http://www.laptopgiving.org/en/terms-and-conditions.php
In connection with your payment of US$399 to OLPC Foundation, OLPC Foundation will provide you with one XO laptop, and a second XO laptop will be given by OLPC Foundation to a child in one of the least developed countries1 in the developing world.
When you're on earth, the earth fills up half the sky. When you are 26,000 miles away, it is much smaller. When you are orbiting at roughly seven times its radius, and matching the tilt of it's axis, it almost never gets in the way of the sun. You are usually well above or well below the plane of it's orbit.
"Quantum mechanics is what you would inevitably come up with if you started from probability theory, and then said, let's try to generalize it so that the numbers we used to call "probabilities" can be negative numbers."
Also a single ganglion cell may send "10 million bits" of information,
Re-read researchers said, and consider that maybe they've looked into this.
If we take the article at face value, and divide, it would indicate that a single ganglion cell carries about 8.75 bits per second. So you're suggesting that they are off by several orders of magnitude.
Despite the differences in how brains and computers relay information, it is perfectly valid to estimate any kind of transission capacity in bits. How else would you have them measure information? The fact is that it is possible to look at a meat computer and figure out how much processing and communication it is doing.
If you think this estimate is so wrong, why? How would so much information get from the eye to the brain? How and why would they eye generate so much information to represent a relatively limited visual field?
Um, no.
The split indicated there is 50/50, not 99/1.
Those numbers represent a image that is getting 1% of the clicks for the entire site. You get the ad revenue generate by your video, minus their expenses which in this case is half.
Those numbers also represent a video hosting site with an income of $500 per month....
/I suspect we would have AI already if it could be turned directly into a product./
How do you figure? Even ignoring the the potential for a singularity, the income possibilities for a decent AI are huge:
Cheap but pleasing and polite telephone customer service. Video monitoring and loss prevention. 'Search' Medical diagnosis
Any company that develops a generic intelligence will very quickly become the largest company in the world. (assuming no one else does rolls their own very very quickly) There is almost no product or service that can'tbe improved or replaced by AI.
And that's not even counting: Robotics (household, manufacturing, military, DRIVING) Entertainment (everything done now, plus good game AI opponents and sex bots) Programming (including new AI's)
Automated invention and design. (Hey look Dave, I just found a cure for cancer!)
How's that for turning directly into a product?
AI has gotten relatively low commercial funding because it is high risk, and people have gotten burned on it. Now that academic research has brought us seemingly much closer, more and more investors will place their bets.
I suspect we would have AI already if it could be turned directly into a product.
How do you figure?
Even ignoring the the potential for a singularity, the income possibilities for a decent AI are huge:
Cheap but pleasing and polite telephone customer service.
Video monitoring and loss prevention.
'Search'
Medical diagnosis
Any company that develops a generic intelligence will very quickly become the largest company in the world. (assuming no one else does rolls their own very very quickly) There is almost no product or service that can'tbe improved or replaced by AI.
And that's not even counting:
Robotics (household, manufacturing, military, DRIVING)
Entertainment (everything done now, plus good game AI opponents and sex bots)
Programming (including new AI's)
Automated invention and design. (Hey look Dave, I just found a cure for cancer!)
How's that for turning directly into a product?
AI has gotten relatively low commercial funding because it is high risk, and people have gotten burned on it. Now that academic research has brought us seemingly much closer, more and more investors will place their bets.
Is it "Do no Evil" or "Don't be evil" ? I've heard both attributed to the Google motto, but they are very different imperatives.
There are moral models in which a good person might have to do an evil for some greater good. (Work with China for the purpose of engagement) It would also be possible to produce horrible effect without ever commiting any identifiable evil act. (We are just following the local laws.)
http://flexyourrights.org/
"Just say no to police searches"
This is a neat little site that details what your rights are in vasious situations, how to walk away from the police, and how to decline searches. (Basically, ask if you are free to go, if you aren't, don't say anything till you see a lawyer. Be polite.) It also has a number of useful videos for download. (samples of their DVD)
I am honest, and I use gnutella for my music.
I will and do pay for music and other content.
I tend to not pay for CD's because copyright is immoral.
I have a right to copy. It's time to revise business models.
It would require a box at the radio station, but you could scan for keywords in the radio show as it airs, then use Google's existing keyword matching system to select an ad to play. This has the benefit that your ad will be placed where people were talking about your product or industry within the past 15 minutes. This would be huge in talk radio.
I don't know how many stations would be willing to have an adserver at the station though.
It's for the same reason we will say something is version 6.0 instead of just 6: there is going to be a 6.1 . So when version 2.41 comes out we will contrast it with 2.40, where contrasting 2.41 with 2.4 is slightly less fluid.
But then the question becomes did they have a version 2.00 or 2.0?
I was downloading all of project gutenberg to put onto a CD (this was a couple of year ago) The chromosomes put me over the top, and it wasn't like I was ever going to read them (too wordy) so I cut them out. You tend to remember having the genome on your computer, though.
I'll grant you that there are a number of good arguments for some level of spectrum regulation, but the bottom line is that if not for that unregulated patch of spectrum, Wifi wouldn't exist at all.
Creating a website, and writing a program to crawl the Internet is cheap.
Building towers every few miles, and linking them with some form of high-bandwidth telecommunications link, is phenominally expensive. Out of the range of the vast majority of us.
Cost isn't really the problem though. The problem is again, the regulation. Anyone can start a search engine, but to put up a cell tower, you need permission from the government. We ARE seeing great dynamic competition in the WiFi arena, because anyone CAN put up an access point legally. It's legal and easy because Wifi operates on a relatively unregulated part of the spectrum. I'd have started my own small telecom years ago, if I were allowed to lay cable.
They don't become monopolies because of deregulation, they are handed monopolies by the government. (think ma bell) 'Regulation' is a kludge to fix that. I'm not sure what the world would look like if anyone could lay fiber, or set up a transmitter, but I can tell you it would not be full of telecom monopolies.
Slashdot Mirror
http://www.laptopgiving.org/en/terms-and-conditions.php In connection with your payment of US$399 to OLPC Foundation, OLPC Foundation will provide you with one XO laptop, and a second XO laptop will be given by OLPC Foundation to a child in one of the least developed countries1 in the developing world.
When you're on earth, the earth fills up half the sky.
When you are 26,000 miles away, it is much smaller.
When you are orbiting at roughly seven times its radius, and matching the tilt of it's axis, it almost never gets in the way of the sun. You are usually well above or well below the plane of it's orbit.
Similarly, We very rarely shade the moon.
Can you link a sources for that? I've been wondering why the crank hasn't been getting mentioned, and wether the leasing would apply to the US models.
For me, this looks like the best shot I have at understanding it.
http://www.scottaaronson.com/democritus/lec9.html
"Quantum mechanics is what you would inevitably come up with if you started from probability theory, and then said, let's try to generalize it so that the numbers we used to call "probabilities" can be negative numbers."
So techinically both parties have started the same number of wars, Republicans have ended more though.
You also have two wars unaccounted for in the 'Ended' column, the two wars currently ongoing. I wonder who the oddsmakers say will end them.
Should undeclared wars count? Why not Yugoslavia? or Somalia? Pananama? Should the curent two be lumped together as the war on terror?
Why are we counting wars as credits to a party?
I think 'Extremadura' would be an awesome name for a release of a major distro.
Also a single ganglion cell may send "10 million bits" of information,
Re-read researchers said, and consider that maybe they've looked into this.
If we take the article at face value, and divide, it would indicate that a single ganglion cell carries about 8.75 bits per second. So you're suggesting that they are off by several orders of magnitude.
Despite the differences in how brains and computers relay information, it is perfectly valid to estimate any kind of transission capacity in bits. How else would you have them measure information? The fact is that it is possible to look at a meat computer and figure out how much processing and communication it is doing.
If you think this estimate is so wrong, why? How would so much information get from the eye to the brain? How and why would they eye generate so much information to represent a relatively limited visual field?
Isn't Sourceforge owned by Andover, which also owns Slashdot?
Isn't it generally policy to note such potential conflicts of interest?
Um, no.
The split indicated there is 50/50, not 99/1.
Those numbers represent a image that is getting 1% of the clicks for the entire site. You get the ad revenue generate by your video, minus their expenses which in this case is half.
Those numbers also represent a video hosting site with an income of $500 per month....
/I suspect we would have AI already if it could be turned directly into a product./
How do you figure?
Even ignoring the the potential for a singularity, the income possibilities for a decent AI are huge:
Cheap but pleasing and polite telephone customer service.
Video monitoring and loss prevention.
'Search'
Medical diagnosis
Any company that develops a generic intelligence will very quickly become the largest company in the world. (assuming no one else does rolls their own very very quickly) There is almost no product or service that can'tbe improved or replaced by AI.
And that's not even counting:
Robotics (household, manufacturing, military, DRIVING)
Entertainment (everything done now, plus good game AI opponents and sex bots)
Programming (including new AI's)
Automated invention and design. (Hey look Dave, I just found a cure for cancer!)
How's that for turning directly into a product?
AI has gotten relatively low commercial funding because it is high risk, and people have gotten burned on it. Now that academic research has brought us seemingly much closer, more and more investors will place their bets.
I suspect we would have AI already if it could be turned directly into a product. How do you figure? Even ignoring the the potential for a singularity, the income possibilities for a decent AI are huge: Cheap but pleasing and polite telephone customer service. Video monitoring and loss prevention. 'Search' Medical diagnosis Any company that develops a generic intelligence will very quickly become the largest company in the world. (assuming no one else does rolls their own very very quickly) There is almost no product or service that can'tbe improved or replaced by AI. And that's not even counting: Robotics (household, manufacturing, military, DRIVING) Entertainment (everything done now, plus good game AI opponents and sex bots) Programming (including new AI's) Automated invention and design. (Hey look Dave, I just found a cure for cancer!) How's that for turning directly into a product? AI has gotten relatively low commercial funding because it is high risk, and people have gotten burned on it. Now that academic research has brought us seemingly much closer, more and more investors will place their bets.
Quite right, I just wanted to illustrate the general mentality of doing all the 'right' things, but still getting the evil results you want.
Is it "Do no Evil" or "Don't be evil" ?
I've heard both attributed to the Google motto, but they are very different imperatives.
There are moral models in which a good person might have to do an evil for some greater good. (Work with China for the purpose of engagement)
It would also be possible to produce horrible effect without ever commiting any identifiable evil act. (We are just following the local laws.)
http://flexyourrights.org/
"Just say no to police searches"
This is a neat little site that details what your rights are in vasious situations, how to walk away from the police, and how to decline searches. (Basically, ask if you are free to go, if you aren't, don't say anything till you see a lawyer. Be polite.) It also has a number of useful videos for download. (samples of their DVD)
This is information every american should have.
I am honest, and I use gnutella for my music. I will and do pay for music and other content. I tend to not pay for CD's because copyright is immoral. I have a right to copy. It's time to revise business models.
How would you propose we test for having a mind?
It would require a box at the radio station, but you could scan for keywords in the radio show as it airs, then use Google's existing keyword matching system to select an ad to play. This has the benefit that your ad will be placed where people were talking about your product or industry within the past 15 minutes. This would be huge in talk radio.
I don't know how many stations would be willing to have an adserver at the station though.
Who is the prime minister?
Of course it gets help from wikipdia.
It's for the same reason we will say something is version 6.0 instead of just 6: there is going to be a 6.1 .
So when version 2.41 comes out we will contrast it with 2.40, where contrasting 2.41 with 2.4 is slightly less fluid.
But then the question becomes did they have a version 2.00 or 2.0?
I was downloading all of project gutenberg to put onto a CD (this was a couple of year ago) The chromosomes put me over the top, and it wasn't like I was ever going to read them (too wordy) so I cut them out.
You tend to remember having the genome on your computer, though.
The human genome will fit on a CD.
You can download The human genome project files from project gutenberg and see for yourself.
I'll grant you that there are a number of good arguments for some level of spectrum regulation, but the bottom line is that if not for that unregulated patch of spectrum, Wifi wouldn't exist at all.
Creating a website, and writing a program to crawl the Internet is cheap.
Building towers every few miles, and linking them with some form of high-bandwidth telecommunications link, is phenominally expensive. Out of the range of the vast majority of us.
Cost isn't really the problem though. The problem is again, the regulation. Anyone can start a search engine, but to put up a cell tower, you need permission from the government. We ARE seeing great dynamic competition in the WiFi arena, because anyone CAN put up an access point legally. It's legal and easy because Wifi operates on a relatively unregulated part of the spectrum. I'd have started my own small telecom years ago, if I were allowed to lay cable.
They don't become monopolies because of deregulation, they are handed monopolies by the government. (think ma bell) 'Regulation' is a kludge to fix that. I'm not sure what the world would look like if anyone could lay fiber, or set up a transmitter, but I can tell you it would not be full of telecom monopolies.