Slashdot Mirror
Slashback: Stupidity, Telebastardy, Fast Search
"I read your Overture/FAST story on Slashdot and wanted to make a clarification.Thanks for the correction, Peter.Your headline implies that Overture is completely acquiring FAST. This is completely incorrect. Overture has only acquired FAST's Internet business unit assets, which includes FAST WebSearch, FAST PartnerSite and FAST's popular search site, AlltheWeb.com."
Isn't that the stuff that sells? icantblvitsnotbutter writes "In what looks like a scoop, The Register has an article covering the latest in the ongoing battle between Gary Kremen and VeriSign. The High Court of California has rejected a request to consider the legal issue of whether a domain can legally be deemed as property. This is a huge help for (relatively) money-strapped Kremen, whose opponent VeriSign was evidently using the request as a delaying tactic. VeriSign previously had breathlessly warned that a wrong decision would 'cripple the Internet'."
And they made such a pleasant version of Debian, too ... robmered writes "Three years after receiving US$135M in cash from Microsoft, and one and a half years after Xandros bought Corel's Linux assets, The Age is reporting that Corel has finally removed all Linux software from its website. The end of an era, or a margin note in history? The Age thinks the former, but the strength of Open Office, Gimp and numerous desktop environment efforts seem to indicate that the Linux bandwagon will roll on regardless."
Certainly, I would like to talk at length about your business proposal. Would you like to know my fees in advance? KC7GR writes "There's an article running at DMNews about a company called Castel, Inc. that has, supposedly, developed software that can be used by automated dialing equipment to bypass a TeleZapper, or similar SIT generators, and get through to your phone no matter what.
It is also claimed that the software can deliver any type of text or phone number to a recipient's caller ID box, no matter if it's true or false, and that it can also bypass the anti-telemarketer blocks made available by some telephone companies, such as SBC and Qwest.
Granted, this software is not cheap (about $2,700.00 per calling position, apparently), and Castel is quick to claim that they created this stuff primarily for collection agencies to help them get through to deadbeats who use TeleZappers. Does anyone here really think that'll stop telemarketers from using the same crap, just because they can?"
Brevity is one antidote to stupidity. Yoda2 writes "Here is Part II of the Salon story on the Loebner Prize that Slashdot covered yesterday."
Is that not illegal yet?
Help a college student
I worked as a telemarketer once... for a week. I got paid full time for my training and then bailed and got a new job before ever making a call. So I know nothing about the industry.
I'm curious, how long do you think it would take a telemarketing company to pay off the huge chunk of change they'd require to buy enough copies of this program to outfit their entire outfit? As I recall, there were several hundred stations at the place I worked.
~SL
You sir or madam, are an idiot. NO ONE will fight for YOUR privacy, except for you. Go ahead, sit around, and lose your rights. But I'm going to fight the good fight. You can thank me later.
If you have your own phone switch, you can send out any caller id you want. It's not authoritative, never has been. It's about the same as a reply-to address in email. It's a shame the poster didn't buy Kevin Mitnick's book after it was mentioned on slashdot so many times, because he does cover caller id spoofing for social engineering on people who do think caller id is a secure way to id the caller.
Parent-parent posting was worded cleverly (or stupidly, depending on intent):
"Fight it", not "fight for it".
We all have something to hide. Some people are hiding very bad things... others are hiding things that big business or government tells us are bad... but almost everyone does anyways.
Nobody is 100% innocent.
I'm in charge of the phones, among other things here at the office. And our Nortel switch can already transmit whatever the owner wants, for CID info, according to the company that handles our maitenance contract. The tech told me that it's childishly simple to change it to almost anything.
And this system, is several years old.
"Politicians are interested in people. Not that this is always a virtue. Fleas are interested in dogs." P.J. O'Rourke
In Texas, law explicitly requires callers to identify themselves in CallerID with a phone number the business can be reached at (NOT attached to an autodialer), or if the equipment is not capable of presenting a number, they must state their company name and callback number in the first 30 seconds of a call.
Note that by having ANY id, your equipment can obviously present callerID.
For once, Texas has a useful law.
Experience-Based Language Acquisition (EBLA) is an open source software system written in Java that enables a computer to learn simple language from scratch based on visual perception. It is the first "grounded" language system capable of learning both nouns and verbs. Moreover, once EBLA has established a vocabulary, it can perform basic scene analysis to generate descriptions of novel videos.
A more detailed summary is available here and this is the project web site.
I've always been intrigued by Salon's output, but I cannot honestly take this article seriously. The author has a very clear pro-Loebner bias that he doesn't even try to conceal. His hostility towards Minsky, Dennett, and the rest of the established academic community is so blatant (and unfounded) that it's embarrassing to read. Take this quote:
Decision sciences, by the simplest possible definition, refers to computerized assistance in resource allocation. An example provided by a press release from MIT announcing the creation of a decision sciences program was "complex computer-based 'passenger yield management' systems and models that the airlines use to adjust pricing of each flight's seats in order to maximize revenue and profitability to the airline." That's a far cry from the bold claims made by A.I. visionaries in decades past. But focusing on such systems has a signal advantage for scientists who have been failing miserably at the Turing test. It gets them off the hook.
And later: In other words, if you read between the lines what you come up with is that one reason "serious" A.I. scientists don't try to mimic human speech anymore is that they discovered they can't do it.
Okay, so he's holding up the academics to ridicule because they abandoned the Turing Test. Why did they abandon the Turing Test. Will, according to the filty academic, it's because: ""The Turing test is not very useful for many A.I. scientists today because they work on projects that have nothing to do with human linguistic performance."
So, the respectable AI people aren't working with the Turing Test because they aren't working with linguistics. Gosh, that seems fairly reasonable to me. I mean, I suppose it's possible that the entire AI academic community, en masse, chose to boycott a hack contest run by an East Coast elite who started the contest because "He's a hedonist who thinks work is an abomination and sloth is our greatest virtue. He got interested in A.I. because he hoped the day would come when robots and A.I.'s could do all the work and people could play all the time." The rich kid wants to play so those damn academics better make me a robot who can bake me a pie. But I digress....
The contest focuses on a field that has been abandoned by current AI research. Why? Because we can't make it work yet. The hardware isn't there yet. So we're doing other stuff. Look at the progress of chess programs, mission-critical systems, UT bots. AI is getting better. A souped-up ELIZA isn't going to confirm that. They attack the AI people for not producing better entries for a contest the AI people don't find valid. Loebner and the author, who are obviously in the same camp, are trying to have it both ways. Bullshit. If Salon wants my money to stay afloat, they'll have to do better than this.
~Chazzf
No statement is true, not even this one.
--sex
Very popular slashdot journal for adul
actually, that may not be true. I did door to door sales*, and the rule of thumb is, the more 'No Soliciting' signs, the more likely you would make a sale.
*it was a very long time ago, and I am not proud of it. Interesting note, I found out if I took my merchendise to a strip club, people would by it in droves. I had to give the girls 10%,but hey everyone gets there cut.
The Kruger Dunning explains most post on
Just because someone has nothing to hide it doesn't mean they are happy for everyone to know everything in intimate detail. That I have nothing to hide as far as the government or law enforcement is concerned doesn't mean I am happy to have you watch me in the shower.
I always assumed that the term "nothing to hide" meant roughly that I had nothing that would cause me too much grief if it became known to people who mattered to me in some way (eg I don't want my wife to know about the pr0n or my boss to know its gay pr0n).
As you don't particularly matter to me its not a question of 'nothing to hide', it's just none of your damn business.
It isn't a question of my privacy. It is a question of my *right* to be secure in my person, home, and papers.
The privacy issue is the privacy of the telemarketer or collection agency. *They* are the ones crying right to "privacy" while trying to devise ways to violate my *right* to be secure in my home by demanding entry without revealing who they are first.
If someone comes to my door wearing a ski mask and asks to be let in but won't tell me who they are, well guess what? *I ain't lettin' 'em in.*
Go figure.
What this software does is allow them to knock on my door and request entry *while disguised as my girlfriend.*
Well, as my dear, sweet, little old granny used to say, " They can blow that shit right out their fuckin' ass!"
Granny was a pisser. I miss the old bat.
Well, I can just pull the plug on the damned phone I guess. The telemarketers get more use out of it than I do. I'm not sure why I bother paying thirty bucks a month so MCI can call me and ask me to pay fifty bucks a month anyway.
I suppose then they'll find a way to legally force me to have a phone as way to protect their "freedom" to try to sell me shit I don't want.
Oh. Wait. *I didn't say that.*
Oh Shit. Now I've gone and done it.
KFG
Holding the line clogs up your precious line, too. Even if you're not listening, it still wastes your time (and maybe money).
I think we need either more advanced telephone technology, or a different idea.
There's no sig like this sig anywhere near this sig, so this must be the sig.
A friend of mine lives in Denver and his phone has a service provided by Qwest (I think he got the service when they were still USWest) that plays a message stating that "this number does not accept solicitations... if you're a solicitor hang up and put this # on do-not-call list, otherwise press 1..." His phone doesn't ring unless the caller presses 1. There is also some legislation in Colorado that states, with a system like that, any solicitor who presses 1 to go through anyway can be sued for something like $10k per incident. My friend tells me there have been very few times when a solicitor comes through (where he then mentions the possible fine and they hang up abruptly).
I wonder why there aren't more phone companies offering such a service and why more states don't back up the disturbances with hefty fines. Maybe the telemarketers' lobbyists are lining pockets... maybe(?).
They are going in together with YAHOO. It seems that PacBell has a customer base in place as an ISP, and YAHOO would like to rape it. I have been with SBC for about five years as a PPP customer.. but now they are constantly sending me emails under the heading "action required" that direct me to the Yahoo download page .
Note this has to be downloaded to a Microsoft machine.
No linux support.
I do not like it at all that they insist me download software on my end that their end will talk to. I have no idea of any hidden agenda what the software on my end is doing, nor, under DMCA, is there really any way for me to even legally discuss whats going on.
So, it looks like I may have to change ISP only because Yahoo wants me held captive.
Does anybody have ideas for a good ISP? I am looking at www.copper.net .
"Prove all things; hold fast that which is good." [KJV: I Thessalonians 5:21]
And exactly how profitable would it be to spend $2700/seat for a system to telemarket to people who are going to great lengths to avoid telemarketers? Isn't that paying extra to reach the least profitable demographic? I can see collection agencies being interested, but telemarketers?
In a free society you are who you say you are. -- Mumford
Makes sense. If you know you're pathologically susceptible to marketing, your best course of action is to try not to be marketed-at in the first place.
-- Some things are to be believed, though not susceptible to rational proof.