Of course it's cheating, it's subverting the rules of the game. The robot is showing its hand after seeing yours. The fact that it does so fast enough to fool human perception doesn't change this.
Your comparison with chess is invalid: Deep Blue plays chess according to the rules of chess. This robot, on the other, is not playing according to the rules of Rock/Paper/Scissors, therefore it is cheating.
Cheating is a perfectly valid description. It's subverting the rules of the game by showing its Rock/Paper/Scissors are seeing its opponent's hand. Intention has nothing to do with it.
Since the IRA also engaged in terrorism, there seems to be a flaw in your understanding
You misunderstand. That definition is not "my understanding". It's the apparent definition that The Media and The Authorities seem to be adhering to.
Terrorism(n.): When a white person is killed by a Muslim.
Just because you trust someone to be _trustworthy_ doesn't mean that you trust their _opinions_. For example, I would trust some members of my family to not abuse having a house key, for example; wouldn't stop them from talking nonsense I don't agree with, though
If there's a query about which units are being used, the question "Is that 'real' GB or do you mean 'marketing' GB?" is the way I usually phrase it.
These guidelines are not chilling: they are the opposite. Following the introduction of these guidelines, many knee-jerk prosecutions will not take place, whereas previously they would have taken place.
Whoever wrote the Slashdot headline is entirely wrong.
Was there nowhere quieter to record? Piped music, other people chatting and moving about etc. A shame...
This will be chaotic. End-user confusion or fraud will occur when WHATEVER.co.uk and WHATEVER.uk are owned by different people/organisations. Say, when the
Also, the notes say that the extra costs will be used for: "[D]aily monitoring for malicious software and viruses" - monitoring of what, exactly? All pages of all web sites on all subdomains?
"Security Theater" implies that it is harmless, in my opinion. I don't believe that's the case here. What's a better term for "not meeting the objectives it's supposedly trying to meet and being actively harmful in the process"?
This is an interesting technical exercise. However, it won't stop me playing this opening as White. This opening leads to all sorts of exciting games in all sorts of situations.
It can also have a great psychological effect, not greatly diminished by this new study of it. If you need to win a particular game, playing the Kings Gambit with White sends a strong "OK, buddy, this is an all or nothing game!" message to your opponent.
Just because a computer has figured out a way to win, doesn't mean that a typical opponent will have learnt the right continuation in every variation or that they will remember it over the board.
You can "deliver better uptime" by not using DRM in the first place. Voila, 100% 'uptime' with no infrastructure required.
52-minutes is 'quick-look'?? Really?
"Ninety percent of baseball is half mental." -- Yogi Berra
