But is autoplay/autorun an automatic turn signal or is it a starter motor?
It's a starter motor that automatically starts the car whenever you get in. This is a great feature most of the time, but when you just wanted to run out to the garage to get your sunglasses out of the glove compartment, it accidentally starts up and asphyxiates everyone in the house.
Don't need to exercise, just pop this pill.
on
Cosmetic Neurology
·
· Score: 1
People make all kinds of claims about these sorts of medications, but the effect isn't going to beat just eating a healthy diet, getting exercise and going to bed for a reasonable amount of time.
So does that mean it WOULD be effective for the 99.8% of the population that doesn't get a healthy diet, enough exercise and plenty of sleep?
Only 1Mbps? I would pay anyone $250 right now to up my speed on my 56kbps modem to 33kbps. Right now it's 26kbps (as it's been since 1994).
And to belay the obvious: No, satellite doesn't work on my site, and wireless is "5 years away" which is the same number I've heard for the last 10+ years.
And if you think I chose to live in the boonies (rural US) without internet, you're wrong. I chose to live in the boonies WITH ALL UTILITIES, but around the mid-90's the set making up ALL UTILITIES changed. So I guess I should have burned my now-useless house down as soon as ISDN was invented.
I had a catch all mail address for many years on a couple of my domains. I did exactly what you did: use sellerdomain@mydomain. This quickly became untenable.
There are some bots out there that have all the time in the world and would send spam to aaaaaaa@mydomain, aaaaaab@mydomain, etc. It's a great day when ALL 2 million emails end up in your inbox. Then there would be the 50 to 100 emails/day addressed like this: fo3j3wq32@mydomain with random looking usernames. Don't know what that was all about.
The upside is that I'd get emails to real people at lexicographically nearby domains. I'd usually pretend to be the actual person and make up outlandish responses for fun. I'm sure I got plenty of people in trouble.
admit some places have it a hell of whole lot worse off than western countries
So as long as we're better than the worst, we should never complain. So the person with the worst behavior in the world has set the bar for all of humanity--no one can work to change any behavior as long as it's not the absolute worst.
Looks like we have to work in serial, dealing with the one worst individual at a time, getting him to not be worst anymore then going to the next worst, until we get to everyone. What a GREAT PLAN!
I got my Master's in Software Engineering at Harvard. I was an IT professor at the time (for a small community college) where I ran some online offerings, ran a website for my own classes and some of the Harvard offerings, and even setup online courses as a TA at Harvard. I was also an 'online TA' running special bulletin board question and answer sessions for students who took classes online. So I'm not exactly an old fart too set in his ways to see the advantage of technology.
Despite this, I took only 1 class online--for the other 13 classes I drove the 340 mile round trip to campus (a total of 60,000 miles for the degree). Why?
Because, first I wanted to participate. I had the opportunity to become a TA, work with the online crew, get to know professors. I also got a job offer as a programmer at a research lab in Cambridge which was cool.
Second, I flunked my online course--well, I got a C which doesn't get you grad credit at Harvard. That's because the streaming lectures were available 24/7. That means you can always catch it tomorrow. And pretty much anything that can be put off a day never gets done.
Here I was working to perfect online ciricula with some of the smartest people I've ever met. But I know now that an online course is not the same thing as a real class. Whether it is an useful alternative depends on the student, but they are very different activities.
Since pre-paid anonymous cell phones are almost always used for no good and legal purpose this sounds like a great idea for that kind of phone.
I have an anonymous tracfone. I got it not because I am evil, but because I am cheap. My phone has lasted me 18 months for a total of $140 or $7.78/month. Tell me the cell plan that would be cheaper than this.
I'm sure the telcos would agree that not paying at least $50 every month should be illegal. Don't worry, I'm sure in a few more years it will be.
I was once 'invited' to a Barbeque at my boss's house on a Friday evening. When all of the programmers had shown up, he had us check out his new computer setup. We entered this little room with about a half dozen PCs.
He then LOCKED US IN and told us we could leave when the programming project we had been working on was finished.
Yes. You read that correctly. He kidnapped about 8 people.
I had no family at the time so I thought it was all great fun. But some of the married people were less excited to be forced to work the weekend. The conditions weren't terrible, but no one likes to work anywhere there is no choice.
No surprise but the upshot: Many programmers quit, boss was fired, company soon folded.
So remote the telco would lose money on connecting you? Well, that is SO VERY remote. It's so remote, 50% of the population lives there. Yeah, real fucking remote.
To be honest, I think most people object to filtering because they want their vices to be triggered "accidentally"
An interesting idea, but I doubt it. I for one object to filtering because I have been in situations where I made a bad decision because I did not know the whole story. Once I knew the whole story, I realized I could have made a better decision had I known.
And knowing this, I further recognize that someone who wanted me to make a bad decision (one that benefited him more than me) could therefore achieve that goal. All he has to do is withhold certain information from me.
I want to make the best decisions for myself, so I do not want information filtered. It has little to do with wanting to masturbate. I can do that without any outside help, thanks.
Oh, I see, you've written so many books there's no possible way you can remember them all to fill out a web form for each one.
I'm sorry, if you don't care enough to opt out, then ALL HUMANS SHOULD GET THE INFO. No more of this, "It's mine, you can't have it, I don't care if I'm not using it, I'd rather it was wasted just so I can hoard it."
As long as Google is not the EXCLUSIVE stealer of info, so other companies can swoop in and ALSO distribute unclaimed works, this doesn't make one company too strong.
I applaud this sentiment. ALL info should go this path. Let's sum it up as: Oh, YOU don't care? Well, WE do.
I said Child Porn should be legal. Of course using a child for making child porn should remain illegal. But the porn itself should carry no penalties.
A picture can (and should) still be used as evidence of a crime, but that crime better have a victim and a (different) perpetrator or it's not a crime. As evidence, it should be distributable.
Just make ALL speech legal. That takes care of this bullshit. You can't be prosecuted for telling someone something. Period.
And if you think there must be a line somewhere ("Fire" in a crowded theater), forget it. ALL speech should be legal.
Treason? Defamation? Child porn? Top secret leaks? Incitement to riot? ALL should be legal. As long as everyone KNOWS it's legal, it works out fine.
Will it make people safer? NO! It will make things more dangerous. But at least we'll be safer from the government which, since it owns infinite power, is a much bigger enemy than any schmuck on a street corner.
When I was a kid, I remember the first commercial break that contained 2 30-second commercials back-to-back instead of the normal 1 30-second commercial. People were outraged. How could they do it? Why were they trying to make us stop watching?
But I'm sure you would have told me "Don't worry, 2 commercials isn't that much." Fast forward a few decades and you now can't find the show for the advertising.
This is why libel and slander should NOT be against the law. Problem solved.
Won't people lie about others then? Yes. But since everyone will KNOW that it's legal to lie, you will have to actually apply some sense to determine if what you are reading might be true.
A cynical reader will be the best defense against anarchy. This is why I propose that ALL speech, regardless of content, should be legal.
What about people telling military secrets? Perfectly legal. So you'd better concern yourself with a person's loyalty before you tell him a secret because him revealing it will not be illegal.
What about "fire" in a crowded theater? Again, you better glance about before you herd to the exits because the yeller might be lying.
Won't that be LESS safe for people? Yes, it WILL! I'll gladly trade safety for freedom.
Everyone should take only half a load? Yeah, that'll work great. Build in a huge incentive to cheat once prices are high. Your suggestion would lead to a highly exploitable environment, which people will exploit because that's what people do. Let's face it, "exploit environment" has been a successful strategy for about 4 billion years. Your gentlemen's agreement is essentially asking us to become a different species. Unlikely.
During the training of a neural net, the weightings of the synapses are adjusted in a feedback loop until the correct output appears. Some of those weightings will go from zero to a non-zero weight (new synapses will form) and some will go from non-zero to zero (old synapses will die).
So nothing stands in the way of getting a "smart" machine by hooking up transistors in this way.
Robots, just as humans, do exactly what their programming tells them to do.
Yes, but controlling the programming turns out to be impossible. So when a man goes nuts with a gun in a school, he's listening to his faulty programming. How do we know if we've installed faulty programming in a machine?
Remember that the weights of synaptic paths is ALL the programming you can do and there is no known way to determine how a machine will behave given a particular set of weightings. You can't "check" the programming any more than we could check the gunman's programming.
So expecting miscalculations is far from the stupidest idea ever.
No, the only vested interest a robot will have is what we have programmed into it.
No. You cannot program neuronic machines. You TRAIN them. You got training (as a child) to share your cake. But sometimes you don't share your cake. So now you suggest we train it to not make humans extinct. Hmmm....
You're thinking about this all wrong. Just because the box looks like a computer doesn't mean we can program it like a computer. The only control one has over the neurons is to change the weighting of the signals that travel down a synapse. That's it. No "Love=1" crap available.
And the best part is after training, no one can predict what weighting affects what output in a given situation. So the only "programming" you can do is the same "programming" we give children. Can you flip a bit in your child from bad to good?
So this boils down to a problem of TEACHING, not programming. And we've pretty much proven we're only so-so at teaching (all children do not grow up to be good). So let's just HOPE we can teach this thing to be good. But we better be able to kill it if the teaching is only so-so.
How many things have gone wrong inside your body that your body had to deal with to fix itself? My guess is there are hundreds of these things going on in your body every day.
Now we get to monitor, pinpoint, intercept, change, and CHARGE for every one of these events.
All medical tests are attempts to find something to charge you for, regardless if doing nothing is effective or not. Now, with this system, everyone will be taking a lifelong medical test.
Every human (who lives long enough) will go through puberty. Not every human will be able to afford 'enhancements.' So, should we build a society with 2 classes of humankind?
It seems to me, that's one of the reasons moralists are raising issues. Maybe we should get ready to bow and scrape to the supermen. Maybe that will be good. But certainly don't you think we ought to talk about it a little?
such data over a long period of time can pretty much be construed to incriminate anyone. What a waste of government resources.
A waste? Far from it. Having data to incriminate ANYONE is not a problem--it is the goal. Sounds like they got exactly what they wanted, resources be damned.
Slashdot Mirror
But is autoplay/autorun an automatic turn signal or is it a starter motor?
It's a starter motor that automatically starts the car whenever you get in. This is a great feature most of the time, but when you just wanted to run out to the garage to get your sunglasses out of the glove compartment, it accidentally starts up and asphyxiates everyone in the house.
People make all kinds of claims about these sorts of medications, but the effect isn't going to beat just eating a healthy diet, getting exercise and going to bed for a reasonable amount of time.
So does that mean it WOULD be effective for the 99.8% of the population that doesn't get a healthy diet, enough exercise and plenty of sleep?
Only 1Mbps? I would pay anyone $250 right now to up my speed on my 56kbps modem to 33kbps. Right now it's 26kbps (as it's been since 1994).
And to belay the obvious: No, satellite doesn't work on my site, and wireless is "5 years away" which is the same number I've heard for the last 10+ years.
And if you think I chose to live in the boonies (rural US) without internet, you're wrong. I chose to live in the boonies WITH ALL UTILITIES, but around the mid-90's the set making up ALL UTILITIES changed. So I guess I should have burned my now-useless house down as soon as ISDN was invented.
I had a catch all mail address for many years on a couple of my domains. I did exactly what you did: use sellerdomain@mydomain. This quickly became untenable.
There are some bots out there that have all the time in the world and would send spam to aaaaaaa@mydomain, aaaaaab@mydomain, etc. It's a great day when ALL 2 million emails end up in your inbox. Then there would be the 50 to 100 emails/day addressed like this: fo3j3wq32@mydomain with random looking usernames. Don't know what that was all about.
The upside is that I'd get emails to real people at lexicographically nearby domains. I'd usually pretend to be the actual person and make up outlandish responses for fun. I'm sure I got plenty of people in trouble.
admit some places have it a hell of whole lot worse off than western countries
So as long as we're better than the worst, we should never complain. So the person with the worst behavior in the world has set the bar for all of humanity--no one can work to change any behavior as long as it's not the absolute worst.
Looks like we have to work in serial, dealing with the one worst individual at a time, getting him to not be worst anymore then going to the next worst, until we get to everyone. What a GREAT PLAN!
I got my Master's in Software Engineering at Harvard. I was an IT professor at the time (for a small community college) where I ran some online offerings, ran a website for my own classes and some of the Harvard offerings, and even setup online courses as a TA at Harvard. I was also an 'online TA' running special bulletin board question and answer sessions for students who took classes online. So I'm not exactly an old fart too set in his ways to see the advantage of technology.
Despite this, I took only 1 class online--for the other 13 classes I drove the 340 mile round trip to campus (a total of 60,000 miles for the degree). Why?
Because, first I wanted to participate. I had the opportunity to become a TA, work with the online crew, get to know professors. I also got a job offer as a programmer at a research lab in Cambridge which was cool.
Second, I flunked my online course--well, I got a C which doesn't get you grad credit at Harvard. That's because the streaming lectures were available 24/7. That means you can always catch it tomorrow. And pretty much anything that can be put off a day never gets done.
Here I was working to perfect online ciricula with some of the smartest people I've ever met. But I know now that an online course is not the same thing as a real class. Whether it is an useful alternative depends on the student, but they are very different activities.
I'm not sure educative is a word. Probably looking for pedagogical.
Since pre-paid anonymous cell phones are almost always used for no good and legal purpose this sounds like a great idea for that kind of phone.
I have an anonymous tracfone. I got it not because I am evil, but because I am cheap. My phone has lasted me 18 months for a total of $140 or $7.78/month. Tell me the cell plan that would be cheaper than this.
I'm sure the telcos would agree that not paying at least $50 every month should be illegal. Don't worry, I'm sure in a few more years it will be.
So when alcohol was legalized in the 30's, everyone ran out and started doing heroin? I think you were doing heroin before you suggested this.
I was once 'invited' to a Barbeque at my boss's house on a Friday evening. When all of the programmers had shown up, he had us check out his new computer setup. We entered this little room with about a half dozen PCs.
He then LOCKED US IN and told us we could leave when the programming project we had been working on was finished.
Yes. You read that correctly. He kidnapped about 8 people.
I had no family at the time so I thought it was all great fun. But some of the married people were less excited to be forced to work the weekend. The conditions weren't terrible, but no one likes to work anywhere there is no choice.
No surprise but the upshot: Many programmers quit, boss was fired, company soon folded.
So remote the telco would lose money on connecting you? Well, that is SO VERY remote. It's so remote, 50% of the population lives there. Yeah, real fucking remote.
To be honest, I think most people object to filtering because they want their vices to be triggered "accidentally"
An interesting idea, but I doubt it. I for one object to filtering because I have been in situations where I made a bad decision because I did not know the whole story. Once I knew the whole story, I realized I could have made a better decision had I known.
And knowing this, I further recognize that someone who wanted me to make a bad decision (one that benefited him more than me) could therefore achieve that goal. All he has to do is withhold certain information from me.
I want to make the best decisions for myself, so I do not want information filtered. It has little to do with wanting to masturbate. I can do that without any outside help, thanks.
Oh, I see, you've written so many books there's no possible way you can remember them all to fill out a web form for each one.
I'm sorry, if you don't care enough to opt out, then ALL HUMANS SHOULD GET THE INFO. No more of this, "It's mine, you can't have it, I don't care if I'm not using it, I'd rather it was wasted just so I can hoard it."
As long as Google is not the EXCLUSIVE stealer of info, so other companies can swoop in and ALSO distribute unclaimed works, this doesn't make one company too strong.
I applaud this sentiment. ALL info should go this path. Let's sum it up as: Oh, YOU don't care? Well, WE do.
I said Child Porn should be legal. Of course using a child for making child porn should remain illegal. But the porn itself should carry no penalties.
A picture can (and should) still be used as evidence of a crime, but that crime better have a victim and a (different) perpetrator or it's not a crime. As evidence, it should be distributable.
Just make ALL speech legal. That takes care of this bullshit. You can't be prosecuted for telling someone something. Period.
And if you think there must be a line somewhere ("Fire" in a crowded theater), forget it. ALL speech should be legal.
Treason? Defamation? Child porn? Top secret leaks? Incitement to riot? ALL should be legal. As long as everyone KNOWS it's legal, it works out fine.
Will it make people safer? NO! It will make things more dangerous. But at least we'll be safer from the government which, since it owns infinite power, is a much bigger enemy than any schmuck on a street corner.
When I was a kid, I remember the first commercial break that contained 2 30-second commercials back-to-back instead of the normal 1 30-second commercial. People were outraged. How could they do it? Why were they trying to make us stop watching?
But I'm sure you would have told me "Don't worry, 2 commercials isn't that much." Fast forward a few decades and you now can't find the show for the advertising.
This is why libel and slander should NOT be against the law. Problem solved.
Won't people lie about others then? Yes. But since everyone will KNOW that it's legal to lie, you will have to actually apply some sense to determine if what you are reading might be true.
A cynical reader will be the best defense against anarchy. This is why I propose that ALL speech, regardless of content, should be legal.
What about people telling military secrets? Perfectly legal. So you'd better concern yourself with a person's loyalty before you tell him a secret because him revealing it will not be illegal.
What about "fire" in a crowded theater? Again, you better glance about before you herd to the exits because the yeller might be lying.
Won't that be LESS safe for people? Yes, it WILL! I'll gladly trade safety for freedom.
Everyone should take only half a load? Yeah, that'll work great. Build in a huge incentive to cheat once prices are high. Your suggestion would lead to a highly exploitable environment, which people will exploit because that's what people do. Let's face it, "exploit environment" has been a successful strategy for about 4 billion years. Your gentlemen's agreement is essentially asking us to become a different species. Unlikely.
During the training of a neural net, the weightings of the synapses are adjusted in a feedback loop until the correct output appears. Some of those weightings will go from zero to a non-zero weight (new synapses will form) and some will go from non-zero to zero (old synapses will die).
So nothing stands in the way of getting a "smart" machine by hooking up transistors in this way.
Robots, just as humans, do exactly what their programming tells them to do.
Yes, but controlling the programming turns out to be impossible. So when a man goes nuts with a gun in a school, he's listening to his faulty programming. How do we know if we've installed faulty programming in a machine?
Remember that the weights of synaptic paths is ALL the programming you can do and there is no known way to determine how a machine will behave given a particular set of weightings. You can't "check" the programming any more than we could check the gunman's programming.
So expecting miscalculations is far from the stupidest idea ever.
No, the only vested interest a robot will have is what we have programmed into it.
No. You cannot program neuronic machines. You TRAIN them. You got training (as a child) to share your cake. But sometimes you don't share your cake. So now you suggest we train it to not make humans extinct. Hmmm....
You're thinking about this all wrong. Just because the box looks like a computer doesn't mean we can program it like a computer. The only control one has over the neurons is to change the weighting of the signals that travel down a synapse. That's it. No "Love=1" crap available.
And the best part is after training, no one can predict what weighting affects what output in a given situation. So the only "programming" you can do is the same "programming" we give children. Can you flip a bit in your child from bad to good?
So this boils down to a problem of TEACHING, not programming. And we've pretty much proven we're only so-so at teaching (all children do not grow up to be good). So let's just HOPE we can teach this thing to be good. But we better be able to kill it if the teaching is only so-so.
How many things have gone wrong inside your body that your body had to deal with to fix itself? My guess is there are hundreds of these things going on in your body every day.
Now we get to monitor, pinpoint, intercept, change, and CHARGE for every one of these events.
All medical tests are attempts to find something to charge you for, regardless if doing nothing is effective or not. Now, with this system, everyone will be taking a lifelong medical test.
Count me out.
Every human (who lives long enough) will go through puberty. Not every human will be able to afford 'enhancements.' So, should we build a society with 2 classes of humankind?
It seems to me, that's one of the reasons moralists are raising issues. Maybe we should get ready to bow and scrape to the supermen. Maybe that will be good. But certainly don't you think we ought to talk about it a little?
such data over a long period of time can pretty much be construed to incriminate anyone. What a waste of government resources.
A waste? Far from it. Having data to incriminate ANYONE is not a problem--it is the goal. Sounds like they got exactly what they wanted, resources be damned.