They will imbue their performance with some level of emotion. Computers can't do that.
Not true. If there is some characteristic of the music that you can hear, then it is a modification of the pressure wave that reaches your ear. If it's a matter of changing the waveform, then computers absolutely CAN do it.
I admit that it would take a lot of research to discover what we perceive as "emotion" in the music, but if it's there then it can be emulated. However, let's admit right out of the gate that if you played Piece A to an audiophile and told him it was humans, then Piece A again and told him it was machines, guess which one he'll hear the "emotion" in!
the world might be a better place if *fewer* people were able to make a living by writing
Hear, hear! I agree with your reasoning. And let's face it, the towering cynicism represented by a new boy band or vampire romance novel is frightening (and I consider myself somewhat cynical).
holding onto books and then simply raking in royalties for over a century
Yes! But hold onto your seats folks, because no copyrighted work which generated even a single dollar in the previous 12 months WILL EVER GO OUT OF COPYRIGHT AGAIN.
What is amazing to me is we've all seen products get retroactively destroyed and yet people are still willing to exchange paper books for electronic ones. Doesn't anyone else see the obvious future where books can be 'burned' remotely and without leaving a single copy in existence?
Historically, books have not been prized because they have good contrast on the pages or they feel good in the hand (arguments I've heard for paper). They have been prized because they COULD NOT BE CONTROLLED. And now we're lining up to eliminate that prized feature.
Oh, I see your mistake--you forgot there is such a thing as credit. If I can't absorb $10,000--I'll borrow it and pay it back monthly. And not at your usurious 50% APR ($416/mo), but more likely at <10% APR (<$132/mo).
Once you can power it autonomously, there are no limits to the things this device (and those that follow) can do.
No. It's all about intelligence. This thing can do nothing autonomously. That's why I declare IT IS NOT A ROBOT!
If this is a robot, explain to me why my car is not a robot. It rolls on mechanical 'wheels' and has all kinds of 'activators.' I just have to be on hand to control it.
I think this definition of robot comes from researchers who would rather say "I work with robots!" instead of "I work with a bunch of servos that I turn on and off with switches that I hold in my hand--pretty futuristic, eh?"
Unlike being tired...having an alcoholic drink is 100% avoidable
Being tired before driving is 100% avoidable. There should be automatic interlocks that prevent you from driving tired. In fact, it should prevent you from starting the car if you are even 1/3 tired.
This past spring, after a 13-year wait, I issued (in many tech/comm forums) a blanket offer of $2000 upfront and $200 per month to ANYONE who could get me 1+Mb at my house.
On Monday I took home a Verizon USB modem and I now get about 1.5Mb. Total cost? $15 down and $60 / mo. To me, that's savings of $1985 upfront and $140/mo.
Yes, it's capped at 5GB, but my dialup was capped at 8GB since that is 26.4kbps * 60s * 60m * 24h * 30 days * (1byte/8bits). And yes, it's expensive. But for 13 years, people told me to MOVE to get internet, so this $60/mo has SAVED MY HOUSE! So not so expensive in the big picture.
East Houston stinks because of the Brown Paper Company. Papermaking is very stinky because they boil wood in Sulfuric Acid to break it down into pulp more quickly. Hydrogen sulfide is released in the process and that stinks.
Ron White was sued when he pointed this out, and now he does a good 5 minutes of material about it. "When the wind is right, 2 million people can smell the [Houston] mill. I'm just saying, if someone were playing music that 2 million people could hear, they'd tell 'em to turn it the fuck off!"
The extremely annoying part is that the acid is not strictly required to make paper--it can be boiled in plain old water. But that would take longer and therefore cost more. So it's better to just render an entire city horrible than spend an extra buck for a ream at Staples.
as bad as we say ad-targeting is, totally un-targeted ads are pure noise.
You say that like noise is a BAD thing. But noise is very much easier to ignore than someone calling out to you. So I say let 'em stay untargetted and ignorable.
When you're running NoScript, it won't matter if "anyone could do it" because when you arrive on anyone's page, it will NOT run the mouse-tracking script. For the tracking to work, you would have to turn on scripting on that new site.
All scripts are blocked except those URLs you have allowed in the past. A new page with its own script is blocked by default.
C'mon, everybody knows how to kill "gangland style:" Two to the body to put 'em down. THEN, approach and one in the head to be sure.
In the old days, you'd then drop the (gauzed) gun immediately, so if you were stopped even a few feet away, you could say twernt me. However, technology has removed that option.
It takes 15 seconds to get through the commercials? My TiVo will skip to a frame about 28 seconds further on in about 125ms. I usually push the skip 5 times (2 seconds total) and that works for all the 2.5 minute breaks which are the most common length. For shows I watch regularly, I know how many pushes are necessary at each break. Even with an initial backup (for x.25 or x.75 minute breaks) of 2 -8 second pushes (1 second), followed by 2 seconds of skipping is a total of 3 seconds.
15 seconds? And you can actually SEE the commercials? Burn your DVR!
And there's even other ways the problem is not as well defined as we think: There could exist a different model than the turing machine with non-deterministic output which could model NP problems (let's call the new problem space NP') and that may be in P. If the nature of this machine is such that the normal translation requirement needed to be in NP doesn't work on it (or becomes NP itself), we might have P!=NP, but P=NP'. This would allow us to solve some NP problems in P yet still have P!=NP.
I just think the entire space of algorithms is not filled out enough to make universal predictions. So if we prove P!=NP, we might still be able to solve the problems in P. In which case it's our framework that must be thrown out, not the search for P-time procedures.
This is to say, NP tells us more about the current state-of-the-art for automated processing than it does about the actual nature of the universe. While this may turn out to be false, a proof of P!=NP is not necessarily a signal to give up looking for P solutions to NP problems.
you can use finger prints in the same way, and no one seems to have a problem with those
Wrong. Because I have a problem with those. I don't believe the authorities should have the right to force you to hand over your person for any kind of recording.
Of course, I lost that argument.
Just as everyone will lose this one too. Have fun in your dystopia.
I have the absolutely best internet connection possible in my location. A 320k page will load in 97 seconds. That's a long time to wait.
As technology moves forward and speed improves even more...
OK, I hit 26.4kbps speed in 1997. It is now 13 years later and technology has moved forward. My current speed? 26.4kbps. So it's just possible technology moving forward will NOT compensate for larding your page with shit.
I've been on the internet since 1984. Back then, there was all kinds of discussion and many, many 'services' and info. And guess how it all got there? Why, what do you know? It was done out of the kindness of people's hearts.
Then about 1988, the marketers showed up. It's been downhill ever since.
So can humans do things for each other just to be nice? Yes, as long as those humans don't include marketing assholes.
The FBI scanning the public traffic of an American website is in no way is comparable to monitoring you
Not so fast there. I think these things are not only comparable, I think they are identical. Tracking EVERYTHING you do that happened in public IS tracking you.
If I chat to my friend, I don't expect the FBI to be listening, even if it happens on the street in front of my house. Just because "chatting" now happens on a machine that the FBI can access, suddenly every public place is now spied on by the FBI?
Me no likey. And I especially don't like that if they CAN do something creepy, all of us citizens must accept that they WILL and ARE doing it. And I will never accept the idea that we must lay down for this because it is technically possible.
Oh, and for all you fucking spys: "Kill the principal, blow up the white house, bomb on the flight."
Does an educational publishing house exist to disseminate information to the people who will use it to improve our society? Or does it merely gobble up the maximum amount of money without regard to the impact on society?
Violin? Oh man, that there's a sax. A raw tenor sax bleats out while a bevy of nurses in garter belts and stockings run around in single file for no particular reason....
"Why are you so against this military hardware used against our enemies? It's not like the government will be flying these things over its own citizens."
Slashdot Mirror
They will imbue their performance with some level of emotion. Computers can't do that.
Not true. If there is some characteristic of the music that you can hear, then it is a modification of the pressure wave that reaches your ear. If it's a matter of changing the waveform, then computers absolutely CAN do it.
I admit that it would take a lot of research to discover what we perceive as "emotion" in the music, but if it's there then it can be emulated. However, let's admit right out of the gate that if you played Piece A to an audiophile and told him it was humans, then Piece A again and told him it was machines, guess which one he'll hear the "emotion" in!
the world might be a better place if *fewer* people were able to make a living by writing
Hear, hear! I agree with your reasoning. And let's face it, the towering cynicism represented by a new boy band or vampire romance novel is frightening (and I consider myself somewhat cynical).
holding onto books and then simply raking in royalties for over a century
Yes! But hold onto your seats folks, because no copyrighted work which generated even a single dollar in the previous 12 months WILL EVER GO OUT OF COPYRIGHT AGAIN.
will we ever say that it's not just about the money?
Remember what Kurt Vonnegut said should be engraved on humanity's tombstone:
"We could have saved the Earth, but we were too damn cheap."
they can turn them into 'bad' products at will
Yes! Very well said.
What is amazing to me is we've all seen products get retroactively destroyed and yet people are still willing to exchange paper books for electronic ones. Doesn't anyone else see the obvious future where books can be 'burned' remotely and without leaving a single copy in existence?
Historically, books have not been prized because they have good contrast on the pages or they feel good in the hand (arguments I've heard for paper). They have been prized because they COULD NOT BE CONTROLLED. And now we're lining up to eliminate that prized feature.
Oh, I see your mistake--you forgot there is such a thing as credit. If I can't absorb $10,000--I'll borrow it and pay it back monthly. And not at your usurious 50% APR ($416/mo), but more likely at <10% APR (<$132/mo).
Once you can power it autonomously, there are no limits to the things this device (and those that follow) can do.
No. It's all about intelligence. This thing can do nothing autonomously. That's why I declare IT IS NOT A ROBOT!
If this is a robot, explain to me why my car is not a robot. It rolls on mechanical 'wheels' and has all kinds of 'activators.' I just have to be on hand to control it.
I think this definition of robot comes from researchers who would rather say "I work with robots!" instead of "I work with a bunch of servos that I turn on and off with switches that I hold in my hand--pretty futuristic, eh?"
Unlike being tired...having an alcoholic drink is 100% avoidable
Being tired before driving is 100% avoidable. There should be automatic interlocks that prevent you from driving tired. In fact, it should prevent you from starting the car if you are even 1/3 tired.
"There. Now THAT ought to do it."
This past spring, after a 13-year wait, I issued (in many tech/comm forums) a blanket offer of $2000 upfront and $200 per month to ANYONE who could get me 1+Mb at my house.
On Monday I took home a Verizon USB modem and I now get about 1.5Mb. Total cost? $15 down and $60 / mo. To me, that's savings of $1985 upfront and $140/mo.
Yes, it's capped at 5GB, but my dialup was capped at 8GB since that is 26.4kbps * 60s * 60m * 24h * 30 days * (1byte/8bits). And yes, it's expensive. But for 13 years, people told me to MOVE to get internet, so this $60/mo has SAVED MY HOUSE! So not so expensive in the big picture.
East Houston stinks because of the Brown Paper Company. Papermaking is very stinky because they boil wood in Sulfuric Acid to break it down into pulp more quickly. Hydrogen sulfide is released in the process and that stinks.
Ron White was sued when he pointed this out, and now he does a good 5 minutes of material about it. "When the wind is right, 2 million people can smell the [Houston] mill. I'm just saying, if someone were playing music that 2 million people could hear, they'd tell 'em to turn it the fuck off!"
The extremely annoying part is that the acid is not strictly required to make paper--it can be boiled in plain old water. But that would take longer and therefore cost more. So it's better to just render an entire city horrible than spend an extra buck for a ream at Staples.
[STRIKE]Without those limitations[/STRIKE] police will inevitably abuse their authority.
FTFY
as bad as we say ad-targeting is, totally un-targeted ads are pure noise.
You say that like noise is a BAD thing. But noise is very much easier to ignore than someone calling out to you. So I say let 'em stay untargetted and ignorable.
I mean we can detect people's lies based on their face movements
No we can't. People who say they can are trying to sell you something. Beware.
No current method to detect lying is very effective. Once we have better brain scanning, we'll find that lying is STILL impossible to detect reliably.
When you're running NoScript, it won't matter if "anyone could do it" because when you arrive on anyone's page, it will NOT run the mouse-tracking script. For the tracking to work, you would have to turn on scripting on that new site.
All scripts are blocked except those URLs you have allowed in the past. A new page with its own script is blocked by default.
NoScript = No mouse tracking.
C'mon, everybody knows how to kill "gangland style:" Two to the body to put 'em down. THEN, approach and one in the head to be sure.
In the old days, you'd then drop the (gauzed) gun immediately, so if you were stopped even a few feet away, you could say twernt me. However, technology has removed that option.
Oh, to go back to those halcyon hitman days....
It takes 15 seconds to get through the commercials? My TiVo will skip to a frame about 28 seconds further on in about 125ms. I usually push the skip 5 times (2 seconds total) and that works for all the 2.5 minute breaks which are the most common length. For shows I watch regularly, I know how many pushes are necessary at each break. Even with an initial backup (for x.25 or x.75 minute breaks) of 2 -8 second pushes (1 second), followed by 2 seconds of skipping is a total of 3 seconds.
15 seconds? And you can actually SEE the commercials? Burn your DVR!
And there's even other ways the problem is not as well defined as we think: There could exist a different model than the turing machine with non-deterministic output which could model NP problems (let's call the new problem space NP') and that may be in P. If the nature of this machine is such that the normal translation requirement needed to be in NP doesn't work on it (or becomes NP itself), we might have P!=NP, but P=NP'. This would allow us to solve some NP problems in P yet still have P!=NP.
I just think the entire space of algorithms is not filled out enough to make universal predictions. So if we prove P!=NP, we might still be able to solve the problems in P. In which case it's our framework that must be thrown out, not the search for P-time procedures.
This is to say, NP tells us more about the current state-of-the-art for automated processing than it does about the actual nature of the universe. While this may turn out to be false, a proof of P!=NP is not necessarily a signal to give up looking for P solutions to NP problems.
you can use finger prints in the same way, and no one seems to have a problem with those
Wrong. Because I have a problem with those. I don't believe the authorities should have the right to force you to hand over your person for any kind of recording.
Of course, I lost that argument.
Just as everyone will lose this one too. Have fun in your dystopia.
Only saints are unafraid.
Most saints in my good book were horribly assassinated. Maybe they are unafraid of police officers, but they must be very afraid.
As technology moves forward and speed improves even more...
OK, I hit 26.4kbps speed in 1997. It is now 13 years later and technology has moved forward. My current speed? 26.4kbps. So it's just possible technology moving forward will NOT compensate for larding your page with shit.
I've been on the internet since 1984. Back then, there was all kinds of discussion and many, many 'services' and info. And guess how it all got there? Why, what do you know? It was done out of the kindness of people's hearts.
Then about 1988, the marketers showed up. It's been downhill ever since.
So can humans do things for each other just to be nice? Yes, as long as those humans don't include marketing assholes.
The FBI scanning the public traffic of an American website is in no way is comparable to monitoring you
Not so fast there. I think these things are not only comparable, I think they are identical. Tracking EVERYTHING you do that happened in public IS tracking you.
If I chat to my friend, I don't expect the FBI to be listening, even if it happens on the street in front of my house. Just because "chatting" now happens on a machine that the FBI can access, suddenly every public place is now spied on by the FBI?
Me no likey. And I especially don't like that if they CAN do something creepy, all of us citizens must accept that they WILL and ARE doing it. And I will never accept the idea that we must lay down for this because it is technically possible.
Oh, and for all you fucking spys: "Kill the principal, blow up the white house, bomb on the flight."
Does an educational publishing house exist to disseminate information to the people who will use it to improve our society? Or does it merely gobble up the maximum amount of money without regard to the impact on society?
Well, I guess now we know.
Violin? Oh man, that there's a sax. A raw tenor sax bleats out while a bevy of nurses in garter belts and stockings run around in single file for no particular reason....
"Why are you so against this military hardware used against our enemies? It's not like the government will be flying these things over its own citizens."
Fast forward a few years....