Seriously, this patent shit has gotten completely out of control. I understand that people want to keep other people from stealing their ideas and profiting on them, but patenting a concept? Christ! Can I go ahead and put a patent on a virtually representing people or places over electronic media for communication purposes? Just because it's not mainstream now, doesn't mean it won't completely fuel commerce in 10-20 years. Would it make more sense for a patent to last 2 years: Just enough time to get a product to market first? This would still stifle industrial espionage without killing commerce 10-15 years down the road.
What exactly does IBM hope to accomplish with this? I can't think of any motivation besides milking Amazon for every penny.
I tell you what, nothing is scarier than when a paperclip asks, "Hey, man, does this look infected to you?" Oh, the rumors that will fly around the avatar water cooler.
I don't know about making something invisible to microwaves, but apparently the microwave at the office can make a hot pocket invisible. I put it in and set it to two minutes, go to the bathroom, and when I come back it's nowhere to be found.
Just a few days ago, they were trying to get gamers in shape and keep them active, now they're removing ALL physical aspects of the game? I personally can't wait until they can tap the visual cortex, then we won't even have to use our eyes! Hooray for atrophy!
Joking aside, this is a snazzy development that will probably go a long way toward an eventual cure for paralysis, as well as a nifty new form of input for the handicapped and motor-function-impaired (is there an adjective that sums that up?)
In light of the replies to my statement, I would like to concede the point. It's been a long time since I've written any meaningful code, and appearently I'm a little rusty.
Somebody please explain to me exactly what kind of software bug can be found by automatic scanning that isn't found by standard debugging and compile-time checks. If a computer can ascertain exactly what the programmer intended to do, why do we need programmers?
The simple answer to this is that they can't. That's the point behind hiring human codeslingers to write applications. Considering that most software bugs are logic bugs (off by one, etc) that can't be directly seen in the code without actually, you know, RUNNING the program, I find it difficult to believe that AI has come to the point where it can guess the coder's intentions and infer the purpose of an application.
Additionally, where exactly did this proprietary code come from? I don't know which companies these programs were released by, but other than the SharedSource initiative which mostly caters to programming students (if they still even have this program), Microsoft would call their next o/s Windows Sh*tburger (I think I'll trademark that) before they would release their code, especially to a third party consulting firm.
John Fitzgerald published an interesting article a few years ago about some people's belief that because others are using computers successfully, that merely introducing a computer into a given situation will make the participants more productive, comparing it to the cargo cults in Melanesia many years ago.
Merely shoving a laptop in a child's face will not make them better, brighter, etc. If anything the laptop will server to function as a distraction, much as my TI-83 was in calculus class (all I ever did was play games on it). If you want to make your children more productive, limit their access to technology: computer an tv only after all classwork is done unless said classwork requires the computer or tv.
Granted, computers are useful for research, typing, cataloging, etc; and should definitely remain an integral part of the education system, I think that simply saying, "Here's your computer," will only be to the detriment of said student
OK, take the worst thing you can think of. Now, make it kill puppies and rape goats. Then, dip it in acid, and finally, give it your credit card number.
That's AOL.
"...the ISP for people who didn't know any better"
on
The AOL Roller Coaster
·
· Score: 3, Informative
I work in a computer store in backwater Tennessee. I have enough trouble explaining stuff to people now, next I'm going to have to explain the difference between a virus and a virus? I spent 20 minutes the other day explaining the concept of the double-click.
Please kill me now.
Slashdot Mirror
Seriously, this patent shit has gotten completely out of control. I understand that people want to keep other people from stealing their ideas and profiting on them, but patenting a concept? Christ! Can I go ahead and put a patent on a virtually representing people or places over electronic media for communication purposes? Just because it's not mainstream now, doesn't mean it won't completely fuel commerce in 10-20 years. Would it make more sense for a patent to last 2 years: Just enough time to get a product to market first? This would still stifle industrial espionage without killing commerce 10-15 years down the road.
What exactly does IBM hope to accomplish with this? I can't think of any motivation besides milking Amazon for every penny.
I tell you what, nothing is scarier than when a paperclip asks, "Hey, man, does this look infected to you?" Oh, the rumors that will fly around the avatar water cooler.
I, for one, welcome our new telemarket... Ok, they're gone.
Get the shotgun, Joey.
I don't know about making something invisible to microwaves, but apparently the microwave at the office can make a hot pocket invisible. I put it in and set it to two minutes, go to the bathroom, and when I come back it's nowhere to be found.
Just a few days ago, they were trying to get gamers in shape and keep them active, now they're removing ALL physical aspects of the game?
I personally can't wait until they can tap the visual cortex, then we won't even have to use our eyes!
Hooray for atrophy!
Joking aside, this is a snazzy development that will probably go a long way toward an eventual cure for paralysis, as well as a nifty new form of input for the handicapped and motor-function-impaired (is there an adjective that sums that up?)
In light of the replies to my statement, I would like to concede the point. It's been a long time since I've written any meaningful code, and appearently I'm a little rusty.
Somebody please explain to me exactly what kind of software bug can be found by automatic scanning that isn't found by standard debugging and compile-time checks. If a computer can ascertain exactly what the programmer intended to do, why do we need programmers?
The simple answer to this is that they can't. That's the point behind hiring human codeslingers to write applications. Considering that most software bugs are logic bugs (off by one, etc) that can't be directly seen in the code without actually, you know, RUNNING the program, I find it difficult to believe that AI has come to the point where it can guess the coder's intentions and infer the purpose of an application.
Additionally, where exactly did this proprietary code come from? I don't know which companies these programs were released by, but other than the SharedSource initiative which mostly caters to programming students (if they still even have this program), Microsoft would call their next o/s Windows Sh*tburger (I think I'll trademark that) before they would release their code, especially to a third party consulting firm.
I find this article highly suspect
John Fitzgerald published an interesting article a few years ago about some people's belief that because others are using computers successfully, that merely introducing a computer into a given situation will make the participants more productive, comparing it to the cargo cults in Melanesia many years ago.
Merely shoving a laptop in a child's face will not make them better, brighter, etc. If anything the laptop will server to function as a distraction, much as my TI-83 was in calculus class (all I ever did was play games on it). If you want to make your children more productive, limit their access to technology: computer an tv only after all classwork is done unless said classwork requires the computer or tv.
Granted, computers are useful for research, typing, cataloging, etc; and should definitely remain an integral part of the education system, I think that simply saying, "Here's your computer," will only be to the detriment of said student
Waving your hands and talking to the computers... hmmm... So waving my arms and cursing at the computer would actually accomplish something?
Neat.
OK, take the worst thing you can think of. Now, make it kill puppies and rape goats. Then, dip it in acid, and finally, give it your credit card number.
That's AOL.
AOL recently aced PC World's list of the top 25 worst tech products of all time. .
I don't think they were all bad. They did send me all those nifty coasters, frisbees, and BB targets.
I work in a computer store in backwater Tennessee. I have enough trouble explaining stuff to people now, next I'm going to have to explain the difference between a virus and a virus? I spent 20 minutes the other day explaining the concept of the double-click. Please kill me now.