Baby Astronaut

What happens if you just add the Merged post follows: Consecutive posts merged tags without actually making a consecutive post? Let's see. Merged post follows: Consecutive posts merged (hope it doesn't break the forums)

I dunno. When a child asks how far does space go out, one answers "forever". Or what's the highest number? "they don't end" Or how much does someone love them? "Infinitely" Or how much do they love 'em back? "Infinity plus infinity". We all play these games or mental exercises, and seeing no end in sight or imagining something going on forever is so (visually) natural a kid can quickly understand what you're saying -- where its math representation probably takes quite bit of schooling to absorb.

Well, look at some campfire on a webcam, and then stand next to one. You'll feel the distance.

There, fixed New visitors here might not understand the level of precision in definition given to certain words, especially in scientific contexts like these boards. So naturally, when someone's been using the phrase "it's only logical" in everyday language without giving much thought to its absolute, standard, textbook definition (and maybe completely unaware of the studies on logical fallacies or even the components of good debate) -- especially when news anchors or a famous intellectual wanna-be spouts the phrase often -- and seeing as there's no placard at the forums entry stating "no fallacies allowed, and you must only use the word Logic properly", then we might conclude it's only *logical* that a newcomer unfamiliar with the rigors of science (and having grown up on entertainment-filtered science) is going to make a few errors of intended meaning and word choice. So instead of biting off someone's head for a minor error that's fairly common and understandable, people here can be a little more productive and explain, give links to how scientific words differ from everyday, popular use of the same words. And link to a site that clearly illustrates fallacies and how to avoid them. People do come here to learn, not to get a barrage of disapproval on word choice that often seems to be unclear/confusing on how they erred. I've seen it often, the person doesn't seem to know why the crowd is attacking their *seemingly* valid points, when normally, if offering those same points in the everyday world, it spurs interest and discussion. These links are a start at least, there's probably better websites. http://www.unc.edu/depts/wcweb/handouts/fallacies.html It is particularly easy to slip up and commit a fallacy when you have strong feelings about your topic—if a conclusion seems obvious to you, you're more likely to just assume that it is true and to be careless with your evidence. To help you see how people commonly make this mistake, this handout uses a number of controversial political examples—arguments about subjects like abortion, gun control, the death penalty, gay marriage, euthanasia, and pornography. The purpose of this handout, though, is not to argue for any particular position on any of these issues; rather, it is to illustrate weak reasoning, which can happen in pretty much any kind of argument! http://modern-science.blogspot.com/2005_09_01_archive.html Fact/Know/True English: Something that is absolutely correct, beyond the shadow of a doubt. Science: These terms are not generally used as their meanings are imprecise. Sometimes when talking w/ laypeople they're used to mean "observation," other times to mean "theory." When talking to other scientists we use different words. Nothing in science can be "known" absolutely as "true," so these words are meaningless.

Funny you say that, what immediately came to mind seeing 24 and 30 in the OP was: that must be from Karl Rove's personal diary (except his would likely be a lot simpler in directions/execution and greasy with slime).

...if you want to send it by PM to another member?

What about these? (also good for targeting cancer) <object width="425" height="344"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YU47blakiiI&hl=en&fs=1"></param><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><param name="allowscriptaccess" value="always"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YU47blakiiI&hl=en&fs=1" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowscriptaccess="always" allowfullscreen="true" width="425" height="344"></embed></object> (also good for running cars) <object width="425" height="344"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=m2wG90QlZSU&hl=en&fs=1"></param><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><param name="allowscriptaccess" value="always"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=m2wG90QlZSU&hl=en&fs=1" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowscriptaccess="always" allowfullscreen="true" width="425" height="344"></embed></object>

Great vid, iNow lol

Then you won the challenge (although it was by using mrburns's entry so it might not count).

It's legit. It's Macromedia Flash 3, and I just found out it's for Windows 95. But even running the program in (the appropriate) compatibility mode didn't help. (FIY, the program nowadays is called Adobe Flash.) Nice, thanks. I didn't see anything related to Flash, but it's a good to know where the event logs are kept. I listed everything there in post #10, maybe you can understand it better than me? Almost for sure, except when he's playing internet movies or the sort. It's probably time he got a newer version of the program, anyway. But I'd like to give it one more try. There is no mention of RAM in his BIOS, for some reason.

Think I broke it. If you type in... 1 OR a OR www OR and OR the OR "inurl:*www" ..you get "Results 1 - 10 of about 0" (pages containing that search). However, look on and it's obvious you got more than 0 results. Snail, the capitalized word OR in a search engine tells it to fetch results with either one or both your search entries (in a crawled web page). Thus it actually should give us more results for picking 1 OR 2 OR 3, not less. As a side note, the capitalized word AND tells the search engine to fetch results only if a web page contains both your search entries, not just the one item. For example, 1 AND 2 will fetch your all web pages containing 1 and 2, but not 1 (ditto for 2). You don't have to use "AND" though. Instead, you can place a "+" sign directly in front of the search item. One AND two is the same as one +two. Another related trick is you can use a "-" sign to exclude a word from your search, which allows you to narrow down the results closer to your liking. For example, if you were searching for "Time" but wanted the search to ignore anything related to Time Magazine, just enter your search as time -magazine. And presto. As Google has improved it's search engine considerably, you don't really need the "-" sign as much there. But it works great on eBay. (note: don't use "+" or "-" signs for numerical digits on Google, unless you want it to calculate the entry as a math problem instead For example, if you enter 1 +2 you'll get "3" instead of a search)

big314mp hasn't logged in nearly three weeks. Anyone else got some input for my last post? Issue unsolved. (And how did this get over 250 views???!!)

Someone caught flak resurrecting an old thread. Maybe it's a result of "similar threads" popping up? I've seen ones from 2003-2005, it's probably a good idea to adjust the software so those won't appear on the list. Then people can just use Search if they wanted to find older similar topics (before asking questions, to see if it's been addressed previously). Of course not. Welcome aboard!

After updating the Paging File to 5500 minimum and 10500 maximum (previously it was 1500 and 2000), the Flash 3 program isn't handling the images any quicker. In fact, I haven't noticed a boost of speed anywhere on the computer. And usually, people say they do notice a change after updating the paging file numbers. Not really sure what to do from here. Is there another way to boost speed of image processing? The CPU utilization runs from 0-4% to 8% continuously, switching back and forth if the mouse is used, or small activities are done. Playing a movie sends it over 20%. However, just opening the file of vector images shoots it to 100% continuously (opening for 5-10 seconds), and then 40, 60, or 100% while manipulating them or scrolling down. 2) To see if there is sufficient ram, look at the "commit charge" box. One of the things listed is "peak". This is the peak amount of "ram" (in quotes, because if the physical ram is exceeded, then the swap file is called in to meet the demand) that the system has used since the last reboot. If this number is larger than the total amount of ram in the machine, then ram could be the hold up. I've listed some numbers after my friend rebooted and opened the images file again. Commit Charge (K) Total 560,904 (always changing by small increments) Limit 8,547,248 Peak 958,492 Physical Memory (K) Total 3,078,640 Available 2,378,536 (always changing by small increments) System Cache 478,320 (changes less often, small increments) Kernel Memory (K) Total 112,008 (occasional changes) Paged 50,776 Nonpaged 61,232 (occasional changes) Hopefully you can make better sense of these numbers. Gotcha. I'll go with the assumption it has 4GB RAM. Thanks.

OK, I see. Identical amounts of energy don't always produce the same amount of force. Plus, energy use isn't the same as energy input. Therefore the number of calories a person burns doesn't matter -- a lot of those calories won't have made it in.

I didn't entirely grasp you're saying. But I'm only concerned with energy input. If I were to lift the side of a car with my bare hands, and the next day I were to lift it again using a jack with a crank, I'd burn less calories that next day.

I didn't mean less energy total -- just from one doing the lifting. If each robot had a full battery, would they have equal levels remaining in their batteries if one used a lever and the other didn't?

If machine A were to lift 1000 kilos directly, and machine B were to use a lever for better advantage in lifting the same 1000 kilos, would machine B spend less energy? The machine can be a robot, and the lever is some tool it found laying around.

I see your logic. But, an AI would have a reason to change its goals. If the AI viewed its original programming as faulty and then reprogrammed itself, the AI might conclude that its original goals (which are based on faulty programming) have a need to evolve/change as well.....into less faulty goals. And these could be unpredictable, even to itself. Until it makes a decision based on new information it didn't have previously.

Ah, but you're missing a crucial point. We're talking about the Singularity, where a machine can program itself better than a human could've. If robots were to be self-programming, then no matter how we did program them originally, wouldn't the robots eventually scrap the relevant code and "improve" it? Ditto. Yes, definitely...but only as educated guesses, not scientifically. I agree. But your thread is about Singularity University, which Kurzweil is the head of. That makes him fairly relevant to the discussion in this case.

Occasionally those peripheral imaginings resemble scary animals. We practically jump, go wtf is that, and laugh at how startled we got from a harmless object. Usually the wind or something had moved it, lending weight to the temporary illusion (of a menacing plastic bag).

Wow, 3 times the amount. The link was very helpful, thanks. Just a couple more questions. #1: It recommends you avoid having the paging file on the main drive ©. But wouldn't putting it on an external drive be kind of counterproductive, making access slower? The C drive is quicker than external drives. #2: If you change the page file size for one user, does this change it for other users too (including admin)? Or does each user have their own paging file, even simultaneously running?

That's what's funny. It runs normally for video, internet browsing, etc, but for manipulating or switching between large amounts of high resolution info -- not great. The Flash prog takes about 5 secs to open if the file has more than a few high resolution images. Normally it opens in less than a sec. It has an AMD Athlon 64 2.21Ghz (3500+), and max Memory is 4GB. I used two pairs of matching RAM sticks so it's not likely a compatibility issue. RAM: PC3200 DDR400 I'll google "page file" and try it, see if anything improves. My one friend suggested XP might give the wrong reading, so I should check the C-MOSS to see what it says for RAM amount. But I didn't find anything referring to it. Merged post follows: Consecutive posts mergedHere's what I found. One place said to do the following steps. Run ---> msconfig ---> SYSTEM.INI ---> 386enh ---> click "New" ---> type "ConservativeSwapfileUsage=1" ---> click "OK" ---> restart computer. As for changing your page file size, there were various inconsistent suggestions, but the most popular says to change its minimum to 1.5 x your RAM and your maximum to double your RAM. So from 2.93 RAM I guess we'll need to do a 4467 minimum and 5956 maximum (assuming 1 GB RAM is 1024 MB). Is this right? Because another tip had said to change both fields to 1.5x your RAM (i.e. same min/max).

Two problems. I put 4 GB of RAM (total) in my friend's XP Media Center Edition, but it's only showing 2.93 in the system properties. It originally had two 512 MB RAM out of 4 available slots, until I replaced them with four 1 GB sticks. Also, he often manipulates about 15-20 very high resolution vector images, moving/resizing/etc, which usually slows the computer -- for example, it takes 2 minutes of hourglass to copy and paste them as a group. And I'd have thought going from 1 GB to 4 GB RAM would've sped up this process. But nope. So I want to try a few things. First, double-checking the RAM info in the BIOS, in case Windows is just being inaccurate. But...I didn't find anything labeled RAM there. Second, I heard one can assign a portion of RAM to the hard drive, and that alone would boost speed. If true, how does one accomplish this? BTW, he's using Flash 3 -- maybe the program's too old to efficiently use memory? Any different suggestions? Thanks.

That makes sense, Grant. Where do you obtain your info from? I'd like to research more if possible.