As you state, your experience is several years out of date. Go programs went through a great leap from 2006 to present, due to the technique of Monte Carlo Tree Search.
The upshot of this is that endgames of almost maximally strong Go players may be almost infinitely long and complicated.
No, it isn't. You need to get your head out of the clouds and actually learn Go. The game simplifies greatly the closer it gets to the endgame. That's why experienced human players can almost always agree on what stones are dead under Japanese rules without using Jasiek's precise definition of Japanese rules.
Sitting back and letting everyone else decide who should be in power should be what we hope for in an uninformed populace. He said he didn't pay attention to politics, so any voting he would have done would have been based on campaign ads or what the guy at the bus stop was ranting about.
He still has to take some blame by not becoming informed and voting accordingly. Not that I'm any better. I've voted all of once in my entire life, but I acknowledge it as a personal failing.
Christians believe that while man wrote the scriptures, the writing was "inspired" and free from error.
Which is a pretty ludicrous belief, seeing as different scriptures are inconsistent with each other. You also have the language problem (how many translations exist?) and the historic context problem (different times, different meanings).
Certainly we do not hold Athanasius or Luther or Calvin to be free from error.
So why do you give a free pass to the people wrote the scriptures and to the later committee that compiled the Christian Bible, deciding what went in and what didn't? It's all so much bullshit. You think that men 2,000 years ago managed to write free from error, but after that all the error-free "inspiration" stopped?
Most wealthy nations have some system of subsidies and benefits for the poor/jobless; are we really discussing whether to do away with these, and proposing that the outcome would be better?
In general, I believe in workfare, not welfare. I don't have all the answers, but the idea that you are guaranteed a salary whether you are working or not doesn't sound like a good idea to me.
I see what you're saying. What you didn't make clear in your earlier post, and what I want to highlight here, is that are referring to an already existing "guaranteed income" in the form of the current welfare system, even when people aren't working. You want to pad that out to be higher and include bigger benefits that go beyond even what some low-income people currently make.
I've never understood the incredible attraction of a flat tax; it's not as if piecewise linear functions were what made filing taxes hard.
Probably because it seems fair. Somebody making more will still pay more, but pay the same percentage of their income. The way the percentage of taxes get ratcheted up seems like an unfair tax on the rich. It is just one big example of the constant fiddling Congress does with the tax code, resulting in the absurdly complex tax code we have now.
"Guaranteed minimum income" is just another way of saying "subsidies that avoid the phase-out problem".
That sounds very deceptive to me. If you don't work, does that mean you're guaranteed an income? How is that the same as paying less or more in taxes based on income from actual work?
Unless there's a law saying you can't scrape web pages for email addresses, then the message on his web page is legally worth toilet paper. There has to be some kind of due consideration, and you can't expect a computer program to have parsed and understood his terms on behalf of its operator.
They created two new companies, just after I sued them the first time, but they claimed it was not to avoid my lawsuit but to avoid the Visa anti-fraud/chargeback detection mechanisms.
That actually sounds like a legitimate claim, and quite a hilarious one too. I'm surprised such a rotten company would even tell you that. It might be relevant in your lawsuit.
I'm also still mystified as to what makes people think Android is more of a "smartphone" OS than the J2ME based featurephones everyone has had for a decade - same Java lockin, similar strange low-memory-consumption JVM's, just without reasonably standardized API's.
J2ME was a really cut down Java to handle the weak phones of the times, so it gave people trouble. Android is pretty much Java, which love or hate Java, is pretty easy to build applications in.
I live in Argentina, and you can say all the deranged shit you want about us, most of that shit funded on the lack of information most people in the us have
Most Americans don't know anything or care about Argentina. Americans only know about Venezuela because our government likes to bash them, and Chavez makes for good news.
In my country I can say whatever I want
What can't you say in the United States that you can say in Argentina?
I have free access to the internet
We have public libraries with Internet access. You'll have to pay for utilities that go direct to your house.
there is a place for independent media on national TV
We have the Public Broadcasting Service.
unlike the us, we don't allow the religious right to push for creationism on schools
The issue of teaching Creationism in public schools has been debated in the Supreme Court and Creationism lost.
we don't have anti-terrorism laws
Good for you. I hope it stays that way.
we can't be wiretapped without a court order
Same here.
And we don't spend most of our budget bombing other countries and funding CIAs, FBIs and DHSs
Good for you.
I know you have a hard time facing the truth, but most of the world has way more freedom than the states.
I doubt it. You can't deny the Holocaust in many European countries. Name five countries that are freer than the United States, and I'm sure I can find plenty of non-free aspects to them. As for your "most of the world" remark, laughable.
You have to find the range of IP's allowed through your local network and restrict your spoofing to that range, which in the end doesn't conceal your identity very well anyway.
Why not? Surely a spoofed address from a local network is better than revealing your exact IP address?
As far as the credit card company is concerned, I suspect intentional gullibility.
Probably not, as failing to reverse the charges often results in the cardholder dropping their credit card. It's also expensive to get new cardholders, so they really don't like losing a customer without a good reason.
That doesn't mean they can't exercise discretion about how they do their jobs. You know, when the gardener manages to trip an explosion from residue in the back yard, I'd say that's enough evidence that the place is not safe, totally outweighing the time spent without accidents.
If they blew that place sky high while clearing it out, everybody would be calling them idiots for attempting to clear it.
No one is infringing on your right to interstate travel. You are free to drive a car (your own car or a rented car) on the interstate highway system without any involvement of body scanners or security personnel.
And what if they locked down the interstate highway system too? Would he be free to travel by horse or foot? The government is federally mandating searches at public airports, severely limiting the options for people who don't want to undergo such unconstitutional searches.
Nice list, the hijackers didn't get mobbed, but then all the planes were landed by the pilot. No pilot is going to open up the cockpit door, threats or not. If the demand is to be flown somewhere in particular, that's a possibility that the pilots can do themselves. What good could come by letting the hijackers in? The better odds are to stay in control of the plane.
Slashdot Mirror
I got into Go several years ago
As you state, your experience is several years out of date. Go programs went through a great leap from 2006 to present, due to the technique of Monte Carlo Tree Search.
Interesting, can you name any such software that can play go and has a 4 dan rank?
http://www.gokgs.com/graphPage.jsp?user=zen19
The upshot of this is that endgames of almost maximally strong Go players may be almost infinitely long and complicated.
No, it isn't. You need to get your head out of the clouds and actually learn Go. The game simplifies greatly the closer it gets to the endgame. That's why experienced human players can almost always agree on what stones are dead under Japanese rules without using Jasiek's precise definition of Japanese rules.
They usually come around when it is pointed out that feeding someone food that tastes bad is not abuse. We do it to children all the time.
I've always thought it was abusive to make children eat food that they did not like.
Sitting back and letting everyone else decide who should be in power should be what we hope for in an uninformed populace. He said he didn't pay attention to politics, so any voting he would have done would have been based on campaign ads or what the guy at the bus stop was ranting about.
He still has to take some blame by not becoming informed and voting accordingly. Not that I'm any better. I've voted all of once in my entire life, but I acknowledge it as a personal failing.
From your link: "Lamo also provided Ellen Nakashima of the Washington Post with a complete version of the logs"
Why isn't Greenwald railing against her, too? He seems intent on charging Poulsen with a conspiracy.
Christians believe that while man wrote the scriptures, the writing was "inspired" and free from error.
Which is a pretty ludicrous belief, seeing as different scriptures are inconsistent with each other. You also have the language problem (how many translations exist?) and the historic context problem (different times, different meanings).
Certainly we do not hold Athanasius or Luther or Calvin to be free from error.
So why do you give a free pass to the people wrote the scriptures and to the later committee that compiled the Christian Bible, deciding what went in and what didn't? It's all so much bullshit. You think that men 2,000 years ago managed to write free from error, but after that all the error-free "inspiration" stopped?
Most wealthy nations have some system of subsidies and benefits for the poor/jobless; are we really discussing whether to do away with these, and proposing that the outcome would be better?
In general, I believe in workfare, not welfare. I don't have all the answers, but the idea that you are guaranteed a salary whether you are working or not doesn't sound like a good idea to me.
I see what you're saying. What you didn't make clear in your earlier post, and what I want to highlight here, is that are referring to an already existing "guaranteed income" in the form of the current welfare system, even when people aren't working. You want to pad that out to be higher and include bigger benefits that go beyond even what some low-income people currently make.
I've never understood the incredible attraction of a flat tax; it's not as if piecewise linear functions were what made filing taxes hard.
Probably because it seems fair. Somebody making more will still pay more, but pay the same percentage of their income. The way the percentage of taxes get ratcheted up seems like an unfair tax on the rich. It is just one big example of the constant fiddling Congress does with the tax code, resulting in the absurdly complex tax code we have now.
"Guaranteed minimum income" is just another way of saying "subsidies that avoid the phase-out problem".
That sounds very deceptive to me. If you don't work, does that mean you're guaranteed an income? How is that the same as paying less or more in taxes based on income from actual work?
Unless there's a law saying you can't scrape web pages for email addresses, then the message on his web page is legally worth toilet paper. There has to be some kind of due consideration, and you can't expect a computer program to have parsed and understood his terms on behalf of its operator.
They created two new companies, just after I sued them the first time, but they claimed it was not to avoid my lawsuit but to avoid the Visa anti-fraud/chargeback detection mechanisms.
That actually sounds like a legitimate claim, and quite a hilarious one too. I'm surprised such a rotten company would even tell you that. It might be relevant in your lawsuit.
I'm also still mystified as to what makes people think Android is more of a "smartphone" OS than the J2ME based featurephones everyone has had for a decade - same Java lockin, similar strange low-memory-consumption JVM's, just without reasonably standardized API's.
J2ME was a really cut down Java to handle the weak phones of the times, so it gave people trouble. Android is pretty much Java, which love or hate Java, is pretty easy to build applications in.
I live in Argentina, and you can say all the deranged shit you want about us, most of that shit funded on the lack of information most people in the us have
Most Americans don't know anything or care about Argentina. Americans only know about Venezuela because our government likes to bash them, and Chavez makes for good news.
In my country I can say whatever I want
What can't you say in the United States that you can say in Argentina?
I have free access to the internet
We have public libraries with Internet access. You'll have to pay for utilities that go direct to your house.
there is a place for independent media on national TV
We have the Public Broadcasting Service.
unlike the us, we don't allow the religious right to push for creationism on schools
The issue of teaching Creationism in public schools has been debated in the Supreme Court and Creationism lost.
we don't have anti-terrorism laws
Good for you. I hope it stays that way.
we can't be wiretapped without a court order
Same here.
And we don't spend most of our budget bombing other countries and funding CIAs, FBIs and DHSs
Good for you.
I know you have a hard time facing the truth, but most of the world has way more freedom than the states.
I doubt it. You can't deny the Holocaust in many European countries. Name five countries that are freer than the United States, and I'm sure I can find plenty of non-free aspects to them. As for your "most of the world" remark, laughable.
Nice job, AC. That's the most succinct and right-sounding summary I've read. I can't verify it myself, as I'm not a 4channer.
You have to find the range of IP's allowed through your local network and restrict your spoofing to that range, which in the end doesn't conceal your identity very well anyway.
Why not? Surely a spoofed address from a local network is better than revealing your exact IP address?
Stop whining about your karma, and learn to format paragraphs.
The reason that Bitorrent became popular was because it was a faster protocol
No, it became popular because Napster was sued out of existence.
As far as the credit card company is concerned, I suspect intentional gullibility.
Probably not, as failing to reverse the charges often results in the cardholder dropping their credit card. It's also expensive to get new cardholders, so they really don't like losing a customer without a good reason.
Sometimes I think: fine. All the commercial entities can take the net and turn it into nothing but a big shopping mall [..]
This reminds of a story from 1994: imminent drowning of the net in sticky brown liquid
It's a bit archaic since it talks a lot about Usenet (newsgroups), which has since been taken over by the Web.
That doesn't mean they can't exercise discretion about how they do their jobs. You know, when the gardener manages to trip an explosion from residue in the back yard, I'd say that's enough evidence that the place is not safe, totally outweighing the time spent without accidents.
If they blew that place sky high while clearing it out, everybody would be calling them idiots for attempting to clear it.
No one is infringing on your right to interstate travel. You are free to drive a car (your own car or a rented car) on the interstate highway system without any involvement of body scanners or security personnel.
And what if they locked down the interstate highway system too? Would he be free to travel by horse or foot? The government is federally mandating searches at public airports, severely limiting the options for people who don't want to undergo such unconstitutional searches.
Nice list, the hijackers didn't get mobbed, but then all the planes were landed by the pilot. No pilot is going to open up the cockpit door, threats or not. If the demand is to be flown somewhere in particular, that's a possibility that the pilots can do themselves. What good could come by letting the hijackers in? The better odds are to stay in control of the plane.
So are you going to volunteer to take the shit out one box at a time?
The educated one seem to be doing fine. The Yahoos not so much.
In Swift's novel, the educated ones were just as much Yahoos as the uneducated. He was talking about humanity as a whole.