jckt

8 ms·

31.
by jckt 12y ago
While I am inclined to agree with you (government overreach? almost sounds like some form of censorship, as a law), I think it's fallacious to believe that new books have some intrinsic good. In fact, new books probably don't, if
32.
by jckt 12y ago
The ESA has their own Flickr album of the Rosetta mission (with more pics), for anyone interested https://www.flickr.com/photos/europeanspaceagency/sets/72157...
33.
by jckt 12y ago
Peer review isn't the problem. In fact, many of his article do appear to be peer reviewed. For example, this[1] article was published in the peer-reviewed "Journal of Scientific Exploration"[2]. This JSE also publishes a quar
34.
BBC Horizon: The Man Who Lost His Body [video](youtube.com)
1 points by jckt 12y ago|0 comments
35.
by jckt 12y ago
Before you go and buy a book, you should check out ChefSteps: http://www.chefsteps.com/ It's linked to Modernist Cuisine, which is also linked to Nathan Myhrvold, who isn't popular here (for good reasons), but it&
36.
by jckt 12y ago
Happy to see a cooking thing instead of a Soylent thing on HN (but to each their own). An article in similar spirit, but more focused on why you should consider cooking at home, rather than how you would go about doing so: https:/&#
37.
by jckt 12y ago
I don't think your description of copying is particularly useful regarding physical art, as that type of "replicator" technology (molecule switching) is far, far away. In reality copies are, well, never so completely identica
38.
by jckt 12y ago
"But looking back significantly further than that", says the GP. Our bodies are mostly what they are based on thousands of years ago (or more), not hundreds. In other words, the 1900s are irrelevant. It cost a lot of time/ene
39.
by jckt 12y ago
Further reading for anyone interested: Neal Stephenson's legendary "Mother Earth Motherboard" is related. http://archive.wired.com/wired/archive/4.12/ffglass_pr.html
40.
by jckt 12y ago
Interesting to note that ctrl+shift+f, which on the desktop version is a shortcut to jump to the search area context, works in the mobile version but doesn't let you type (for some reason).
41.
by jckt 12y ago
http://www.scientificamerican.com/article/fact-or-fiction-bl... I think it only saves energy on CRT screens, which is not popular these days.
42.
by jckt 12y ago
Maybe intelligence isn't the right word? As I understood m52go's comment, it's more like smaller brains -> less variations of "mind state" (as in state machines)? Hence less "variance of intelligence".
43.
by jckt 12y ago
Isn't that because the US is so big (and also with a huge economy I guess)? Most countries are much smaller (like Estonia, or its neighbouring countries) and leaving the country isn't as big a deal.
44.
by jckt 12y ago
I think another problem (though probably minor compared to the bloated bureaucracies everyone else is mentioning) is that the teaching quality doesn't matter as much to students these days. This is a UK source, but I think it reflects
45.
by jckt 12y ago
I feel bad derailing this thread further, but you know bloody nothing about me. My comment was on-topic. grkvlt's was not, regardless of what he thinks I meant with that one pronoun (which was wrong, anyway). Maybe you should realise t
46.
by jckt 12y ago
You're easily irritated, no? Maybe I'm a girl and, try as I might to say "he" all the time (to avoid comments like yours), the one time it slips and I say "she" the Internet thinks it's all about some &quo
47.
by jckt 12y ago
Can't edit, so correction: "...no reason why such a journal should not exist..."
48.
by jckt 12y ago
Yeah, that's why I said that my comment was slightly off topic. It was more concerned with the tech crowd (like HN I guess) treating the possibility of FTL/time travel with such seriousness, which is somewhat out of character for
49.
by jckt 12y ago
I can't seem to find the claim in the post where the journal editors actually said "this can't be publishable, period". I am pretty sure that when the physics journal editor rejects your paper, she isn't even actual
50.
by jckt 12y ago
Can you elaborate on "beneficial"? Beneficial for what? Sure, perhaps the time travel paper captured the public imagination. But so does movies and novels. Though I didn't see him talk about it at length in the blog, I can se
51.
by jckt 12y ago
Slightly off-topic, but normally HN is scientifically sound when physics or any other science is mentioned. But when it comes to time-travel/FTL, I can't help but feel that half the posters here seem to almost want it to be true
52.
by jckt 12y ago
By "different views of time" do you mean a scientific view, or a philosophical view? If it's the scientific view, the idea regarding time and macroscopic bodies -- general relativity -- specifically what you'd need to de
53.
by jckt 12y ago
I agree. His attempts to get his type of paper being published in established physics journals are sort of explained in his last paragraph though. He thinks that there's "room in the world of publishing for science motivated prima
54.
by jckt 12y ago
According to this paper[1] about L4, it seems to be the former (that is, performance has genuinely improved). [1] http://www.nicta.com.au/pub?doc=6930
55.
by jckt 12y ago
Same for me. I came across his site (through some usenet emacs stuff) and read his blog entries...I'm all for free speech and all, but I don't think a lot of his opinions would be considered, especially on HN, "unacceptable&q
56.
by jckt 12y ago
A random Google search. Thought, with a name like "hacker news", I'd come up with a lame "script kiddie" site full of teenagers or something. Couldn't have been proven more wrong.
57.
by jckt 12y ago
Glest/MegaGlest[0] is also another FOSS RTS project. When I last played it it felt a bit like Warcraft 3, but definitely not a clone (no heroes as far as I remember). [0]: http://megaglest.org/
58.
by jckt 12y ago
Certainly you can't expect every article to be written for a tech-literate audience?
59.
by jckt 13y ago
I guess I meant normal as in not-a-sociopath. As another commenter said, Gates was definitely intense. But then a lot of other people can be similarly described (maybe not to the same degree, but someone like Linus is not exactly known for
60.
by jckt 13y ago
Ah, okay, I get it now. I completely misunderstood lutusp's sentence.

More ›