What they mean is that it's not pay-to-win, unlike many other "free" games. Almost all purchasable items are purely cosmetic (skins, special effects, non-fighting pets that follow you) and have no gameplay effect, apart from one: extra stash tab to store items. These are nice to have, but not necessary to roll a successful character.
I predict that the Unknown Powers will convince the committee to bail out and either (a) drop this idea overall (b) default to some old broken/flawed crypto protocol. Check back in 1 year.
Please explain to me once again how switching the bindings of Alt-W and Ctrl-C would irremediably change the "editing paradigm".
Re your other comment, Windows shortcuts are not better, they are standard.
And no, you're wrong, I have been using Emacs for a while and I still use it every now and then today. I have kept the habit of pressing Ctrl-X Ctrl-S to save rather than simply Ctrl-S when I am using another editor. Doesn't do me any good and is occasionally dangerous (when I happen to have highlighted text, or stuff in the clipboard I wish to preserve).
I would approve of requiring labeling on food if it was produced by one of these.
And yet it should be safer than regular food, if I understand correctly. There's less risk of virus infections and DNA transfer with humans (assuming it's a real risk in the first place...).
People like what they're used to, even if it's not necessarily the best thing. That's why it takes an awful lot of work to convince someone to switch from Windows to Linux, especially when they are at a point in which regedit-hacking is "natural" and "easy" to them. That's why neither Emacs nor Vi have adopted standard rest-of-the-world shortcuts such as ctrl+c, ctrl+v, after they've been around for, like, 30 years? That's why you can't remove an option or change something in a software without disrupting someone's workflow (I'm too lazy to look up the relevant xkcd). My answer is: forget about these old get-off-my-lawn users grumbling and go on, especially if what you are doing makes sense from a usability point of view. Focus on making things easy for new users instead.
(I guess I can kiss my karma goodbye - I have probably offended every possible category of Slashdot users here.)
I like some of the more subtle details in the title and summary: new math "techniques", "researchers need new mathematical tools", etc.
The summary isn't too inaccurate; what they are talking about is compressed sensing https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Compressed_sensing, i.e., the search for sparse (as in: with few nonzero elements) solutions to underdetermined systems of nonlinear equations. "Sparse" is understood in suitable basis, so for instance for a sound it could mean few different frequencies. The problem in itself is NP-hard, but it turns out that in some cases of interest you can get the solution or a reasonable approximation by solving a convex programming problem (minimizing the 1-norm rather than the sparsity).
There's worse than that. Traceroute packages are special packages with some options set so that you can check which way they go through. Who guarantees you that *all the other* packages are not taking a different path? Who guarantees you that your packages do not take one or two more hops through modified routers whose IP stack does not decrease the TTL variable as it should?
From what you say, it looks a lot like OpenSSL's fault: why does the RNG work even without proper initialization, allowing users to do the wrong thing in the first place? It should return an error unless safe_init() is called before get_random_number().
Scaling has occurred at a fairly constant linear rate of about 1 qubit per annum since the earliest machines were produced. There's no signs of an exponential take-off the way there was with conventional computing hardware
Shouldn't 1 qubit/year already be considered an exponential growth? After all, if (say) RAM doubles its size every year, you are adding 1 bit per year to the available address space.
Actually I think it would be possible to make a browser-based e-mail interface that decrypts everything client-side without sending any private key to the server. It just takes a bit of javascript magic. (Will we see Google implementing it anytime soon though? Doubt it.)
Sure, it's all easy and fun until something like this happens: http://theconversation.com/the-reinhart-rogoff-error-or-how-not-to-excel-at-economics-13646.
(I'm not saying that errors do not happen with databases, but the fact that the logic in your code is written in one bazillion copy-and-pasted formulas makes it very, very easy to screw up something. And it makes it impossible to write proper tests.)
Slashdot Mirror
What they mean is that it's not pay-to-win, unlike many other "free" games. Almost all purchasable items are purely cosmetic (skins, special effects, non-fighting pets that follow you) and have no gameplay effect, apart from one: extra stash tab to store items. These are nice to have, but not necessary to roll a successful character.
I predict that the Unknown Powers will convince the committee to bail out and either (a) drop this idea overall (b) default to some old broken/flawed crypto protocol. Check back in 1 year.
There's the issue.
That's what happens when you let a particle physicist design the experiment. (relevant: http://abstrusegoose.com/156)
Re your other comment, Windows shortcuts are not better, they are standard.
And no, you're wrong, I have been using Emacs for a while and I still use it every now and then today. I have kept the habit of pressing Ctrl-X Ctrl-S to save rather than simply Ctrl-S when I am using another editor. Doesn't do me any good and is occasionally dangerous (when I happen to have highlighted text, or stuff in the clipboard I wish to preserve).
And yet it should be safer than regular food, if I understand correctly. There's less risk of virus infections and DNA transfer with humans (assuming it's a real risk in the first place...).
People like what they're used to, even if it's not necessarily the best thing.
That's why it takes an awful lot of work to convince someone to switch from Windows to Linux, especially when they are at a point in which regedit-hacking is "natural" and "easy" to them.
That's why neither Emacs nor Vi have adopted standard rest-of-the-world shortcuts such as ctrl+c, ctrl+v, after they've been around for, like, 30 years?
That's why you can't remove an option or change something in a software without disrupting someone's workflow (I'm too lazy to look up the relevant xkcd).
My answer is: forget about these old get-off-my-lawn users grumbling and go on, especially if what you are doing makes sense from a usability point of view. Focus on making things easy for new users instead.
(I guess I can kiss my karma goodbye - I have probably offended every possible category of Slashdot users here.)
The summary isn't too inaccurate; what they are talking about is compressed sensing https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Compressed_sensing, i.e., the search for sparse (as in: with few nonzero elements) solutions to underdetermined systems of nonlinear equations. "Sparse" is understood in suitable basis, so for instance for a sound it could mean few different frequencies. The problem in itself is NP-hard, but it turns out that in some cases of interest you can get the solution or a reasonable approximation by solving a convex programming problem (minimizing the 1-norm rather than the sparsity).
50 years... in which time frame?
There's worse than that. Traceroute packages are special packages with some options set so that you can check which way they go through. Who guarantees you that *all the other* packages are not taking a different path? Who guarantees you that your packages do not take one or two more hops through modified routers whose IP stack does not decrease the TTL variable as it should?
"Suspected"? How large a rock have you been living under? http://www.theregister.co.uk/2011/04/11/state_of_ssl_analysis/
I've heard Element 123 possesses weapons of mass destruction. Is that enough for a reason?
Would this be different with opt-in instead of opt-out?
Great Scott, Marty McFly, is that you?
From what you say, it looks a lot like OpenSSL's fault: why does the RNG work even without proper initialization, allowing users to do the wrong thing in the first place? It should return an error unless safe_init() is called before get_random_number().
Just play it out loud, and every hipster around you will reach for their pocket.
Shouldn't 1 qubit/year already be considered an exponential growth? After all, if (say) RAM doubles its size every year, you are adding 1 bit per year to the available address space.
Actually I think it would be possible to make a browser-based e-mail interface that decrypts everything client-side without sending any private key to the server. It just takes a bit of javascript magic. (Will we see Google implementing it anytime soon though? Doubt it.)
<more cynicism> Is Dropbox? </more cynicism>
Sure, it's all easy and fun until something like this happens: http://theconversation.com/the-reinhart-rogoff-error-or-how-not-to-excel-at-economics-13646. (I'm not saying that errors do not happen with databases, but the fact that the logic in your code is written in one bazillion copy-and-pasted formulas makes it very, very easy to screw up something. And it makes it impossible to write proper tests.)
Calm down, Neo.
Still looks like a step forward from Perl.
Not to mention that Berlin has a great hacking & programming scene. Check for instance the initiatives here: http://c-base.org/.
"Suffered"? I am fairly sure that didn't cause any pain, physical or emotional.
I see you are one of the 40% of healthy adults who struggle with sarcasm. Don't worry, you are in good company.