So now casinos just need something which they say that works in a way and if it works another way they don't pay the announced prize but what they say it should be (of course it's what the machine should have shown, but how do you know there really was a mistake?).
It used to be a good idea to check if a machine does what it is intended for, but this is supporting a I-don't-care behavior, because casinos can get rid of programming/coding errors by sending machines to some inspection *after* the error gets visible, and they aren't held responsible for it.
In fact, I wonder if I could just grab a machine and to the same kind of inspection on it to see if the 0 prize was really the intended one - or if the error makes the house win money noone looks at it?
I suppose this falls in some kind of breach of contract?
Of course this marker, if it is really associated with autism, might provide a quick and efficient way to test it.
I agree labeling people quicker will not be the best way to have them help themselves, but maybe the fact there is this marker also tells us autistic subjects are not just making excuses, but that they have a - at least - chemical reason to be less social?
(Take this with a grain of salt, I'm no genetics/chemistry/psychology expert.)
If I understand it right, Google is being sued for scanning copyrighted works - I don't completely understand the legality of this (I'm not from USA, nor do I know its legal system). Of course, it seems logical that if Google is giving away verbatim copies of the books they should have permission to do so. Maybe showing just - e.g. - 5 pages per user is allowed under some exception (fair use, etc.)?
But what I'm really afraid is if somebody just decides Google should pay a tax on every book they scan, no matter if they actually need that permission or not (sometimes, people give their works away for free, or copyright expires). Just like those taxes that are paid to play musics publicly, which are also sometimes incorrectly applied to public performances of CC music.
The picture I got after reading the post was that it's just another implementation (if they implemented it...) of natural selection. See, (e.g.) human reproduction involves random changes on DNA which will actually survive if they make the new being more productive/fast/efficient/stronger.
On one hand, as it may save lives, we shouldn't worry that much about the cost, but, on the other hand, if it just drains all the energy from the planet, that's another (big) problem to solve...
So, before deploying such a system, ideas on a less expensive way to power it, and discussions on that, are really important.
It's the same that's happening with MSN Instant Messaging: It's broken, the official client is the worst IM client I've ever seen, and it does not support important features as formatted text (multiple formatting in a single message), but people use it.
Also, when somebody wants to discuss something, or just talk, over the Internet, he/she asks "What's your MSN?".
Uh, since when? It's always "what's your sn?" and it's in reference to AIM. I know like 3 people who actually use MSN. Every other kid uses AIM (or signs onto AIM using Trillian).
Not here in Portugal - it seems that MSN is only winning the IM wars outside of USA. I even doubt AOL has ever provided Internet access here - I have my AIM account just because I started using Netscape 7.0 instead of M$ IE (when I was using that... thing called Windows), and it registered a screenname for me.
Here (Portugal) it's the same thing - everyone (but me and some friends of mine) uses MSN.
I'm using GAIM with MSN IM, AIM, YIM, and some XMPP accounts. National ISP's are also trying to implement their own instant messaging protocol. Mine fortunately offers a XMPP-compatible service with the possibility of talking to MSN buddies.
It's the same that's happening with MSN Instant Messaging: It's broken, the official client is the worst IM client I've ever seen, and it does not support important features as formatted text (multiple formatting in a single message), but people use it.
Also, when somebody wants to discuss something, or just talk, over the Internet, he/she asks "What's your MSN?".
Talking about MySpace, I've only visited it a couple of times (to see a football (soccer) player's myspace (which, probably, was just built by some fans), and Nick Sagan's one), and I told myself "I've never seen a site like this one - how can they call this a web page?".
But I know this sort of sites. At school my colleagues don't use myspace, they use hi5. And I've used it some times when I was still accessing it from public computers, with Portable Firefox. But when I accessed it with my laptop (i686 300Mhz 64Mb), it was *very* slow to load.
Solution? A member of the INDUCKS project invited me to their forum at orkut, so I started exploring that social network. It had the same sort of silly server errors (sometimes you see a "Bad, bad server, no donut for you!"), but they didn't occur as frequently as in hi5, and the site design is clearer than the one used at Orkut.
Fortunately GMAIL and Orkut have Gtalk integration, which means that everyone with an account in one of these services will be able to login at gtalk. This is good for me because some of my colleagues had to change to GMAIL accounts because a (very good!) teacher told us he wanted to send important documents via e-mail and that Hotmail was not the ideal tool, and the consequency is that now I'm able to talk to them using gtalk instead of MSN.
The big problem here is "eye candy". People like myspace because it's eye candy. People like the MSN client because it's eye candy. And the same happens with hi5 and other equally bad sites.
There's tons of other sites out there with more functionality and more stable servers, but...no one uses those, do they?
May you tell us which better sites do you know? I'd like to know:-)
Slashdot Mirror
So now casinos just need something which they say that works in a way and if it works another way they don't pay the announced prize but what they say it should be (of course it's what the machine should have shown, but how do you know there really was a mistake?).
It used to be a good idea to check if a machine does what it is intended for, but this is supporting a I-don't-care behavior, because casinos can get rid of programming/coding errors by sending machines to some inspection *after* the error gets visible, and they aren't held responsible for it.
In fact, I wonder if I could just grab a machine and to the same kind of inspection on it to see if the 0 prize was really the intended one - or if the error makes the house win money noone looks at it?
I suppose this falls in some kind of breach of contract?
Of course this marker, if it is really associated with autism, might provide a quick and efficient way to test it.
I agree labeling people quicker will not be the best way to have them help themselves, but maybe the fact there is this marker also tells us autistic subjects are not just making excuses, but that they have a - at least - chemical reason to be less social?
(Take this with a grain of salt, I'm no genetics/chemistry/psychology expert.)
You're right. As I believe Santa doesn't exist, I should give up on that idea that there's anything such as end of copyright.
See, "50 years after Mickey Mouse is public domain" is the new "50 years after everyone stops laughing".
If I understand it right, Google is being sued for scanning copyrighted works - I don't completely understand the legality of this (I'm not from USA, nor do I know its legal system). Of course, it seems logical that if Google is giving away verbatim copies of the books they should have permission to do so. Maybe showing just - e.g. - 5 pages per user is allowed under some exception (fair use, etc.)?
But what I'm really afraid is if somebody just decides Google should pay a tax on every book they scan, no matter if they actually need that permission or not (sometimes, people give their works away for free, or copyright expires). Just like those taxes that are paid to play musics publicly, which are also sometimes incorrectly applied to public performances of CC music.
You're right. Nevertheless, a good abstract should be about what follows it! (Otherwise it would be useless)
The picture I got after reading the post was that it's just another implementation (if they implemented it...) of natural selection. See, (e.g.) human reproduction involves random changes on DNA which will actually survive if they make the new being more productive/fast/efficient/stronger.
This means IPoAC will become more useful, as its main strenght is bandwidth (currently limited by the capacity of microSD cards and the like).
On one hand, as it may save lives, we shouldn't worry that much about the cost, but, on the other hand, if it just drains all the energy from the planet, that's another (big) problem to solve...
So, before deploying such a system, ideas on a less expensive way to power it, and discussions on that, are really important.
Uh, since when? It's always "what's your sn?" and it's in reference to AIM. I know like 3 people who actually use MSN. Every other kid uses AIM (or signs onto AIM using Trillian).
Not here in Portugal - it seems that MSN is only winning the IM wars outside of USA .
I even doubt AOL has ever provided Internet access here - I have my AIM account just because I started using Netscape 7.0 instead of M$ IE (when I was using that... thing called Windows), and it registered a screenname for me.
Here (Portugal) it's the same thing - everyone (but me and some friends of mine) uses MSN.
I'm using GAIM with MSN IM, AIM, YIM, and some XMPP accounts. National ISP's are also trying to implement their own instant messaging protocol. Mine fortunately offers a XMPP-compatible service with the possibility of talking to MSN buddies.
It's the same that's happening with MSN Instant Messaging: It's broken, the official client is the worst IM client I've ever seen, and it does not support important features as formatted text (multiple formatting in a single message), but people use it.
Also, when somebody wants to discuss something, or just talk, over the Internet, he/she asks "What's your MSN?".
Talking about MySpace, I've only visited it a couple of times (to see a football (soccer) player's myspace (which, probably, was just built by some fans), and Nick Sagan's one), and I told myself "I've never seen a site like this one - how can they call this a web page?".
But I know this sort of sites. At school my colleagues don't use myspace, they use hi5. And I've used it some times when I was still accessing it from public computers, with Portable Firefox. But when I accessed it with my laptop (i686 300Mhz 64Mb), it was *very* slow to load.
Solution? A member of the INDUCKS project invited me to their forum at orkut, so I started exploring that social network. It had the same sort of silly server errors (sometimes you see a "Bad, bad server, no donut for you!"), but they didn't occur as frequently as in hi5, and the site design is clearer than the one used at Orkut.
Fortunately GMAIL and Orkut have Gtalk integration, which means that everyone with an account in one of these services will be able to login at gtalk. This is good for me because some of my colleagues had to change to GMAIL accounts because a (very good!) teacher told us he wanted to send important documents via e-mail and that Hotmail was not the ideal tool, and the consequency is that now I'm able to talk to them using gtalk instead of MSN.
The big problem here is "eye candy". People like myspace because it's eye candy. People like the MSN client because it's eye candy. And the same happens with hi5 and other equally bad sites.
There's tons of other sites out there with more functionality and more stable servers, but...no one uses those, do they?May you tell us which better sites do you know? I'd like to know :-)