I didn't actually see the space shuttle until it had exploded, so all my photos are of the shuttle as it burns and breaks up. The instant that the shuttle exploded was dramatic. One second I'm looking for it, the next, it was a bright burning ball of fire.
All it takes is for one jerk to wear a trenchcoat, and ruin it for the rest of it. Nevermind that it doesn't have much to do with the trenchcoat, but the fact that a murderer once wore a trenchcoat.
So, the copy of yourself is exact, and nobody can tell the copy from the original.
But, what makes you so special that you feel that you would be able to tell. I don't think there's anything at all. A good enough copy would fool everyone, including the person teleported.
In an instant, your brain is in a certain state, and that state is an instant of your awareness, it's your *self* really. So, when that instant is gone, that "self" that existed in that instant is dead, to be replace by another one. Does that bother you? The configuration of human being that existed in that instant was unique, and it's gone forever, never to return.
It's like a movie. Each frame is a progression in the sequence, and nobody weeps because each frame lives a split second. So, that's how I see it. I can have my atoms replaced one at a time by ingesting them and laborously moving them around my body with chemical processes. Or, I can have them replaced all at once in a teleporter. Either way, the person that was composed of those old atoms, and existed in those long past instants of time is gone, replaced by the new me.
(This article was typed by a long sequence of millions and millions of instances of PD, for your amusement.)
I work for a small company in Austin TX that ports software. We like to brag that we can port anything to anything, but in reality, all the work that I seem to be doing is porting from either Solaris or HP-UX to Linux. AIX takes a very close second to the targets that we are porting to. Of course, this is very biased, since we're an IBM business partner.:-) I'm sure there's ports going on somewhere to Solaris and HP-UX.
In all of the arrangements that I've been involved with IBM on, their people have been completely indifferent about porting to Linux in preference to AIX. They simply don't seem to care what the hardware is running, as long as the customer is buying shiny new IBM boxes.
Something interesting though - IBM's Visual Age for C++ compiler was a pain in the ass to figure out. There's a zillion command line switches, and getting the right ones set to build proper dynamic libraries took a bit of figuring out. gcc was much nicer in that regard. But, now that I've got them figured out, I really like IBM's compiler more than gcc 2.95. I haven't had the luck of using gcc 3.2.1 yet (third party libraries aren't typically built with it yet, and I use Debian at home) but I can't wait. That new gcc compiler will really be sweet.
OK, Mr. Macho - I've got a tank of plutonium vapor. If you fire a potato through a screen door with it, you'll have crispy fries before they hit the ground.
I know a guy who got a stroke from running through an airport with a computer back hung from the left shoulder to the right hip. It was compressing the artery and KERPOW. He recovered.
And I just read a story about another guy who got a stroke from crinking his head to the side to hold a phone on his shoulder. It was a 57 minute call, and he was pinching a blood vessel in his neck.
I was not including the European and some other democracies, which are in many ways more open than the United States, in both policy and culture. Most countries don't approach the small bunch of open nations at the top; those were what I was referring to.
Anti-trust is irrelevant. The closed source companies will have to change or die. This is no different than it already is.
Note that nothing I said talked about closed source companies. I was talking about US attempts to influence adoption of open source internationally, which will fail. Backfire even.
I've got nothing against closed source. Closed source companies will need to adapt or die. This is exactly the same situation that they are in already.
Remember, closed source companies are a component of an open society. But as open as that society is, it cannot control something that is even more open. That's all I am saying.
Marginal cost is the cost to make just one more unit (I think - I'm a programmer, not a whatever it is that invented a marginal cost.)
So, if it costs a million dollars to make 1000 computers, and if it would cost $50 more to make one more computer after that, then the marginal cost is $50.
We need to know what the marginal cost of resources is for making just one more DRAM chip.
Might not be as bad as you would think. Take the lore of the far-right fundamentalists and you've got the makings of a good game. Angels vs. Demons in a first person flaming swordfight, with large scale battles, expansive history and story, and memorable characters. Don't tell me that Gabriel or Uriel doesn't have some macho aspect to them.
As an atheist, that's a game that I'd enjoy playing.
Re:Before everyone shouts global warming...
on
The Sky Is Rising
·
· Score: 3, Insightful
It's been shown that at least some of the change is due to human activity, and we can't wave our hands and make that just go away.
If either of those people said that the UFOs were real, I'd not believe them, but would want to test it myself. But, if someone lesser said UFOs were real, I wouldn't even bother testing it. The difference is subtle.
That's the kind of thinking that gets people in trouble. The person flapping their lips and making noises has no bearing on the truth of what they are saying. The statement must be judged independant of who says it.
Example: Drink this kool-aid, it's delicious. I am a former Congressman, so you can trust me.
You are sure bent on making a flame war on something pretty dumb.
Flamewar? This is the tamest flamewar I've ever seen. I thought it was a discussion.
Its measured in direct focus groups in which people are given different talking options.
Ah, I see what our difference is now. I almost never agree with the majority, since my desires are much different than everyone elses. For example, I want a two seat, convertable, hybrid gas-ELECTRIC roadster very badly. And I want it talking. I find cars built by focus groups to be boring. Case in point: Compare the Olds Alero concept car to the one they actually produced. Those focus groups managed to turn a very sweet concept into my Dad's Oldsmobile.
If they're annoyed with them it's not because they're talking. I can't imagine a fighter pilot being annoyed when Bitching Betty saves his life by telling him to pull up. I can understand how he'd be annoyed if Bitching Betty keeps telling him to pull up, when he's trying to fly under radar at 100 ft.
Seems like you made the same mistake that GM made - you assumed that it was the talking that was the problem, when it's really what they are saying.
Things I'd like my car to say to me:
1) tell me to get some gas when I have a half gallon in the tank. Tell me ONCE. Don't annoy me with it.
2) Tell me door is OPEN. Don't tell me that my door is a jar. It's not a jar. It's a door. And it's open.
Basically, anything that there's an idiot light for, there can be a voice for. But there needs to be rules:
-if there's a special condition, tell me once then shut up about it. I can refer to the instruments for further information.
-if I have 5 different things going off at the same time, don't itemize. Just say something like "Problems detected, please look at the dash display." Then shut up about it.
See? Not an annoying voice. A useful voice. I should be CEO of General Motors or something.
The whole "door is ajar" thing is a symptom of what's wrong with Detroit carmakers.
They made a talking car. Then they made the talking car say stupid things. When people laughed, they assumed it was because they didn't want a talking car! Stupid Detroit.
I want a talking car, but please make it say something I want to hear.
Slashdot Mirror
I have my photos on my website:
www.pdrap.org, link from the front page.
The actual photo page is here
I didn't actually see the space shuttle until it had exploded, so all my photos are of the shuttle as it burns and breaks up. The instant that the shuttle exploded was dramatic. One second I'm looking for it, the next, it was a bright burning ball of fire.
Very sad. Columbia was my favorite shuttle.
Do you find this photograph to also be disturbing
:-)
I personally find this one to be horrifying.
All it takes is for one jerk to wear a trenchcoat, and ruin it for the rest of it. Nevermind that it doesn't have much to do with the trenchcoat, but the fact that a murderer once wore a trenchcoat.
Forget the virii, I'm concerned about the viruses.
So, the copy of yourself is exact, and nobody can tell the copy from the original.
But, what makes you so special that you feel that you would be able to tell. I don't think there's anything at all. A good enough copy would fool everyone, including the person teleported.
In an instant, your brain is in a certain state, and that state is an instant of your awareness, it's your *self* really. So, when that instant is gone, that "self" that existed in that instant is dead, to be replace by another one. Does that bother you? The configuration of human being that existed in that instant was unique, and it's gone forever, never to return.
It's like a movie. Each frame is a progression in the sequence, and nobody weeps because each frame lives a split second. So, that's how I see it. I can have my atoms replaced one at a time by ingesting them and laborously moving them around my body with chemical processes. Or, I can have them replaced all at once in a teleporter. Either way, the person that was composed of those old atoms, and existed in those long past instants of time is gone, replaced by the new me.
(This article was typed by a long sequence of millions and millions of instances of PD, for your amusement.)
I work for a small company in Austin TX that ports software. We like to brag that we can port anything to anything, but in reality, all the work that I seem to be doing is porting from either Solaris or HP-UX to Linux. AIX takes a very close second to the targets that we are porting to. Of course, this is very biased, since we're an IBM business partner. :-) I'm sure there's ports going on somewhere to Solaris and HP-UX.
In all of the arrangements that I've been involved with IBM on, their people have been completely indifferent about porting to Linux in preference to AIX. They simply don't seem to care what the hardware is running, as long as the customer is buying shiny new IBM boxes.
Something interesting though - IBM's Visual Age for C++ compiler was a pain in the ass to figure out. There's a zillion command line switches, and getting the right ones set to build proper dynamic libraries took a bit of figuring out. gcc was much nicer in that regard. But, now that I've got them figured out, I really like IBM's compiler more than gcc 2.95. I haven't had the luck of using gcc 3.2.1 yet (third party libraries aren't typically built with it yet, and I use Debian at home) but I can't wait. That new gcc compiler will really be sweet.
OK, Mr. Macho - I've got a tank of plutonium vapor. If you fire a potato through a screen door with it, you'll have crispy fries before they hit the ground.
I know a guy who got a stroke from running through an airport with a computer back hung from the left shoulder to the right hip. It was compressing the artery and KERPOW. He recovered.
And I just read a story about another guy who got a stroke from crinking his head to the side to hold a phone on his shoulder. It was a 57 minute call, and he was pinching a blood vessel in his neck.
So be careful.
I was not including the European and some other democracies, which are in many ways more open than the United States, in both policy and culture. Most countries don't approach the small bunch of open nations at the top; those were what I was referring to.
Anti-trust is irrelevant. The closed source companies will have to change or die. This is no different than it already is.
Note that nothing I said talked about closed source companies. I was talking about US attempts to influence adoption of open source internationally, which will fail. Backfire even.
I've got nothing against closed source. Closed source companies will need to adapt or die. This is exactly the same situation that they are in already.
Remember, closed source companies are a component of an open society. But as open as that society is, it cannot control something that is even more open. That's all I am saying.
No, it proved that eating potato chips is more efficient than eating cabbage.
Can you tell that I mock your ideas? Open is a more general idea than capitalist. Capitalism in a closed society is called fascism.
The free world won the cold war because an open society is more efficient than a closed one.
Free software will win on the same basis. Sure, the US is open compared to most of the countries in the world, but it's not as open as open source.
STOP your filthy lies! Benchmarking is vandalism, and it's not tolerated here.
Yet another moron who doesn't know the difference between a patent and a copyright.
Marginal cost is the cost to make just one more unit (I think - I'm a programmer, not a whatever it is that invented a marginal cost.)
So, if it costs a million dollars to make 1000 computers, and if it would cost $50 more to make one more computer after that, then the marginal cost is $50.
We need to know what the marginal cost of resources is for making just one more DRAM chip.
Might not be as bad as you would think. Take the lore of the far-right fundamentalists and you've got the makings of a good game. Angels vs. Demons in a first person flaming swordfight, with large scale battles, expansive history and story, and memorable characters. Don't tell me that Gabriel or Uriel doesn't have some macho aspect to them.
As an atheist, that's a game that I'd enjoy playing.
It's been shown that at least some of the change is due to human activity, and we can't wave our hands and make that just go away.
chose to be kept in Federal prison without a trial for more than 4 years
Did Kevin waive his right to a speedy trial? I think I read that somewhere.
How else can we explain how the editors are finding these old stories?
If either of those people said that the UFOs were real, I'd not believe them, but would want to test it myself. But, if someone lesser said UFOs were real, I wouldn't even bother testing it. The difference is subtle.
That's the kind of thinking that gets people in trouble. The person flapping their lips and making noises has no bearing on the truth of what they are saying. The statement must be judged independant of who says it.
Example: Drink this kool-aid, it's delicious. I am a former Congressman, so you can trust me.
You are sure bent on making a flame war on something pretty dumb.
Flamewar? This is the tamest flamewar I've ever seen. I thought it was a discussion.
Its measured in direct focus groups in which people are given different talking options.
Ah, I see what our difference is now. I almost never agree with the majority, since my desires are much different than everyone elses. For example, I want a two seat, convertable, hybrid gas-ELECTRIC roadster very badly. And I want it talking. I find cars built by focus groups to be boring. Case in point: Compare the Olds Alero concept car to the one they actually produced. Those focus groups managed to turn a very sweet concept into my Dad's Oldsmobile.
"Never piss off the people who own the printing presses."
If they're annoyed with them it's not because they're talking. I can't imagine a fighter pilot being annoyed when Bitching Betty saves his life by telling him to pull up. I can understand how he'd be annoyed if Bitching Betty keeps telling him to pull up, when he's trying to fly under radar at 100 ft.
Seems like you made the same mistake that GM made - you assumed that it was the talking that was the problem, when it's really what they are saying.
Things I'd like my car to say to me:
1) tell me to get some gas when I have a half gallon in the tank. Tell me ONCE. Don't annoy me with it.
2) Tell me door is OPEN. Don't tell me that my door is a jar. It's not a jar. It's a door. And it's open.
Basically, anything that there's an idiot light for, there can be a voice for. But there needs to be rules:
-if there's a special condition, tell me once then shut up about it. I can refer to the instruments for further information.
-if I have 5 different things going off at the same time, don't itemize. Just say something like "Problems detected, please look at the dash display." Then shut up about it.
See? Not an annoying voice. A useful voice. I should be CEO of General Motors or something.
Depends on what you launch. Last thing the Saturn V sent to space was Skylab.
The whole "door is ajar" thing is a symptom of what's wrong with Detroit carmakers.
They made a talking car. Then they made the talking car say stupid things. When people laughed, they assumed it was because they didn't want a talking car! Stupid Detroit.
I want a talking car, but please make it say something I want to hear.