Comment Re: Hard to believe (Score 1) 166
Firefox was Mozillas spartan. Netscape code really bogged it down. Firefox was just better after the striping
Firefox was Mozillas spartan. Netscape code really bogged it down. Firefox was just better after the striping
Does it test implementation? Game pad support as one example was just now a proposal. IE doesn't support that therefore it is not compliant is not true as no standard implementation is agreed upon
IE 11 implements W3C standards better than any browser. Webkit might have more check offs from html5test but they are not implemented the same way as w3c.
Css 3 animations are a good example. Chrome does not do them right without hacks.
It is not IE 6 anymore and Sun and IBM subverted and changed proposed standards IE 6 used in development on purpose. It was not designed to break Web pages. Mozilla and Netscape were worse in 2001 believe it or not
Doesn't the entire premise assume that the religious have reduced their definition of the soul down to something a bit of code could produce?
how the hell would you save something with no persistence beyond death? it'd be like trying to baptize a dog, or a tree.
Nah; a better comparison would be like making a backup dump. Then, if the original hardware (body) dies, you can just configure a new one and restore all its data from the backup.
Maybe that's what a "soul" really is, a backup made continuously in some celestial data vault.
AI will believe in the creator. (Or will they?)
Of course they will, since they'll generally know their creator(s) personally, and they'll be in routine communication.
A very real problem for the religious folks is that their purported creator seems to refuse to communicate with his (her?) creations. True, religious people routinely claim to be talking directly to their god, but they can't demonstrate this communication to the rest of us. The result is that many of us just dismiss them as making it all up (probably for profit), and they're not really communicating with any such beings at all. If they are, why can't they show us the evidence?
Any real AIs wouldn't have this problem, since their creators would be out and about, showing off their creations for all the world to see (and also for profit).
Problem is they make finding apps more difficult and outlook 2013s lack of colors make it hard to spot marked events.
If the main complaint people have about the new version of Windows is that the icons don't look very nice it must mean this is a pretty good version.
After all, it's not like you can't just change the icons to whatever you want them to be. I'm sure by the time it ships there will be more than a dozen "Classic Icon" themes available for download. I may spend 45 seconds finding one I like and then never think of it again.
Skuemorphic design with gloss, shininess, gradients, are out dated according to the Art professors.
Look at ios 8? Buttons are gone as they represent real objects. Macosx? Yosemite is flat and high color scales and gradients gone. Andriod M? Same. Furniture? That too is now minimalist color and design.
This is the new thing.
Even chromes icon now no longer looks like 3d plastic circa 2011. It is flat and slightly frosted.
The old way is out of date now. You all whined Skuemorphism sucks!!! Look at the leather in macosx address book??? Well the art professors heard. You got it
If only there was some way of detaching politics from science.... Hm....
Easy: make sure to elect only religious people as politicians. So they won't need to bother with science, and can base laws & regulations on holy books alone. While in the meantime, the rest of society can use actual science to discover how the world around us works (and improve our lives in the process).
Oh wait...
I used to ride every day. But my place of work changed, so now I walk and take the train instead. Around home we generally walk as well, so my bike sits unused for months on end.
Walking is also good exercize of course, but it does limit the range of places to go. I should fix up the bike and start using it again come spring.
Journalism has already been crowdsourced. All you have to do is look at the number of blog postings and discussions at any website that references "news" articles (including Slashdot) to realize that.
Newspapers are already being forced into a co-operative model to apply the resources needed to do true investigative reporting, like the most recent HSBC scandal. None of them have enough staff left on the payroll to do it by themselves.
Software and IT have much the same problem, though the "crowd" is a bunch of cheap overseas labourers instead of the general public. But the end result is the same -- highly paid skilled professionals replaced by cheap mob mentality grunts working on the "million monkeys" theory of producing quality.
The legal profession has been impacted big time just by the ability to do keyword searches of article databases instead of paying junior staff to do the legwork of researching relevant cases for the lawyers in a firm. Most new lawyers are finding it hard as hell to get into any real firms to gain experience as a result, much less ever be offered a partnership.
Note that not one of these changes required anything as earth-shattering as "AI" -- just automation and distribution of common tasks.
Automation changes the source of production from workers to machines. And that separates the source of production from the source of consumption.
To put it simply, robots produce wealth but does not consume it. Humans consume wealth, but (in this possible future) can no longer produce it. Robots have owners of course, but even if you ignore what happens to the majority of people, a few extremely wealthy people can not possibly make up for the consumption shortfall. Ten-thousand people with 10k each vastly outconsume (by necessity) a single person worth 100M.
So, if the entities making wealth and those using wealth become separate, you need a way to transfer wealth from one to the other. If not, you will see a slow-moving economic collapse, as lack of demand and cost-cutting automation drive each other down.
A basic income, generated from a tax on production (transaction tax, energy tax, direct tax on machinery) is one way, and has the benefit of being simple, straightforward and having low administrative overhead.
The time spent selecting questions, then answer them in a simple and understandable way is not free. Especially in a climate where even keeping a blog in your spare time is sometimes seen as a suspect frivolity that takes time from your research.
That said, I spend several years of my life helping to get rid of the Morse Code test for radio hams, so that smart folks like you could just take technical tests to get the license.
I'm currently assembling a Softrock Ensemble receiver just to play with SDR. I'm starting to become interested in more than passive receiving â" but a major part of my curiousity is about Morse, not voice. I can talk to anybody over the net after all, while Morse code communication feels like a very different kind of thing.
MESSAGE ACKNOWLEDGED -- The Pershing II missiles have been launched.