You do have a point, but to complete the analogy wouldn't it be more like either your first option ("telling the contractor who built the fort about the hole while keeping it secret from the owner even though you have reason to believe that the bandits may already know about it") versus the option "telling the fort owners by means of telling the whole world, including every two-bit bandit in existence"?
At that point I'm not so sure the second option (the one actually taken in this case) seems the more attractive one, even though you are right that the first option is not completely rosy and better described the way you did.
Consider a totally unpredictable universe without causation. Any state in the universe will be completely uncorrelated to the next.
Now imagine adding a mechanism - any mechanism that would work - which introduces some correlation into the universe, making it no longer totally unpredictable. For a computer simulated universe, adding the rule that state A has a somewhat higher than chance probability of being replaced by state B would be a sufficient example.
Causation, as far as I can understand, is our word for such a mechanism (any mechanism that would work) - that is, causation is whatever introduces actual correlation. Correct or not?
Right, and what if we consumers and ordinary citizens organized ourselves for even stronger impact? We could even have full time salaried people dedicated to the issues at hand. We could call them politicians.
>>>I know this is a big "if you can't open it up it ain't yours" crowd, but if mom can't open it up, or use it for anything it's not designed to do, I don't get spend my Saturday fixing crap.
>>I don't have to go over the their house and fix their stupid Windows piece of crap that always falls off the network, gets a virus/malware or is being crashed by Flash!
>WHOOSH!! That's the sound of your anti-Windows comments going straight over the head of a *primarily Linux user* like me.
Did you notice the part about how the use case concerned family and friends?
It will be interesting to see if the copyright lobby will go so far as to try to throw a Swedish politician in jail. But if so, that could well backfire. Will they dare create a martyr?
well....that sounds unorthodox, but in the end may be quite viable I suppose? Plus it has the added bonus that when your Granny deletes a file the computer will do what one might actually expect and delete the file, giving her back free space on the drive, rather than moving it to some weirdo trash bin:-)
However mutations prevail when they are positive to themselves, not to the group nor even the individual. Certainly there will be a lot of overlap with regards to benefits to the individual (usually something that is good for the organism is good for the gene producing the effect) and sometimes there is overlap with the group such that what is good for the group also benefits the gene producing the effect. But when there is a conflict of interest (and there often is) the individual or group will lose to the gene. That is, a gene with an effect that is bad for the gene but good for the group will go away, whereas a gene which is good for itself but bad for the group will flourish. (At which time other genes may serve their own best interests by preventing whatever exploitation of them is carried out via the group, and so a new gene working to surpress the group-exploiting gene may evolve. Again, this only works because it is good for the new gene, producing the surpression effect, not because it is "good for the group" as such.)
Thus your argument would be improved by substituting "good for the group" with "good for the gene(s) producing the effect".
Slashdot Mirror
So first news saying Apple is richer than MS and now suddenly the Apple phones have copy paste but not the MS phones...
I knew I shouldn't have gone to sleep, I always suspected I might some day wake up in bizarro world :(
You do have a point, but to complete the analogy wouldn't it be more like either your first option ("telling the contractor who built the fort about the hole while keeping it secret from the owner even though you have reason to believe that the bandits may already know about it") versus the option "telling the fort owners by means of telling the whole world, including every two-bit bandit in existence"?
At that point I'm not so sure the second option (the one actually taken in this case) seems the more attractive one, even though you are right that the first option is not completely rosy and better described the way you did.
"There could be someone else who not only knows about the bug, but has already written and begun using an exploit for it."
Could be that someone else knew. Now for certain millions do.
I don't agree that makes sense (although I'm certainly in favor of a correct quote).
What, except a causal relationship, could sustain a correlation?
Consider a totally unpredictable universe without causation. Any state in the universe will be completely uncorrelated to the next.
Now imagine adding a mechanism - any mechanism that would work - which introduces some correlation into the universe, making it no longer totally unpredictable. For a computer simulated universe, adding the rule that state A has a somewhat higher than chance probability of being replaced by state B would be a sufficient example.
Causation, as far as I can understand, is our word for such a mechanism (any mechanism that would work) - that is, causation is whatever introduces actual correlation. Correct or not?
Right, and what if we consumers and ordinary citizens organized ourselves for even stronger impact? We could even have full time salaried people dedicated to the issues at hand. We could call them politicians.
How do you couple them, preventing the spread of the one without the other?
>>>I know this is a big "if you can't open it up it ain't yours" crowd, but if mom can't open it up, or use it for anything it's not designed to do, I don't get spend my Saturday fixing crap.
>>I don't have to go over the their house and fix their stupid Windows piece of crap that always falls off the network, gets a virus/malware or is being crashed by Flash!
>WHOOSH!! That's the sound of your anti-Windows comments going straight over the head of a *primarily Linux user* like me.
Did you notice the part about how the use case concerned family and friends?
It will be interesting to see if the copyright lobby will go so far as to try to throw a Swedish politician in jail. But if so, that could well backfire. Will they dare create a martyr?
True, but the news here is that TPB is now hosted by the Swedish Pirate Party.
Well, at least it was interesting...and, if true, hilarious.
well....that sounds unorthodox, but in the end may be quite viable I suppose? Plus it has the added bonus that when your Granny deletes a file the computer will do what one might actually expect and delete the file, giving her back free space on the drive, rather than moving it to some weirdo trash bin :-)
So I guess you would argue for closing down all roads and banning cars then?
The second mother supplied mitochondrial DNA.
I would encourage you to vote for Pirate Party even if their web site were to be blocked. Perhaps especially then.
I suppose it would be pastafazou's fault for not reminding his peers often enough that "POLITICIANS ARE LIARS!", right?
"Gas is to merciful, send out the sex crazed rape squads!"
"Seriously, it would actually be quite useful to have one standardised, secure card that could be used to authenticate with banks etc"
The same problem as with having one password for everything - if it is compromised, you are completely screwed - applies here.
I guess the Anonymous Submitter will see that as another "kick in the teeth".
You got your wish. The three Dutch votes got changed leaving only 10 UKIP "no" votes.
Same reason, in other words, that the bible used to be read in Latin to the uneducated spammers...
"try { Signature mysig = new CleverAttempt(); } catch(NonCleverSignatureException e) { postanyway(); }"
I like how there's not even any "post()" in the try block! That's cynical code, that is.
Can you imagine how something could be good for the individual but not for the group?
But if talking about pacemakers, why would the number be so low as only 23% ?
Your argument is not so bad,
However mutations prevail when they are positive to themselves, not to the group nor even the individual. Certainly there will be a lot of overlap with regards to benefits to the individual (usually something that is good for the organism is good for the gene producing the effect) and sometimes there is overlap with the group such that what is good for the group also benefits the gene producing the effect. But when there is a conflict of interest (and there often is) the individual or group will lose to the gene. That is, a gene with an effect that is bad for the gene but good for the group will go away, whereas a gene which is good for itself but bad for the group will flourish. (At which time other genes may serve their own best interests by preventing whatever exploitation of them is carried out via the group, and so a new gene working to surpress the group-exploiting gene may evolve. Again, this only works because it is good for the new gene, producing the surpression effect, not because it is "good for the group" as such.)
Thus your argument would be improved by substituting "good for the group" with "good for the gene(s) producing the effect".