At a Children's science museum near where I live, there is a small pool that lets you "pick up" letters and symbols that seem to be floating in a pool of water. There is a projector overhead that projects the symbols onto the water. Some sensors tell the system where and what attitude the ladles, and if you dip the ladels into the water where a letter is projected, it starts to project into the ladle. This technology has already been done. As for movement and display of data, see Microsoft's table-top computer.
While "free equally worthless" is a common fallacy, there are other reasons to want proprietary code. I, for one, want a company to be held responsible for bugs in the code I use. If there's a bug I want to be able to outsource the patch in the form of paying for it. Furthermore, Vista is as secure as Linux.
Making child porn legal would negate the legality of "catching" the "sick bastards."
There is no "catching" of someone who is behaving legally. You could still assign a disease code to someone who is addicted to child porn, but we aren't in the business of forcing treatment on people for unsavory, but legal behavior
au contrair: Harming a child should be illegal. Filming it should not be illgal. The activity is, in my opinion, evil and harmful and should be punishable by execution. Prooving that the crime was committed (filming it) should be legal. Would you censor films of murders?
"Drop a packet on a regular basis" isn't really something that money could be made from. Even if it took years for an expert to come up with that, any patent would simply be unenforceable.
A myth? A pipe dream?? I'll see your Searle and raise you a Dijkstra. I don't care whether the machine can "really" think any more than I case, in this context, whether I can think. If I act like a person then you are ethically obligated to treat me like a person. One may as well call any person a mere product of his genes and upbringing, and make a slave of him because he only acts human! So ask yourself, when a machine can object to being turned off, how is that different from you objecting to your own death?
Information should never be illegal. If it were legal to own child porn, the creators could be caught a hundred times faster! Furthermore, consumption, without payment, creates no value to the creator. Ever pirate a movie? Copy an MP3? You do realize that the artists didn't get a penny when you did that... I also submit that VR child porn would be much cheaper and easier to produce, and that many consumers would strongly prefer the ethical kind.
I, for one, would strongly prefer to lose the utility of a few more terrorist incidents than the utility lost by the millions of needless searches, the loss of rights, the minimum wage workers on power trips, and the overly-powerful politicians. If I spend 20 seconds per day thinking about how to drive safer, I'll make myself a hundred times safer than spending the same time worrying about OMG the terrorists.
A myth? A pipe dream?? Your brain, sir(and I know you are a man because of the venue), is turing complete, emlatable by any other turing complete processor. I'll see your Searle and raise you a Dijkstra.
I don't care whether it "really understands" any more than I care which part of my brain "understands" what I am typing right now, or even if I "understand" what I am typing now. If I act like I understand than I am fully as human as you, and so is our Turing Complete computer. While I agree that the current Loebner prize is no more than a test of the gullability of the typical person, Strong AI is possible.
On other topics:
Sure! There is no bank robbing! No such thing at all! We know this because all the publishers of those steamy bank robbing flicks were all put into prison. My point here is not that bank robbing is more or less evil than molesting a child, but that committing a crime and recording the commission are two different things. If child porn weren't illegal, the evil people who make it would be caught a hundred times faster! And for a quick jaunt back to the topic: VR child porn can be created without harming a child. Furthermore, it may be (I think it is the case) that those who buy the disgusting stuff would strongly prefer the ethical variety. Legalization would also free the archives so that previously created material could be consumed instead of anything new. Many of us pirate movies, and that creates no incentive for the maker to make more...
I submit that information itself should never be illegal.
too dumb?? I need the government to protect me? You're off the deep end there...
Actually, this will permit the first real turing test. The testee must properly emulate all forms of human discourse from body language to an IQ test to (simulated) driving in heavy traffic and deciding who to flip off.
Now that we can make sufficiently realistic worlds for AI algorithms to interact in, we can start using sped-up genetic algorythms to develope strong AI!
I may be missing something here, but now that it's a standard, can't we just automate the transfer of information to the non-Microsoft parts of the standard and move on?
A document can fit the OOXML standard without any MS quirks at all. Just let MS keep pretending to be standard and code OOXML documents to a real standard. Then in OOXML version 2, MS can keep up or again be non-standard in every sense of the word.
The chain of events leading up to this is quite obvious:
Consultant: Entertainment is where it's at!
Executive: We need better entertainment.
resident tech guy: I'll make menus for them to pull up the movie they want.
Marketing: We already advertised that you can watch the next four years of movies on it, and that you can reach into the screen and feel the action.
resident tech guy: For sophisticated stuff, we need a whole OS.
Integration:(lies)I can give you hardware support.
tech guy: Where's that hardware?
Integration:you just have to modify the kernal to accept system calls via abacus, access security through our new IP 6.0 POTS interface, and oh yeah, the audio is from my Commodore 64.
tech guy(to executive): I did what I could, but we really need a whole re-do of the hardware.
executive: cost money? you're fired.
Slashdot Mirror
No, bash patent trolls! Microsoft! Critical mass reached, initiating chain-reaction mass head explosion!
Doesn't support hardware=hard to use.
At a Children's science museum near where I live, there is a small pool that lets you "pick up" letters and symbols that seem to be floating in a pool of water. There is a projector overhead that projects the symbols onto the water. Some sensors tell the system where and what attitude the ladles, and if you dip the ladels into the water where a letter is projected, it starts to project into the ladle. This technology has already been done. As for movement and display of data, see Microsoft's table-top computer.
While "free equally worthless" is a common fallacy, there are other reasons to want proprietary code. I, for one, want a company to be held responsible for bugs in the code I use. If there's a bug I want to be able to outsource the patch in the form of paying for it. Furthermore, Vista is as secure as Linux.
Non sequitur.
Making child porn legal would negate the legality of "catching" the "sick bastards."
There is no "catching" of someone who is behaving legally. You could still assign a disease code to someone who is addicted to child porn, but we aren't in the business of forcing treatment on people for unsavory, but legal behavior au contrair: Harming a child should be illegal. Filming it should not be illgal. The activity is, in my opinion, evil and harmful and should be punishable by execution. Prooving that the crime was committed (filming it) should be legal. Would you censor films of murders?
Okay! lets make a list of facts...
The first four bytes of Windows Vista are 10110011 00000010 11100101 11110000
The second four bytes are 00000000 00000000 11011000 00000000
Different from
The first words of his lecture were, "Hi and welcome to my class."
how?
"Drop a packet on a regular basis" isn't really something that money could be made from. Even if it took years for an expert to come up with that, any patent would simply be unenforceable.
Yes, and if it were legalized the sick bastards would be caught much faster.
A myth? A pipe dream?? I'll see your Searle and raise you a Dijkstra. I don't care whether the machine can "really" think any more than I case, in this context, whether I can think. If I act like a person then you are ethically obligated to treat me like a person. One may as well call any person a mere product of his genes and upbringing, and make a slave of him because he only acts human! So ask yourself, when a machine can object to being turned off, how is that different from you objecting to your own death?
Information should never be illegal. If it were legal to own child porn, the creators could be caught a hundred times faster! Furthermore, consumption, without payment, creates no value to the creator. Ever pirate a movie? Copy an MP3? You do realize that the artists didn't get a penny when you did that... I also submit that VR child porn would be much cheaper and easier to produce, and that many consumers would strongly prefer the ethical kind.
I, for one, would strongly prefer to lose the utility of a few more terrorist incidents than the utility lost by the millions of needless searches, the loss of rights, the minimum wage workers on power trips, and the overly-powerful politicians. If I spend 20 seconds per day thinking about how to drive safer, I'll make myself a hundred times safer than spending the same time worrying about OMG the terrorists.
A myth? A pipe dream?? Your brain, sir(and I know you are a man because of the venue), is turing complete, emlatable by any other turing complete processor. I'll see your Searle and raise you a Dijkstra. I don't care whether it "really understands" any more than I care which part of my brain "understands" what I am typing right now, or even if I "understand" what I am typing now. If I act like I understand than I am fully as human as you, and so is our Turing Complete computer. While I agree that the current Loebner prize is no more than a test of the gullability of the typical person, Strong AI is possible. On other topics: Sure! There is no bank robbing! No such thing at all! We know this because all the publishers of those steamy bank robbing flicks were all put into prison. My point here is not that bank robbing is more or less evil than molesting a child, but that committing a crime and recording the commission are two different things. If child porn weren't illegal, the evil people who make it would be caught a hundred times faster! And for a quick jaunt back to the topic: VR child porn can be created without harming a child. Furthermore, it may be (I think it is the case) that those who buy the disgusting stuff would strongly prefer the ethical variety. Legalization would also free the archives so that previously created material could be consumed instead of anything new. Many of us pirate movies, and that creates no incentive for the maker to make more... I submit that information itself should never be illegal. too dumb?? I need the government to protect me? You're off the deep end there...
Actually, this will permit the first real turing test. The testee must properly emulate all forms of human discourse from body language to an IQ test to (simulated) driving in heavy traffic and deciding who to flip off.
Now that we can make sufficiently realistic worlds for AI algorithms to interact in, we can start using sped-up genetic algorythms to develope strong AI!
Use of Assignment function for testing a variable: -1 and your nerd card revoked.
Call me paranoid, but if I was going to take over the world, one of the first things I'd want to do is demonize the highly educated and independant.
My first -1 disagree mod. Thanks!
sig.
I may be missing something here, but now that it's a standard, can't we just automate the transfer of information to the non-Microsoft parts of the standard and move on? A document can fit the OOXML standard without any MS quirks at all. Just let MS keep pretending to be standard and code OOXML documents to a real standard. Then in OOXML version 2, MS can keep up or again be non-standard in every sense of the word.
So they're telling them to fuck off?
"Scientists do it in tubes!"
Allow me to express my sincere gratitude for helping so many lonely geeks with their girl problems.
The chain of events leading up to this is quite obvious:
Consultant: Entertainment is where it's at!
Executive: We need better entertainment.
resident tech guy: I'll make menus for them to pull up the movie they want.
Marketing: We already advertised that you can watch the next four years of movies on it, and that you can reach into the screen and feel the action.
resident tech guy: For sophisticated stuff, we need a whole OS.
Integration:(lies)I can give you hardware support.
tech guy: Where's that hardware?
Integration:you just have to modify the kernal to accept system calls via abacus, access security through our new IP 6.0 POTS interface, and oh yeah, the audio is from my Commodore 64.
tech guy(to executive): I did what I could, but we really need a whole re-do of the hardware.
executive: cost money? you're fired.
UAC is a solution to a problem that used to exist on Windows. Kind of like IE before version 8: They were doing it wrong; they no longer are.