i think it would get real old real fast. if my eyes are bleeding, i want it to be because i'm blowing stuff up (on the computer or not), not from staring at spreadsheets from 9 to 5.
i myself am a young person, and i spend the vast majority of my (and everybody else's) time in front of the computer. at school, if people have a computer problem, i'm pretty high on the list of who to go to, and i like that just fine. However, getting a job in it seems like the most boring thing imaginable. I spend enough time in front of a computer, and i don't want work mixed in with that. i would much prefer a cool job like something in biochemistry. Making pigs glow in the dark sounds infinitely more rewording than running helpdesk.
im a staunch athiest, yay 6 billion or so year old earth and such. but i still believe in government impartiality when it comes to these things. im not for creationism being taught in schools, but isnt that the individual school districts right to make it available? belief in the bible (torah, koran, etc) is very serious to some people, and the stories of creation are the foundation of man's place on earth, and the closest thing many people have to true introspection, but its 3am and i digress. My point is that the government cannot take sides in a religious/secular debate, just as it cannot take sides in a purely religious one. Yes, science funding is important and should be increased whenever there is cash, because America has much to gain from it, but we have little to gain from killing its competition .
Whole microbes surviving in an airless, nutrientless, radiation-saturated enviornment is not unprecedented. The Apollo 12 crew found scores of living streptococcus mitus doing just fine on the Surveyor probes on the moon, which had been there for three years.
While its doubtful whole cells came here and populated the planet, it also seems unlikely that the Earth alone provided all the ingredients.
the Singularity is not just about improving computers' metacognition until they become aware, but also augmenting ourselves. We can be the self-improving 'artificial' intelligences.
And proccessing power need not be purely electrical. Mechanical computers used to be the norm, is what they do not also information processing? And what of 'natural' processors? I imagine if you engineered a brain-like neural mass of synthetic cells, it could play a mean game of chess. Replace the executive system of a monkeys brain with that, and you have a monkey that could beat Kasparov just as easily as Deep Blue, and it could move the pieces itself.
unions are as capitalistic as it gets! plumbers getting together and controlling plumbing prices is no different than oil companies getting together and deciding oil prices.
The more capable you are, the bigger responsibility you have to your country. Therefore, the largest of corporations should be pillars of altruism. Sure their focus is to make money, but thats not impossible to do at the same time as making the world a better place.
completely crazy suggestion. why hide a bee-you-tee-full dish under a rock? we use cable, but i still want a dish on my roof, even if i doesnt do anything.
if email is the biggest issue, a pda that gets wireless intarwebs from cell towers could be the solution. i hears talk that their making ones that are actually faster than wired broadband.
some of my favorite matches had only-a-wedge-on-wheels bots! it was funny watching them take one or two hits from a pneumatic pick hammer and stop working, or even better, get flipped over and impaled again.
the return system would doubtlessly take up too much precious space on the vessel to make sending a man to mars be worthwhile. what does NASA hope to accomplish by sending a human to mars? why not bigger and better robots? i could understand sending someone half-way, to deploy the robots, and maybe hang out in space a bit, making sure they touch down alright, but why do we need a human on mars, what with the singularity so near?;)
how little gravity it has doesn't mean you wouldn't have to land thrusters down, or have another means of righting the ship. the lunar lander could pull this off because it could just 'jump' into earth's gravity, and then free fall. to make a mars round trip you would need to construct a shuttle capable of making two liftoffs, the second one with no assisting structures, and then steer itself back to earth.
a round trip isnt really feasible. the moon was a round trip because all they needed was the dainty little capsule to leave the moons gravity and reenter the earth's. a round trip to mars would require the vessel to have a mechanism for standing itself back up once it landed (to accomplish this with something like the space shuttle, you would need your one man to build the infrastructure of a launch site), and still have room for a second tank of gas.
i believe it would be a better idea to first send a few drone ships to land and automatically prepare a base to receive humans.
i never understood why the pirate bay always shows up in the news as being under fire for distributing intellectual property. in my experience, it never has any seeders.
i was six when i was introduced to donkey kong and mario, and seven when i got the blood and gore of mortal kombat 3. i'm just fine, but i don't know what evidence i can supply for that that won't make me sound like a troll. kids are never too young to learn a new trade. just last week i tought my 3 year old little bro how to operate a mouse and navigate a web page. if he gets hooked on teh interwebs, imagine how much of an incentive that will be to learn to read.
Slashdot Mirror
by shortening check-out line conversations almost down to nothing, i can now shop for groceries without fear of making prolonged social interactions.
my page claims my name is Nyarlathotep, that i am 8ft 11in, and that my occupation is 'Harbinger of the Endtimes'
i think it would get real old real fast. if my eyes are bleeding, i want it to be because i'm blowing stuff up (on the computer or not), not from staring at spreadsheets from 9 to 5.
i myself am a young person, and i spend the vast majority of my (and everybody else's) time in front of the computer. at school, if people have a computer problem, i'm pretty high on the list of who to go to, and i like that just fine. However, getting a job in it seems like the most boring thing imaginable. I spend enough time in front of a computer, and i don't want work mixed in with that. i would much prefer a cool job like something in biochemistry. Making pigs glow in the dark sounds infinitely more rewording than running helpdesk.
im a staunch athiest, yay 6 billion or so year old earth and such. but i still believe in government impartiality when it comes to these things. im not for creationism being taught in schools, but isnt that the individual school districts right to make it available? belief in the bible (torah, koran, etc) is very serious to some people, and the stories of creation are the foundation of man's place on earth, and the closest thing many people have to true introspection, but its 3am and i digress. My point is that the government cannot take sides in a religious/secular debate, just as it cannot take sides in a purely religious one. Yes, science funding is important and should be increased whenever there is cash, because America has much to gain from it, but we have little to gain from killing its competition .
Whole microbes surviving in an airless, nutrientless, radiation-saturated enviornment is not unprecedented. The Apollo 12 crew found scores of living streptococcus mitus doing just fine on the Surveyor probes on the moon, which had been there for three years. While its doubtful whole cells came here and populated the planet, it also seems unlikely that the Earth alone provided all the ingredients.
the Singularity is not just about improving computers' metacognition until they become aware, but also augmenting ourselves. We can be the self-improving 'artificial' intelligences. And proccessing power need not be purely electrical. Mechanical computers used to be the norm, is what they do not also information processing? And what of 'natural' processors? I imagine if you engineered a brain-like neural mass of synthetic cells, it could play a mean game of chess. Replace the executive system of a monkeys brain with that, and you have a monkey that could beat Kasparov just as easily as Deep Blue, and it could move the pieces itself.
42 days, and then they charge you with something. And arrest your lawyer for 42 days.
yes. lasers are a god given right, pretty sure Jefferson said that.
Tactical High Energy Lasers. Everywhere. /discussion
unions are as capitalistic as it gets! plumbers getting together and controlling plumbing prices is no different than oil companies getting together and deciding oil prices.
The more capable you are, the bigger responsibility you have to your country. Therefore, the largest of corporations should be pillars of altruism. Sure their focus is to make money, but thats not impossible to do at the same time as making the world a better place.
completely crazy suggestion. why hide a bee-you-tee-full dish under a rock? we use cable, but i still want a dish on my roof, even if i doesnt do anything.
if email is the biggest issue, a pda that gets wireless intarwebs from cell towers could be the solution. i hears talk that their making ones that are actually faster than wired broadband.
its a light bulb in a firehouse somewhere thats been running the most basic program ever for 107 years, nonstop. if(true){ON}
Man, the macbook air is suuuch a lightweight!
what? no, there will be no need for any more games. it will be that good
article doesnt even mention spore. from the demos i have seen, it will likely be the last game i ever play.
some of my favorite matches had only-a-wedge-on-wheels bots! it was funny watching them take one or two hits from a pneumatic pick hammer and stop working, or even better, get flipped over and impaled again.
the return system would doubtlessly take up too much precious space on the vessel to make sending a man to mars be worthwhile. what does NASA hope to accomplish by sending a human to mars? why not bigger and better robots? i could understand sending someone half-way, to deploy the robots, and maybe hang out in space a bit, making sure they touch down alright, but why do we need a human on mars, what with the singularity so near? ;)
how little gravity it has doesn't mean you wouldn't have to land thrusters down, or have another means of righting the ship. the lunar lander could pull this off because it could just 'jump' into earth's gravity, and then free fall. to make a mars round trip you would need to construct a shuttle capable of making two liftoffs, the second one with no assisting structures, and then steer itself back to earth.
a round trip isnt really feasible. the moon was a round trip because all they needed was the dainty little capsule to leave the moons gravity and reenter the earth's. a round trip to mars would require the vessel to have a mechanism for standing itself back up once it landed (to accomplish this with something like the space shuttle, you would need your one man to build the infrastructure of a launch site), and still have room for a second tank of gas. i believe it would be a better idea to first send a few drone ships to land and automatically prepare a base to receive humans.
i never understood why the pirate bay always shows up in the news as being under fire for distributing intellectual property. in my experience, it never has any seeders.
i was six when i was introduced to donkey kong and mario, and seven when i got the blood and gore of mortal kombat 3. i'm just fine, but i don't know what evidence i can supply for that that won't make me sound like a troll. kids are never too young to learn a new trade. just last week i tought my 3 year old little bro how to operate a mouse and navigate a web page. if he gets hooked on teh interwebs, imagine how much of an incentive that will be to learn to read.
in space, no one hear you scream