More or less, there isn't much difference between large corporations and governments. I'm sure Disney has more sway in the world than say Virginia (USA) or even a coalition of states. Both are after your money; at least gov't (supposedly) represents its people.
what type of thing cannot be approached logically?
For one, we can't trust our senses, because any information we gather about our senses comes through our senses. Not that we don't trust our senses, what else can we do? We implicitly make a decision to trust them without any evidence that we should (or shouldn't). This is one way that logic shows us its own limits.
We don't enjoy a delicious meal through our logical capacities. Even though flavor can be approached logically, we can't (at least for now) create a formula to tell us the most delicious meal for someone. That shouldn't stop us from enjoying food until we find that formula. And even if we do find such a formula, we shouldn't stop enjoying food.
I know that I know nothing, which is the greatest knowledge of all. If in dealing with subtle aspects of gender, society, and relationships, while taking attacks on my masculinity, I have come off heavy-handed, I apologize!
I have to agree with the AC. Basically I was saying "women aren't shit (and neither are men)." To paraphrase, anyway. I certainly agree that acting a wimp will get you a wimp's rewards... that's not the issue at hand though (or so I thought).
No defense mechanism for me... I am nothing and so I have nothing to defend. Are you sure you are not getting defensive?
The previous posters aren't sad individuals
It is sad to lose your humanity. There is more to life than logic and what you think you "know" based on your limited perspective of the world. Love and you will know love. Do not and you will not. It's that simple.
they've simply... presented our existence in terms that can be explained via the same paradigms that we explain the rest of the animal world.
Well, the same paradigms that you use to describe the animal world, anyway... as if any of our behavioral sciences are more than (very useful) vague abstractions. There's much more to know about life than what our sciences can currently gain a perspective on.
I am afraid I am speaking with people who have already closed their minds to the possibility that what they do not/cannot understand with logic must inherently not exist or be explainable with something besides logic.
You guys are both kind of sad individuals. You should really hear yourselves. I'm sorry you have both lost touch with what it is to be human and how to interact with others:-(
So care to share links? Googling for "pgp smtp certificate store" doesn't come up with anything that looks related. Twitter isn't a bad service. It has some advantages over email at least in regards to spam.
Yeah, I guess that is a little inconsistent;-) Last time I posted something like this I was modded down pretty severely, so I had to get that in there at the top:-)
Google, Yahoo, and Microsoft have their priorities (profit) which is not necessarily going to be conducive to setting up an elegant, secure, spam-free messaging service (and getting all the other players to the table as well). I realize there are market and other forces that are a barrier to progress in this area, but I would think that something could be done to reduce spam and the reliance on filtering. There are all kinds of ways to do it and advantages and disadvantages to different approaches (some being implemented in one way or another). Another poster mentioned DKIM, which seems promising (and is already somewhat implemented?). I've gotta read more about it, though. Cheers!
So you are switching from an open, peer-to-peer network to one controlled by a single entity (or small set of entities) which will not have your best interests at heart?
Can't really see a downside, especially because of encryption. Sure I'd love to be using something reliable and popular and spam-free that is based on open, p2p technologies. The problem is that doesn't exist, which is pretty much my point:)
How do you communicate with non-twitter, non-Facebook users anyway?
Of course email or phone, but I mostly talk to my friends and they mostly have one or more of SMS, Facebook, phone, or Twitter. That's why I said I am reducing my email usage, and didn't say stopping completely. It's just that an obsoleted technology such as email, that has so many problems and gaping holes in it, needs to be replaced. It's the principal of the thing, mostly.
Considering there was a post on/. a bit ago claiming email was 95% spam... I would guess that services that can identify the message senders* would have less of a problem dealing with spam. Email spam is illegal, but as far as I know, Facebook spam and SMS spam are not. That makes a big difference. There have been plenty breakthroughs in messaging, and email is cold behind the times technically, socially and practically.
*either through public key encryption (anonymous) or by making people register to use the protocol (easy to bring charges against spammers)
I don't care what anybody else says, we need a new protocol for messaging. It could combine the best parts of email with the best parts of social networking/IM/SMS and surpass them all. We need a network where there is some way to ascertain the origin of any email/account. We need automatic encryption. We can still keep SMTP around, there's no need to kill it (so we can have anonymous networks), but we need something else now. I know, I know, easier said than done and put your money where your mouth is, but for my part, I am trying to use email less and less, while switching to Facebook/Twitter/SMS to get in touch with people.
Excuse me, I would like to be a bitch for a moment of your time;-) Physics, according to the OED, is defined as:
The branch of science concerned with the nature and properties of non-living matter and energy... the science whose subject matter includes mechanics, heat, light..., sound, electricity, magnetism, gravity, the structure of atoms, the nature of subatomic particles, and the fundamental laws of the material universe. Also: the physical properties and phenomena of a thing.
Theoretical mathematics can be a part of many fields, even outside of the hard sciences. Sure, a theory that can't be tested shouldn't be given so much adoration, but it is still very much a part of physics, for better or worse!
I mean if you are just talking about amateur club DJs, sure, but then... most amateur musicians are hit or miss as well. I mean, I can relate, it really gets me when "DJs" use their shuffle or just play shit with a crossfade. I mean that isn't that creative. On the other hand, I can't think of any big name DJs that do anything like that (tell me one please). Anyway, I seriously doubt you could replace even most amateur DJs with an automated system that would be better. There's a lot of feeling involved in music that just isn't going to be easily translatable to algorithms. Transitions between songs are pretty much the way you cut your teeth as a DJ, so if a machine is selecting and mixing songs better than you, that is pretty much the definition of failure. A good DJ shouldn't let the floor clear out because he/she picked the wrong song - and several tries is going to be pretty noticeable when you are playing 1000s of songs (say 3 or even 2 or 1 fails per song is going to sound pretty crappy for a looong time... more than 3000 minutes just starting out. That's something intuitive that a human can easily pick up on.) Why put in a slow song for the bar? At least human DJs are trying to please people and not the establishment owner... I can agree to disagree, but saying that DJs are less creative than other musicians in general is flat out wrong.
Maybe I just haven't looked hard enough... but I mean where do you find a lot of people doing beatmatching and selling albums of it like they are the shit? Maybe I am kind of sheltered out here in Missouri and am only exposed to the good DJ albums, but I do a lot of internet searching for this stuff, and honestly, I don't find too much stuff that isn't creative. Maybe you should change the venues you look for good DJs in? Are you talking about stuff like Girl Talk? I mean is that where wea re disagreeing? Also, live beatmatching at the club is super tight. Anyway, cheers mate. I certainly don't mind agreeing to disagree; I am seriously just curious.
Here you go. Google helps a lot when you don't understand something;-) Here's the most relevant part, although there are many more exemptions:
... the fair use of a copyrighted work, including such use by reproduction in copies... for purposes such as criticism, comment, news reporting, teaching (including multiple copies for classroom use), scholarship, or research, is not an infringement of copyright. In determining whether the use made of a work in any particular case is a fair use the factors to be considered shall include --
(1) the purpose and character of the use, including whether such use is of a commercial nature or is for nonprofit educational purposes;
(2) the nature of the copyrighted work;
(3) the amount and substantiality of the portion used in relation to the copyrighted work as a whole; and
(4) the effect of the use upon the potential market for or value of the copyrighted work.
The fact that a work is unpublished shall not itself bar a finding of fair use if such finding is made upon consideration of all the above factors.
Almost all minor sampling should fall under criticism/comment or least should be exempted in some other way. Of course many people (including the courts) disagree with me. Oh well. Just because we have asinine laws, doesn't make them morally right. Searh for "remix culture" if you want to understand the other side's arguments.
P.S. We certainly have a right to petition our corporate overlords. It's a tired argument to say the corporations can do what they want and we should bend over for a good dicking without saying a word about it. Sure, they have many rights, but they also massively influence society and are therefore subject to at least some accountability to those people they affect. P.P.S. The ACLU is awesome. Those who believe in true freedom should support the ACLU. It's weird to me that somehow to a lot of people freedom is merely the provisions of the 2nd amendment (which I support), and all the other Rights be damned when marginalized people say or worship something the first group doesn't like, or when a marginalized group wants freedom that runs counter to traditional, straight-laced society.
Slashdot Mirror
More or less, there isn't much difference between large corporations and governments. I'm sure Disney has more sway in the world than say Virginia (USA) or even a coalition of states. Both are after your money; at least gov't (supposedly) represents its people.
what type of thing cannot be approached logically?
For one, we can't trust our senses, because any information we gather about our senses comes through our senses. Not that we don't trust our senses, what else can we do? We implicitly make a decision to trust them without any evidence that we should (or shouldn't). This is one way that logic shows us its own limits.
We don't enjoy a delicious meal through our logical capacities. Even though flavor can be approached logically, we can't (at least for now) create a formula to tell us the most delicious meal for someone. That shouldn't stop us from enjoying food until we find that formula. And even if we do find such a formula, we shouldn't stop enjoying food.
Thanks I will look at these.
I know that I know nothing, which is the greatest knowledge of all. If in dealing with subtle aspects of gender, society, and relationships, while taking attacks on my masculinity, I have come off heavy-handed, I apologize!
I have to agree with the AC. Basically I was saying "women aren't shit (and neither are men)." To paraphrase, anyway. I certainly agree that acting a wimp will get you a wimp's rewards... that's not the issue at hand though (or so I thought).
Literally.
The previous posters aren't sad individuals
It is sad to lose your humanity. There is more to life than logic and what you think you "know" based on your limited perspective of the world. Love and you will know love. Do not and you will not. It's that simple.
they've simply ... presented our existence in terms that can be explained via the same paradigms that we explain the rest of the animal world.
Well, the same paradigms that you use to describe the animal world, anyway... as if any of our behavioral sciences are more than (very useful) vague abstractions. There's much more to know about life than what our sciences can currently gain a perspective on.
I am afraid I am speaking with people who have already closed their minds to the possibility that what they do not/cannot understand with logic must inherently not exist or be explainable with something besides logic.
I guess we will have to agree to disagree. Still... I am sad for you.
That's put very well.
You guys are both kind of sad individuals. You should really hear yourselves. I'm sorry you have both lost touch with what it is to be human and how to interact with others :-(
Man are you hanging out with the wrong women.
So care to share links? Googling for "pgp smtp certificate store" doesn't come up with anything that looks related. Twitter isn't a bad service. It has some advantages over email at least in regards to spam.
Yeah, I guess that is a little inconsistent ;-) Last time I posted something like this I was modded down pretty severely, so I had to get that in there at the top :-)
Google, Yahoo, and Microsoft have their priorities (profit) which is not necessarily going to be conducive to setting up an elegant, secure, spam-free messaging service (and getting all the other players to the table as well). I realize there are market and other forces that are a barrier to progress in this area, but I would think that something could be done to reduce spam and the reliance on filtering. There are all kinds of ways to do it and advantages and disadvantages to different approaches (some being implemented in one way or another). Another poster mentioned DKIM, which seems promising (and is already somewhat implemented?). I've gotta read more about it, though. Cheers!
So you are switching from an open, peer-to-peer network to one controlled by a single entity (or small set of entities) which will not have your best interests at heart?
Can't really see a downside, especially because of encryption. Sure I'd love to be using something reliable and popular and spam-free that is based on open, p2p technologies. The problem is that doesn't exist, which is pretty much my point :)
How do you communicate with non-twitter, non-Facebook users anyway?
Of course email or phone, but I mostly talk to my friends and they mostly have one or more of SMS, Facebook, phone, or Twitter. That's why I said I am reducing my email usage, and didn't say stopping completely. It's just that an obsoleted technology such as email, that has so many problems and gaping holes in it, needs to be replaced. It's the principal of the thing, mostly.
If you want to be snobby about it, that's your prerogative; I just want a decent messaging protocol to be implemented!
Considering there was a post on /. a bit ago claiming email was 95% spam... I would guess that services that can identify the message senders* would have less of a problem dealing with spam. Email spam is illegal, but as far as I know, Facebook spam and SMS spam are not. That makes a big difference. There have been plenty breakthroughs in messaging, and email is cold behind the times technically, socially and practically.
*either through public key encryption (anonymous) or by making people register to use the protocol (easy to bring charges against spammers)
Don't go fishing for a way to slip out of this. I'm not taking your bait.
LOL 'nuff said.
Proof, no. But anecdotes are not meaningless. *Slaps you with a large trout.*
I don't care what anybody else says, we need a new protocol for messaging. It could combine the best parts of email with the best parts of social networking/IM/SMS and surpass them all. We need a network where there is some way to ascertain the origin of any email/account. We need automatic encryption. We can still keep SMTP around, there's no need to kill it (so we can have anonymous networks), but we need something else now. I know, I know, easier said than done and put your money where your mouth is, but for my part, I am trying to use email less and less, while switching to Facebook/Twitter/SMS to get in touch with people.
The branch of science concerned with the nature and properties of non-living matter and energy ... the science whose subject matter includes mechanics, heat, light ..., sound, electricity, magnetism, gravity, the structure of atoms, the nature of subatomic particles, and the fundamental laws of the material universe. Also: the physical properties and phenomena of a thing.
Theoretical mathematics can be a part of many fields, even outside of the hard sciences. Sure, a theory that can't be tested shouldn't be given so much adoration, but it is still very much a part of physics, for better or worse!
I mean if you are just talking about amateur club DJs, sure, but then... most amateur musicians are hit or miss as well. I mean, I can relate, it really gets me when "DJs" use their shuffle or just play shit with a crossfade. I mean that isn't that creative. On the other hand, I can't think of any big name DJs that do anything like that (tell me one please). Anyway, I seriously doubt you could replace even most amateur DJs with an automated system that would be better. There's a lot of feeling involved in music that just isn't going to be easily translatable to algorithms. Transitions between songs are pretty much the way you cut your teeth as a DJ, so if a machine is selecting and mixing songs better than you, that is pretty much the definition of failure. A good DJ shouldn't let the floor clear out because he/she picked the wrong song - and several tries is going to be pretty noticeable when you are playing 1000s of songs (say 3 or even 2 or 1 fails per song is going to sound pretty crappy for a looong time... more than 3000 minutes just starting out. That's something intuitive that a human can easily pick up on.) Why put in a slow song for the bar? At least human DJs are trying to please people and not the establishment owner... I can agree to disagree, but saying that DJs are less creative than other musicians in general is flat out wrong.
Maybe I just haven't looked hard enough... but I mean where do you find a lot of people doing beatmatching and selling albums of it like they are the shit? Maybe I am kind of sheltered out here in Missouri and am only exposed to the good DJ albums, but I do a lot of internet searching for this stuff, and honestly, I don't find too much stuff that isn't creative. Maybe you should change the venues you look for good DJs in? Are you talking about stuff like Girl Talk? I mean is that where wea re disagreeing? Also, live beatmatching at the club is super tight. Anyway, cheers mate. I certainly don't mind agreeing to disagree; I am seriously just curious.
... the fair use of a copyrighted work, including such use by reproduction in copies ... for purposes such as criticism, comment, news reporting, teaching (including multiple copies for classroom use), scholarship, or research, is not an infringement of copyright. In determining whether the use made of a work in any particular case is a fair use the factors to be considered shall include --
(1) the purpose and character of the use, including whether such use is of a commercial nature or is for nonprofit educational purposes;
(2) the nature of the copyrighted work;
(3) the amount and substantiality of the portion used in relation to the copyrighted work as a whole; and
(4) the effect of the use upon the potential market for or value of the copyrighted work.
The fact that a work is unpublished shall not itself bar a finding of fair use if such finding is made upon consideration of all the above factors.
Almost all minor sampling should fall under criticism/comment or least should be exempted in some other way. Of course many people (including the courts) disagree with me. Oh well. Just because we have asinine laws, doesn't make them morally right. Searh for "remix culture" if you want to understand the other side's arguments.
P.S. We certainly have a right to petition our corporate overlords. It's a tired argument to say the corporations can do what they want and we should bend over for a good dicking without saying a word about it. Sure, they have many rights, but they also massively influence society and are therefore subject to at least some accountability to those people they affect.
P.P.S. The ACLU is awesome. Those who believe in true freedom should support the ACLU. It's weird to me that somehow to a lot of people freedom is merely the provisions of the 2nd amendment (which I support), and all the other Rights be damned when marginalized people say or worship something the first group doesn't like, or when a marginalized group wants freedom that runs counter to traditional, straight-laced society.
Some more: Kid Koala, Kut Master Kurt, Afrika Bambaataa, DJ Spooky, The X-Ecutioners, Nightmares on Wax, The BPA. Man if I had my iTunes with me I could probably type a whole screen of tight shit.