slingblade. Those relate more to the, lets say, 'abnormal' brain as portrayed in Memento.
Which reminds me of Abby Normal from Young Frakenstein. Frankenstein is relevent too, in a way.
It is more about projecting the life of someone with a brain considerably different than the average brain, and the way they are subjected to a much different environment than most people are familiar with.
It is the same guy. Both are discussed in the parent article. Another interesting point about these designs is that the circuits tend to only work in the same temperature they had evolved in. And to resolve this, the researcher simply says, 'we will just have to add another constraint.'
If this system of fractal categorization becomes customary in the age of mp3's, a whole new world of genre labeling will spawn. This can only be a good thing and will dimish the moot arguments of "NO! this is ambience not trance!!" "NO! its blue grass not redneck jazz(hehe)" simply because it can be mathematically proven with some eye candy that is finally worthy of being in the movie Hackers (the most accurate hacker movie of all time.) Music by definition is:
The art of arranging sounds in time so as to produce a continuous, unified, and evocative composition, as through melody, harmony, rhythm, and timbre.
which dumbed down is manipulation of frequencies and amplitues (et al) so therefore computated labels can be generated.
This will also allow artists to break free from a single label because their various songs will advertantly or inadvertantly fit into their various genres. (as well as correctly label the new mtv shit band forcing them to realize they are in fact shit, manufactured by corporate bigheads looking to destroy the meaning of music: and NO N'Sync, you are NOT the next Beatles mislabled as a boy-band. The Beatles never wore silver, light reflecting, winsheild visors as clothing)
In fact, I don't feel there's anything wrong with downloading unlicensed music; I just don't want such music replacing buying. For some people I know, that has happened, especially those with cable modems.
<sing>Times, they are-a changin.</sing>
Eventually, dialup will die, and the populous will be blessed with connexions such as cable.
When this happens, will you still be tooting your same horn on this issue?
Technology is obviously excelling faster than traditional corporations care to cope with. They insist on resorting to the same laws they have always resorted to, regardless of how obsolete they have become.
(joepeg now hands the mic to RMS who gives a dissertation on the flaws in our system of copyright)
*applaud/hiss*
Although it may sound hearty to state "you shouldn't 'pirate' mp3's," it is futile.
The overwhelming masses of Napster users and the likes are now the dominating force. A cancer too large to suppress. They are not the ones who need to change....
According to the previous slashdot article on this, the size of an ogg is "slightly" larger than an mp3. I would hope this is due to better quality yeilding larger files having to retain more detail.
I have not worked with compression very extensively (in the least hehe) so if, for example, mp3 opened its compression algorithm, how could a programming community such as ours better it? I say mp3 because we are all oh-so-very-familiar with it. This of course can then be applied to the ogg development. I am focussing on things such as better quality, smaller file generation, quicker compression, etc.
You all may wish to peek at this, the Audio Home Recording Act (AHRA) which states:
No action may be brought under this title alleging infringement of copyright based on the manufacture, importation, or distribution of a digital audio recording device, a digital audio recording medium, an analog recording device, or an analog recording medium, or based on the noncommercial use by a consumer of such a device or medium for making digital musical recordings or analog musical recordings.
as linked from here, The Free Music Philosophy (which is also very informative).
Regardless. People, people, you are failing to realize what it is we are discussing. Music. Many/.ers are very logical and rational thinkers. We understand the world mantains seemingly infinite complexities, broken down to the simplest of parts. With this in mind, is it not safe to say music already exists around you. It is an natural thing, a being, in a sense, which we are merely manipulating to appease the emotional aspect of our sense of hearing. Music is not tangible thing.
If so far this is too liberal in content for you, you may as well stop reading as it only gets worse from here.
As expressed very nicely in The Music Philosophy (linked above), all musicians of today are blatantly stealing from their predecessors. This is not an ethical unpleasantry, rather a wonderful progression of this phenomenon which we arbitarily claim to be 'music'. If we agree that we take from those we favor, (who have in fact taking from those they admired ad infinitum) and implement it into our own 'art' as lars claims his music to be, then why does he not give rolaties to each of those before him who have influenced his style of playing in that lars did not 'invent' any of his drumming patterns, but claims they are his own, with impregnable certainty.
Music is a natural therapy, one which requires definition from all of those who enjoy it. It is not a posession. It's not a television for fucks sake.
It is very apparent that lars has lost, or never had, any true love for his expression of music. If he did, he would find any means possible to share it with anyone and everyone willing to explore it.
Instead, he has put entire focus on the abolition of a very powerful, medium, a medium which has overwhelmingly spread the music, for an obvious, and very disturbing reason, he wishes to shelter.
Sure, the media has exploited Metallica, raping the the public with their conformist ideals (trivial) so we all have metallica shoved down our throats already, but this is another issue.
Why has music become a matter of money? Why is it so important to lars that their hard work be BOUGHT AND SOLD for outrageous expenses on one medium.
This is a horrible thing. We must return to our roots. We must cherish those cultures of today who have no price on music. Those who beat their drums with passion and uncontrollable enthusiasm while dancing wildy around eachother. It is a love of music, not the disgusting thing we have made it out to be.
I say fuck metallica. I say fuck the radio, mtv, labels, and the entire industry.
I am a musician, a musical scientist. I play to feed my own desires and explore this unexplainable natural high. When others get as much satisfaction as, or possibly more than, myself, then I know I have done a good thing. I continue to explore and benefit those who revel in it. I DON'T do any of this to be a fucking rock star and lose all visibilty of the reason why there is such a thing as a rock star.
It is because music is natural. We fiend for it like a drug and go to unreasonble measures to get our next fix. We are human.
The industry is the dirty dealer, giving you a mere taste to get you hooked, and laugh as you do these unreasonable things to get more. Napster and the likes are our sources of freedom, in more ways than you realize.
Oh dear is right. I have the worst headache now trying to comprehend Lar's incoherent ramblings. Did he actually answer any of the questions asked? I am not about to re-read that jibberish and risk losing any more brain cells.
If at all possible, please stick to requesting written, prepared responses. Especially when you advertently seek out the prose of an bumbling idiot such as Lars.
Re:how to determine the perfect game of chess
on
Solving Chess?
·
· Score: 1
how would you go about calculating the probability of a monkey typing a single work of Shakespeare without err in one sitting?
n = num of characters including spaces in work k = number of keys on given typewriter
k^n would give you the number of possible combinations (if you think of the work as one ungodly long password), but how would you factor in the functionality of the monkey[s]?
This reminds me of an article I read about citizens suing the IRS under the Freedom of Information Act making them release the algorithm for the Discriminate Function System (DFS) which is used by the IRS to spot improper deductions, or other possible lying on income tax returns.
Here's another example of the FOIA being denied. It has to do with a request of "all documentation and research materials used or developed by NIST during its selection of a proposed digital signature standard" being denied.
That is the best idea I've heard on this entire forum all day. They must have all of the used posts bookmarked, so it would just be a matter of throwing a *sidenote mark next to the quote in the online version which linkes directly to the actual post on the forum it was taken from. This would also allow readers to view corresponding responses without having to scan through multiple forums to match a quote to a post, and even give the origional poster credit.
This is definitely something that should be considered for the electronic version of the book.
Slashdot Mirror
How long until they insert individual-doll transmitter/sensors to determine how close one doll is to another?
Imagine waiting in line for a ride with 30 kids standing right next to eachother, each with their own doll, each of which is saying the same exact thing, only 2 seconds apart. I just might grab one and strangle it.
If they could communicate, they could tell eachother to shut the hell up. That would be pretty entertaining. Of course I only see this going in the direction of the dolls having annoying, long, drawn-out conversations about each 'interesting' aspect of the park.
Where in the world would such a thing be found in nature: The idea that there is some goal of walking or having wings or having skin instead of scales or wings instead of fins or limbs
Food.
If you get the food and survive, you have passed the fitness test.
If a species which has evolved wings (possibly stemming from a random mutation) is better abled to get the food I need to survive, it is 'fitter' than I am, and I die.
Computer: "Enter Search Terms:"
Teacher: "mischevious students"
Computer: "we are going to send a query through e-mail, it is OK?"
Teacher: "OK"
*1 day later...*
Computer: "Did you mean: mischievous students?"
Teacher: "crap"
As I was gonna say:
You mean like this: (high quality) (lower quality)?
Courtesy of SciFi.com
In what way was Memento a science-oriented film? How does it fit in with Good Will Hunting or A Beautiful Mind
It's not that it might be science-oriented. It is more about the fascination with fascinating brains. Many people are intrigued by brains far superior to thier own, or much different than thier own. Consider Forrest Gump. Slingblade. Those relate more to the, lets say, 'abnormal' brain as portrayed in Memento.
Which reminds me of Abby Normal from Young Frakenstein. Frankenstein is relevent too, in a way.
It is more about projecting the life of someone with a brain considerably different than the average brain, and the way they are subjected to a much different environment than most people are familiar with.
3. Profit!!!
Armagetron, TRON, java, better java, MetaTRON, BMTron (java), and of course this
Heres a cool lightcylce game: glTron
oops, they aren't the same article. Not sure how I ended up there, but as stated by greenhide #4178771, that article is here
It is the same guy. Both are discussed in the parent article. Another interesting point about these designs is that the circuits tend to only work in the same temperature they had evolved in. And to resolve this, the researcher simply says, 'we will just have to add another constraint.'
Yes, with this secret code:
up up down down left right left right B A B A [select] [start]
The art of arranging sounds in time so as to produce a continuous, unified, and evocative composition, as through melody, harmony, rhythm, and timbre.
which dumbed down is manipulation of frequencies and amplitues (et al) so therefore computated labels can be generated.
This will also allow artists to break free from a single label because their various songs will advertantly or inadvertantly fit into their various genres. (as well as correctly label the new mtv shit band forcing them to realize they are in fact shit, manufactured by corporate bigheads looking to destroy the meaning of music: and NO N'Sync, you are NOT the next Beatles mislabled as a boy-band. The Beatles never wore silver, light reflecting, winsheild visors as clothing)
When in doubt, be cool
<sing>Times, they are-a changin.</sing>
Eventually, dialup will die, and the populous will be blessed with connexions such as cable.
When this happens, will you still be tooting your same horn on this issue?
Technology is obviously excelling faster than traditional corporations care to cope with. They insist on resorting to the same laws they have always resorted to, regardless of how obsolete they have become.
(joepeg now hands the mic to RMS who gives a dissertation on the flaws in our system of copyright)
*applaud/hiss*
Although it may sound hearty to state "you shouldn't 'pirate' mp3's," it is futile.
The overwhelming masses of Napster users and the likes are now the dominating force. A cancer too large to suppress. They are not the ones who need to change....
According to the previous slashdot article on this, the size of an ogg is "slightly" larger than an mp3. I would hope this is due to better quality yeilding larger files having to retain more detail.
I have not worked with compression very extensively (in the least hehe) so if, for example, mp3 opened its compression algorithm, how could a programming community such as ours better it? I say mp3 because we are all oh-so-very-familiar with it. This of course can then be applied to the ogg development. I am focussing on things such as better quality, smaller file generation, quicker compression, etc.
btw, the parent is the correct code. all the rest are close
^^vv<><>baba select start
how you say... imcriminating evidence? :)
No action may be brought under this title alleging infringement of copyright based on the manufacture, importation, or distribution of a digital audio recording device, a digital audio recording medium, an analog recording device, or an analog recording medium, or based on the noncommercial use by a consumer of such a device or medium for making digital musical recordings or analog musical recordings.
as linked from here, The Free Music Philosophy (which is also very informative).
Regardless. People, people, you are failing to realize what it is we are discussing. Music. Many /.ers are very logical and rational thinkers. We understand the world mantains seemingly infinite complexities, broken down to the simplest of parts. With this in mind, is it not safe to say music already exists around you. It is an natural thing, a being, in a sense, which we are merely manipulating to appease the emotional aspect of our sense of hearing. Music is not tangible thing.
If so far this is too liberal in content for you, you may as well stop reading as it only gets worse from here.
As expressed very nicely in The Music Philosophy (linked above), all musicians of today are blatantly stealing from their predecessors. This is not an ethical unpleasantry, rather a wonderful progression of this phenomenon which we arbitarily claim to be 'music'. If we agree that we take from those we favor, (who have in fact taking from those they admired ad infinitum) and implement it into our own 'art' as lars claims his music to be, then why does he not give rolaties to each of those before him who have influenced his style of playing in that lars did not 'invent' any of his drumming patterns, but claims they are his own, with impregnable certainty.
Music is a natural therapy, one which requires definition from all of those who enjoy it. It is not a posession. It's not a television for fucks sake.
It is very apparent that lars has lost, or never had, any true love for his expression of music. If he did, he would find any means possible to share it with anyone and everyone willing to explore it.
Instead, he has put entire focus on the abolition of a very powerful, medium, a medium which has overwhelmingly spread the music, for an obvious, and very disturbing reason, he wishes to shelter.
Sure, the media has exploited Metallica, raping the the public with their conformist ideals (trivial) so we all have metallica shoved down our throats already, but this is another issue.
Why has music become a matter of money? Why is it so important to lars that their hard work be BOUGHT AND SOLD for outrageous expenses on one medium.
This is a horrible thing. We must return to our roots. We must cherish those cultures of today who have no price on music. Those who beat their drums with passion and uncontrollable enthusiasm while dancing wildy around eachother. It is a love of music, not the disgusting thing we have made it out to be.
I say fuck metallica. I say fuck the radio, mtv, labels, and the entire industry.
I am a musician, a musical scientist. I play to feed my own desires and explore this unexplainable natural high. When others get as much satisfaction as, or possibly more than, myself, then I know I have done a good thing. I continue to explore and benefit those who revel in it. I DON'T do any of this to be a fucking rock star and lose all visibilty of the reason why there is such a thing as a rock star.
It is because music is natural. We fiend for it like a drug and go to unreasonble measures to get our next fix. We are human.
The industry is the dirty dealer, giving you a mere taste to get you hooked, and laugh as you do these unreasonable things to get more. Napster and the likes are our sources of freedom, in more ways than you realize.
Die lars.
If at all possible, please stick to requesting written, prepared responses. Especially when you advertently seek out the prose of an bumbling idiot such as Lars.
Hey lars: sue me, please.
santa.vs.god
linus.vs.god
SUNDAY.SUNDAY.SUNDAY.SANTA.VS.GOD
n = num of characters including spaces in work
k = number of keys on given typewriter
k^n would give you the number of possible combinations (if you think of the work as one ungodly long password), but how would you factor in the functionality of the monkey[s]?
Wonder if I sparked this question...
They won.
That was until the IRS brought it to the Supreme Court where they declared such information as exempt of the FOIA
Here's another example of the FOIA being denied. It has to do with a request of "all documentation and research materials used or developed by NIST during its selection of a proposed digital signature standard" being denied.
Ya, like:
burn.down.the.cop.shop
pawn.to.kings.bi.shop
down.at.the.pawn.shop
worlds.biggest.porn.shop
and
joepeg.is.becoming.a.distur.banc[e]
That is the best idea I've heard on this entire forum all day. They must have all of the used posts bookmarked, so it would just be a matter of throwing a *sidenote mark next to the quote in the online version which linkes directly to the actual post on the forum it was taken from. This would also allow readers to view corresponding responses without having to scan through multiple forums to match a quote to a post, and even give the origional poster credit.
This is definitely something that should be considered for the electronic version of the book.
...and redistribute it with the quotes cited!