0

I guess it is already there , you can unistall windows and install linux using some bootloader script :)

Yip.

0

I guess it is already there , you can unistall windows and install linux using some bootloader script :)

Which would replace one set of bugs with another.

0

Which would replace one set of bugs with another.

Are you suggesting that nobody knows how to anything right? If so, I would have to agree.

0

What would you do, try to see it or head for high ground?

One of the problems with the Hawaii tsunamis is that suddenly the beach drains of water and all kinds of undersea life is suddenly right there for the picking - locals run for high ground, tourists ran for baubles. This was the most warning available at the time.

0

Tsunamis aren't weather.

Do you think I don't know that? What is your point? Have you read anything in this thread? Did you even read the thread title?

0

Please don't blame 'chaos':

However, it should be noted that despite its "random" appearance, chaos is a deterministic evolution. In addition, there are chaotic systems that do not have periodic orbits (periodic orbits only survive in the boundaries of KAM tori, and for sufficiently strong perturbations from the integrable case, islands do not necessarily survive). Furthermore, in so-called quantum chaos, trajectories do not diverge exponentially because they are constrained by the fact that the entire evolution must be unitary.

The boundary between regular and chaotic behavior is often characterized by period doubling, followed by quadrupling, etc., although other routes to chaos are also possible (Abarbanel et al. 1993; Hilborn 1994; Strogatz 1994, pp. 363-365).

Chaos accepts no responsibility for your inability to understand the world.

0

One of the problems with the Hawaii tsunamis is that suddenly the beach drains of water and all kinds of undersea life is suddenly right there for the picking - locals run for high ground, tourists ran for baubles. This was the most warning available at the time.

That's very interesting, so the tourists run down to the beach to go play in the newly found treasures and the locals run right past them the other way screaming. LOL, I would love to see this in action.

0

When i worked at NOAA, there was a brief 16mm film of an almost empty Hawaiin beach stretching off to the horizon where you could barely see a very dark, very tall wall of water. Mid-frame you see one person bending over picking up something and another person looking at something in his hand, then glancing out to the horizon, then disappearing into the wall - then the POV goes flying. You can't outrun a 500 mph wall w/o a headstart.

We got to see a lot of movies of tsunamis that were just not available to the general public. Most of it was from Japan; by 1987 more than 50% of the adult population had home video cameras and Japan gets a lot of tsunamis (hence the name).

0

Are you suggesting that nobody knows how to anything right? If so, I would have to agree.

Over a certain level of complexity it's theoretically impossible not to have defects.
The human brain can't handle such complexity and tries to oversimplify, leading to defects.

When breaking up the system into less complex subsystems these may each be free of defects but the resulting total system will still have that higher level of complexity and be defective.

Putting machines in there to handle the complexity only increases the level of complexity and those machines are designed ultimately by humans and therefore by definition prone to be defective.

And that doesn't even take into account failure due to wear and tear of components.

0

A machine that would prevent pollution or a machine that would prevent over population.

The second is easy, it's weapons of mass destruction. Employ those on a large enough scale and you can depopulate large areas.

That would also reduce pollution (though of course most of those weapons will cause quite a bit of it when deployed, but I'm thinking longterm solutions here).

0

Whatever programs you have written in life , you can not add additional code in the program which can verify the program is 100% correct .

That has actually been proven mathematically in 1931 under the guise of Gödel's incompleteness theorems.

0

The second is easy, it's weapons of mass destruction. Employ those on a large enough scale and you can depopulate large areas.

That would also reduce pollution (though of course most of those weapons will cause quite a bit of it when deployed, but I'm thinking longterm solutions here).

We could always opt for the neutron bomb - kill the people but save the property. <<cackles quietly to himself as he envisions the simplicity and beauty of the solution>>

0

We could always opt for the neutron bomb - kill the people but save the property. <<cackles quietly to himself as he envisions the simplicity and beauty of the solution>>

EMP, man, where ya been? :icon_razz:

0

"neutron bombs" as Grimjack describes don't exist anyway.

What are called "neutron bombs" by those who don't know better are radiation enhanced nuclear weapons.
Usually a small (sub-kiloton) tactical weapon with an added mantle of materials that emit a high dose of neutrons when irradiated with radiation from a nuclear detonation.

The blast radius may be reduced, but it's still a bloody big boom going off somewhere, and to cover a wide area you do need a lot of them.
There's also enhanced fallout, though it's rather localised (depending on wind, weather, detonation altitude, etc. etc.).

This topic has been dead for over six months. Start a new discussion instead.
Have something to contribute to this discussion? Please be thoughtful, detailed and courteous, and be sure to adhere to our posting rules.