Show me a robot with a soul and I will accept rights for robots. Animals do not have souls therefore they are unable to reason, the soul is the basis of reasoning.
There are already robots more intelligent than many household pets.
Not really...they just are good at the traits of animal behavior we normally associate with intelligence. But in terms of processing power, or usually even learning, we are far behind.
Hmm... the point might be defensible, or close, if "many household pets" includes, e.g., stick insects.
Please shut up, philosophy is karma whore material, and nothing else.
Ph33r the strengths of this argument. Apart from its inherent stupidity, there's a certain irony that you're expressing it over the internet, using computers, an outgrowth from mathematics, a branch of philosophy.
If robots reproduce, they will evolve. (Even if this isn't designed-in, reproduction will not be 100% accurate in all cases.) Any specific instructions (such as "be nice to humans") will eventually dissapear if they're not to the benifit of the species.
Well, the "creative expression" thing works for direct ripoffs with almost-identical graphics etc. A game with different graphics, new sounds and powerups etc. is just copying "abstract ideas" which are not copyrightable.
Disclaimer: although I'm pretty certain of this, IANAL.
Does anyone seriously argue that MacOS is more stable than Windows9x much less NT?
Mac OS is pretty stable these days. Apps bail from time to time, true; however, I have never once had to reinstall MacOS (not counting upgrades, obviously) and my Macs have not been treated with kid gloves. In a long-term sense, it's definitely more stable than Windows -- and it was even in the Dark Times of System 7.5 and the PowerPC shift.
Classic Mac OS (OS 9.x and below) only supports a very limited form of preemptive multitasking, using the Thread Manager.
Actually, the Thread Manager is never pre-emptive on PowerMacs. Pre-emptive threading is done via Multiprocessing Services -- even if there's only one processor.
And the mouse will interrupt the whole system while it is depressed...
True; however, it's in a new appearance format (source: an Apple HI engineer). Considering that the graphics architecture has changed completely and Aqua uses features that wouldn't work under classic MacOS even if Quickdraw supported them (shadows and transparency require double-buffered windows) that isn't much of a surprise.
"Appearances", not Themes. An Appearance controls the dasign of interfac elements, a Theme controls the combination of Appearances with fonts, colours etc.
Appearances have been supported since 8.5 and will be supported in X (but, obviously, with a completely new format). They are not, and will not be, documented. One of the reasons is that changable Appearances is not compliant with a consistent interface. (That's irritating for geeks, but then, geeks aren't Apple's primary market.)
A new "frames" tab on the tool pallette... just what I need: more mouse activity and a new concept for something that was utterly transparent in 5 (and, for that matter, in the first version I used, 1.4).
Steve Jobs has done a great job, but ditching the whole interface design group was a Bad Idea which will more than outweigh the current boom. I quite seriously think he should be kicked out.
Even then, ray tracing is a pretty lame hack when compared with actual real life. When we have hybrid distributed ray tracing/backward ray tracing/raydiosity for arbitrarily complex scenes at, at the very least, 60 fps at over 1000 pixels per dimension, I might be impressed, for a while.
Nah... they just want to sound like exotic metals. What's the Merced being called? Iridium? I've heard the person who thought of this reffered to as Intel's marketing guru... would that be someone who sits in a cave and has little contact with the outside world?
* Laser-retinal displays: great pic projected into your eye, one per eye (i.e. stereoscopic, great privacy). Coming "real soon now."
* Holographic: I seriously doubt it. However, there's a technology where a row or coloumn of lights flashes the image one scanline at a time, and you where glasses with rotating mirrors to see the pic. Primarily intended for cramped-quarters military installations (in tanks and subs), but when they're nice and fast they may be available for conference tables etc. Muh like Nikita, except you get a head-on view from any angle (although it probably shears if you tilt your head).
Can anyone authoratively guestimate how much waste will be produced per energy unit?
In other words, if the energy consumption changed the same, and all fission plants were replaced with fusion plants, would the waste production be higher or lower?
This could be done with an environmental tax keeping the price of fusion energy at the same levels as other production methods. (Obviously this wouldn't work in the US, where it's the right of every man to destroy the work as long as he doesn't harm anyone else in the process, but it would be nice to know in the hypothetical case nonetheless.
Slashdot Mirror
HTH, HAND.
You're right, they can't. That's another good point about them.
A human being is a lump of calcium and carbon whose ancestor was a primitive fish. Wherein lies the specific difference?
Please define
- Soul
- Reasoning
- Animal
No carbonist cop-outs, please.Ph33r the strengths of this argument. Apart from its inherent stupidity, there's a certain irony that you're expressing it over the internet, using computers, an outgrowth from mathematics, a branch of philosophy.
If robots reproduce, they will evolve. (Even if this isn't designed-in, reproduction will not be 100% accurate in all cases.) Any specific instructions (such as "be nice to humans") will eventually dissapear if they're not to the benifit of the species.
Disclaimer: although I'm pretty certain of this, IANAL.
I could write an original storyline for an Asteroids clone if you want.
But profanity is a consentual crime -- there's no real victim. If those subjected to its presence choose to pick it up, that's their choice.
Mac OS is pretty stable these days. Apps bail from time to time, true; however, I have never once had to reinstall MacOS (not counting upgrades, obviously) and my Macs have not been treated with kid gloves. In a long-term sense, it's definitely more stable than Windows -- and it was even in the Dark Times of System 7.5 and the PowerPC shift.
Classic Mac OS (OS 9.x and below) only supports a very limited form of preemptive multitasking, using the Thread Manager.
Actually, the Thread Manager is never pre-emptive on PowerMacs. Pre-emptive threading is done via Multiprocessing Services -- even if there's only one processor.
And the mouse will interrupt the whole system while it is depressed...
Umm... that depends where it's pressed, y'know.
However, the OSX buttons are spaced out further than the 'doze ones... and it's easier to miss in 'doze 'cos of the lack of cursor ballistics.
True; however, it's in a new appearance format (source: an Apple HI engineer). Considering that the graphics architecture has changed completely and Aqua uses features that wouldn't work under classic MacOS even if Quickdraw supported them (shadows and transparency require double-buffered windows) that isn't much of a surprise.
"Appearances", not Themes. An Appearance controls the dasign of interfac elements, a Theme controls the combination of Appearances with fonts, colours etc.
Appearances have been supported since 8.5 and will be supported in X (but, obviously, with a completely new format). They are not, and will not be, documented. One of the reasons is that changable Appearances is not compliant with a consistent interface. (That's irritating for geeks, but then, geeks aren't Apple's primary market.)
That one was revoked a while ago. Since no-one in Europe has been to the moon (at least, not _from_ europe to luna), it hasn't been relevant here yet.
To be honest, I don't see any improvement over 5.
A new "frames" tab on the tool pallette... just what I need: more mouse activity and a new concept for something that was utterly transparent in 5 (and, for that matter, in the first version I used, 1.4).
Steve Jobs has done a great job, but ditching the whole interface design group was a Bad Idea which will more than outweigh the current boom. I quite seriously think he should be kicked out.
Even then, ray tracing is a pretty lame hack when compared with actual real life. When we have hybrid distributed ray tracing/backward ray tracing/raydiosity for arbitrarily complex scenes at, at the very least, 60 fps at over 1000 pixels per dimension, I might be impressed, for a while.
Do you mean to say that since PIII 550s have been around for months, and people still use them, they will never want a faster computer?
Once upon a time, most people where satisfied with 16MHz 286en.
Duh.
What theory might that be? We're still far, far away from true photorealism in "unreal time".
Nah... they just want to sound like exotic metals. What's the Merced being called? Iridium? I've heard the person who thought of this reffered to as Intel's marketing guru... would that be someone who sits in a cave and has little contact with the outside world?
Duh. That should be, "destroy the world," in case anyone's wondering.
* Laser-retinal displays: great pic projected into your eye, one per eye (i.e. stereoscopic, great privacy). Coming "real soon now."
* Holographic: I seriously doubt it. However, there's a technology where a row or coloumn of lights flashes the image one scanline at a time, and you where glasses with rotating mirrors to see the pic. Primarily intended for cramped-quarters military installations (in tanks and subs), but when they're nice and fast they may be available for conference tables etc. Muh like Nikita, except you get a head-on view from any angle (although it probably shears if you tilt your head).
Trivia: I get that to RGB_666... is this the beginning of the end?
Can anyone authoratively guestimate how much waste will be produced per energy unit?
In other words, if the energy consumption changed the same, and all fission plants were replaced with fusion plants, would the waste production be higher or lower?
This could be done with an environmental tax keeping the price of fusion energy at the same levels as other production methods. (Obviously this wouldn't work in the US, where it's the right of every man to destroy the work as long as he doesn't harm anyone else in the process, but it would be nice to know in the hypothetical case nonetheless.