Most slashdotters would be running ad blocking software anyway. I know I am. I'd also never buy something based on seeing it in a banner ad.
On the other hand, I'd actually think about buying iRacer, watching Top Gear, or buying the magazine after reading this interesting article. That's how the web is meant to be used.
"Hah! Attempted murder? Now honestly, what is that? Do they give a Nobel prize for attempted chemistry? Do they?"
If you read the link in the article, you'll see that Eyebeam is more like an art project than a security research project.
If pressed, many logicians will admit that the modern foundation of mathematics (ZFC) is probably inconsistent.
See this article:
http://www.math.princeton.edu/~nelson/papers/warn.pdf
The author discusses an informal survey he took among loogicians on page three.
If someone ever discovers a paradox, we can simply scale back to some other system and keep most of what we know, but still...
Sorry for replying to my own post, but I guess I meant any non-supercomputer. Apparently they've managed to get clusters to play at amateur Dan level over the last couple of years.
For the record, the go ranking system works out as
30 Kyu
5 dan amateur european is about equal to 1 dan professional, due to inconsistencies in rankings between countries.
Ugh. What's with perpetuating this nonsense? A computer did not beat the top ranked Western chess player. Rather, a group of people _reprogrammed the computer after each match_ to beat the top ranked Western chess player.
TFA, it is annoyingly vague on an important point: What is the rank of the Japanese player that lost?
And as others have pointed out, let see a computer take down a top ranked (10th Dan) player at Go. The best a machine has done (I think) is winning against a 5th Dan.
That's only on a 9x9 board. A competent low Kyu or Dan player could crush any computer on a 19x19 board.
For people who don't play go: the difference between 9x9 and 19x19 is a bit like the difference between ping-pong and tennis.
Hell, give them another TWO dimensions. That way, you'll be going to work and suddenly someone will rear-end you from above the previous Thursday. You can continue on your merry way because the whole mess will already have been taken care of.
"What does not kill me, makes me stronger."
That's what my dad used to say.
Until the accident.
Yes, the penny dropped when I looked up Steven Rado as mentioned in the summary.
Here's his website. It's one step away from timecube.
http://www.aethro-kinematics.com/
He seems to be supporting the idea of the luminiferous aether, a concept which physics abandoned over 100 years ago.
I wish it weren't so, but when you involve most people's kids in a story, all critical or rational thought goes out the window. That's just the way things are.
Let's go with
4+3+2 = (inf{n: two nilpotent endomorphisms from C^n with the same minimal polynomial and the same rank are not always similar}) + 2
But hey this is the 'land of the free'
To paraphrase one of Dave Foster Wallace's characters, that's freedom from, not freedom to.
Yeah, well, you know, that's just, like, your opinion, man.
Cloaking uses metamaterials which have a negative refractive index- these bend light rays around the object being cloaked. Very recently, physicists and engineers realised that a similar principle can be applied to pressure waves caused by earthquakes. With the right design, the shockwaves might be bent around a building, rendering it "invisible" to an earthquake.
This was previously thought impossible due to mistakes in some engineering research articles.
Link here:
http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2009/07/090720105125.htm
More techncial articles can be found by googling "elastic cloaking".
And it should be the law: If you use the word `paradigm' without knowing what the dictionary says it means, you go to jail. No exceptions. -- David Jones
