frevd

Yeah I guess in order to make this into a simulation, one would effectively add all the exponential time back, since it requires all that to "run" an amoeba on a classical computer. In that article they mention the organism communicating across its body, i.e. reacting to stimuli in all parts in a correlated fashion, that is the bit referring to a quantum system. Of course all physical systems are quantum systems (if I actually had a phone that one too yes, although the operating system does not make use of its nature). So there is no question whether we can simulate that algorithm, it cannot be possible without calculating all the parts, and that is no longer linear time.

Right, it is not guaranteed to find _the_ best solution possible, but at least it does find _some_ solution to NP-complete problems in linear time, which no classical algorithm is expected to be able to do. Now they claim in that article to have made a simulation of this running on a classical computer exhibiting the same characteristics, which frankly should not be possible. so where is the catch?

No, if I understood right, this thing is a quantum computer solving NP-complete problems in linear time. And the article claims to have a simulation doing the same, but they are not sure whether this is actually only a special case scenario.

It's not Intel's issue, it's a design flaw per se, affecting _all_ CPUs that use predictive branch execution that has effects on the processor cache, which are pretty much all processors produced in this millenium.

That said, there _might_ be a solution to this problem in a way that predictive branch execution does not need to be removed completely from future architecture, which would be a thing we don't really want to loose, even if it increases safety. During that time, it makes sense to disable it, but not by default. The only implication is that older systems must be patched, which is every admin's responsibility.

Ah, sorry, duplicate question (see below). Well, even if it does not do much, it's a start, and it shouldn't require putting in extra energy from power plants.

Does that mean we can cover the deserts with these plates that run purely on solar energy and release energy as infrared radiation to combat Global Heating?

Yes, but there is the major problem that charging electrical car batteries today still requires burning of fossils to create the energy in the first place.

Beside, that's controversial, Musk has got both electrical cars and space rockets.

Germany afaik wants to have predominantly electrical cars driving around in the next decade. Forcing a ban on exhaust cars might create some incentive on producing renewable energies due to the demand, so companies can invest in that. Of course, banning exhaust cars should go hand in hand with banning coal power plants (by way of regulating CO2 limits by law/tax, so that it is expensive to create CO2). Then the demand has to be covered by solar+wind and mainly nuclear energy (the latter not being very popular and the former too space-needy), way to go for clever businesses to come up with solutions (one of them might even be to develop ways to convert created CO2 to solids).

Nobody seems to mention cars, they run on burning fossils and they are a large factor due to the amount of cars in use (ever increasing worldwide). Forcing the industry to replace the exhaust by whatever thing which does not consume fossils to create energy (directly or indirectly e.g. by electrical power that needs to be generated by burning coal) is what might contribute a lot to a better atmosphere (at least in the cities), and could even be good for the economy (as opposed to cost). Renewable energy production without burning fossils should be invested in. The only candidate for now to cover the consumption is nuclear (solar or wind power requires too much space and looks bad, so here you go with your efforts).

Why only 4, 8 or 12 rotors? Can a group of much smaller rotors replace the thrust a single bigger one produces? Would add a lot more redundancy and limit the costs.

I wonder if this was actually a sophisticated trade to profit from shaking up the market - claiming a substantial hack to make the market panic, then buy back the "lost" coins for way lower prices. If you control this kind of assets you can easily corner the market and participate from the emotional reactions. The lost coins can either not be lost at all or sold off way before that in small chunks, netting a profit after all is over.

Given that you can run the same program on a billion bacteria should quite improve the odds of getting the job done.

Surely, also one has to account for possible other "jobs" that get done due to interference.

However, if your goal is to automate processes rather than develop cures to "run" in the human body then this is a very interesting alternative to using silicon, the parallel pipeline potential is enormous.

EDIT: Would it be possible to develop a biological CPU this way? I.e. having "instruction sensors" and a touring-machine-like DNA-robot that can execute externally supplied instructions? Putting that into a bacteria that can clone itself would surely cut down on costs of computing.

Two remarks:

- There are a lot of exchanges that don't involve direct transactions on the blockchain (buying and selling BTC is nonlimited in terms of quantity or time).

- There are many altcoins, claiming to do certain things better such as proof of work or block size etc., however, the most convincing argument for using BTC seems to be the current market capitalization. As such, it is understandable that the Core wants to introduce the least amount of distraction possible, i.e. go against improvements whatsoever.

Can anybody please explain why increasing block size would mean more centralization?

Great idea. Google should pick it up to colorize black/white movies and historical footage. Can easily be extended to feeding desaturated movies for proper training data, can maybe even remaster the quality.

Instead of putting them into nature we should put them into our food, to digest all that plastic that will be in our food chain soon.

If you are redistributing, hosting or using it commercially you have to have the agreement of the author of the content. RSS just gives you access in another way than HTML, but it does not circumvent copyright.

Terminator, the humble beginnings - looks and feels like rats!

Hm true, although everybody knows the identity, nobody can peek into the chats. Good point. That would then allow for generating addresses from speaking aliases, so we don't have to remember GUIDs. Wondering what the current base for the address is, hopefully just some random number persisted on the computer.

Now that you associated this address publicly with your profile on HN you compromised anonymity already.

Lol, fail - I don't understand the question:

#2 "REMOVING WHICH OF THE FOLLOWING WOULD MAKE YOU A COMPLETELY DIFFERENT PERSON?"

I'm not a native speaker -- what am I supposed to do here?

WindOwS X Snowelephant then Mountainelephant. There will most certainly be some kind of internal sub versioning for the kernel part. Let's see which animals they will take for that, cats are already taken by OS X.

pressing F12 in the editor brings up editor debug gui, apparently it is a webpage.

So that thing potentially runs as a website in the browser as well, cloud editing.

Right, marking areas (in this case terms between commas), like Google's Webmaster Tools structured information designer does it, would help. This would require some kind of regular expressions in the example, at least. Of course this would make matters more complicated. This tool excels at simple data sets, I don't think it is meant to be universal.

They did not perceive the nose at all :D

Funny what all gets filtered out. When I'm wearing my extremely old plastic glasses (real ones, not VR), I do not perceive the myriad of scratches on it either, though it certainly contributes to less resolution of what I see, but I'm not aware. Most people are shocked when they get new glasses/lenses/eyes about the increase in detail they weren't aware of.

It might appear like that, but it is about distance! Moving the two images over each other will make your brain think the nose that is farest away from the common center is closest. BUT: the nose should ideally be mirrored, so that the shapes match, at least if you want to combine the images directly using cross-eyeing. They are correct if you show each picture to one eye though (what VR glasses are doing), every eye sees what it would see. However, little differences are filtered out anyway from your brain, merely a disturbance.

No, what he really meant by complexity is information content - will always remain - you can compress it (akin to writing complex code) or uncompress it (akin to writing more code), but whatever you wanted to express you'll still have to express. This principle you can also find in all domain specific languages and in all frameworks that started out as easy and lightweight and become groteskly inflexible and ugly monstrosities after a while when the rest is being added to make them complete in all respects.

How do you convert big amounts of bitcoins into cash, even over time, without leaving a trace? Isn't there bank account information involved leading to individuals, which a criminal investigation could request?

In summary, there must be mechanisms to de-authorize personal, by means of majority vote. To prevent an attack vector, biometric systems need to be used to verify other authorized personal safely (it might be far fetched, but measuring certain stress hormons might prevent attackers from controlling authorized personal and using them to override controls as well, and likewise, other authorized people must be able to act, e.g. by having controls that cannot be blocked by any means (re voice recorders all over the plane to enable or disable locks etc, again by majority vote)). Does that sound too futuristic? I wouldn't want to board a plane if I cannot be sure that any and all cases are covered.

No. It is certainly not my intention to make fun of the case that a copilot is able to control a machine and crash it at his will. Lufthansa is saying "there is no system that can prevent this kind of incident". They will have to take the possibility into account that you have to protect the plane against an authorized person as well, and think about possible solutions to this problem. Solving conflicting interests is not an easy task.

Fine. You authorize the whole crew, not by fingerprint and not by code, but by voice recognition and secret code words per person. Then you allow the override to be overridden by a majority (recursively). Sounds way better than making the door break when a majority of people kicks at them. It is faster than remembering and entering codes, and cannot be overridden by one sick authorized person. An attacker would have to control the whole crew to make them do what he wants, to a level where they actually speak the secret words. In an event where the crew anticipates a crash, giving in on pressure would be the worst option to take.

To prevent attackers from muting all but the required majority of crew members, sensors all over the plane must be able to record any emergency code words spoken in the event of an attack, which will enact certain security measures (depending on the code word could lock or unlock the possibility to enter the cockpit, notify air security etc). This system should of course not be able to be deactivated.

And if you really wanted to make things sure, you could install majority-authorization buttons on every seat setup to be pressed by a percentage of boarded people within a period of mere seconds, which would allow the people on the plane to make a decision. For an attacker it is not possible to make all those people press the button, since he would not know who is not complying.

Of course you can also have some remote mechanism of unlocking, although the security implications of remote authorization and transmission of commands would be complicated to get right and open too many attack vectors.

Overriding the override ;]. But yeah, it's kind of a race-condition. Not sure, how about some majority vote, enough members on the crew there to vote?