Well, not exactly; what you cannot do is use a single book title as an example of trademark usage, which is required to register it. You can, on the other hand, use a book title if it's part of a series or group of products.
There's no free lunch, you always have to settle for the lesser of some evils.
That said, my point is not that we shouldn't change the status quo, on the contrary! Just that the proposed alternative is worse for the people you are supposedly trying to help.
Most websites are essentially the same as they were in the 90s; just a bunch of text and a few images. I don't know what "Next generation services" are you referring to, but I'm pretty sure that current service models will be around for a long time.
Oh, please. It's just ASCII, you can "decrypt" that with Notepad! Search for "GET" and you can see each and every HTTP request in clear text, and they all include the Host: header with the domain.
Just try it: capture some packets, open the file with a text editor and search for GET. It's all there.
OK! Using MacOSX (or is that too specialized for you?):
cd/tmp sudo/System/Library/PrivateFrameworks/Apple80211.framework/Versions/Current/Resources/airport sniff// wait a few minutes/hours/etc
CTRL+D to stop grep 'GET.* HTTP' airportSniff*.cap
Yes! Instead of two month forced labor, the Chinese students can return to the grand times of famine and poverty, but it's OK since at least your conscience is clean, right?
That's what my mother thought until she had her second kid. Turns out genetics and other environmental factors are extremely important for accepting such concepts too.
And where do all these "earnings" go? Is there a giant bank account that grows indefinitely? Does Oracle not need liquid capital to, oh I don't know, supply a stable budget for hiring new engineers and branching out new departments?
Sure, and regular people need money to eat. That doesn't mean that $2 isn't pocket money.
Do you make more than $26000? Maybe you should give some of that to me, you're rich.
I wish. Not even half of that. But I still give more $2 rather freely. Not to corporate apologists, though.
The IR wavelengths that webcams can detect are not the same at which our bodies emit; the object needs to be at least at 280 degrees Celsius (536F) to be possibly detected by regular camera sensors.
I'm hardly a believer in trickle-down economy, but won't most of that money be spent paying for a bunch of people's salaries and such? It's not like it's being used to buy financial products or private beaches.
But my point is that we already have many laws that are designed to protect rights; the fact that those particular examples don't translate well into laws is not a reason why some robot rights couldn't.
For example, a law prohibiting the intentional and non-justified destruction of robots of a certain legally defined category would be testable, finite and specific.
But what is actual intelligence, and is it really required to fight for its existence?
A swarm of self-replicating (this mechanism could be programmed) and whose program could be mutated (possibly by simple copying errors) that was attacked by people and/or other animals could evolve emergent defense mechanisms, which wouldn't be conscious or even particularly sophisticated. In fact, I'm pretty sure events like these have already been observed in simulations.
Would they have rights, even though they're just a dumb collection of devices that happen to react to attacks?
(By the way, a great related read is Stanislaw Lem's The Invincible)
I see you support the author of the article by providing illustration to the fact that the necessary requirements for obtaining rights are quite diminute.
What if you said (and wrote down), "you can use my barn for free, but beware because I might want to shut down the light at any time during your event"? Because Worldcon had to agree with those terms to use the service.
You haven't "bitten", since you didn't answer my question.
But in any case, just because it doesn't work for your car doesn't mean it doesn't work for anything. TFA is about social robots, not dumb cars.
Take the Tamagotchi; even for a crude device like it was, back then there were many kids (and some not-so-kids) who felt a real emotional connection to the machine. In fact, during v1 - when the thing couldn't be paused - there were actually people making money by babysitting them.
Now, you may think that's just because they're kids and/or crazy people, but I think it takes a great lack of imagination not to see how one could become emotionally attached enough to a sufficiently advanced social robot, enough to support giving them rights.
Slashdot Mirror
Obviously you forgot to fork.
Well, not exactly; what you cannot do is use a single book title as an example of trademark usage, which is required to register it. You can, on the other hand, use a book title if it's part of a series or group of products.
There's no free lunch, you always have to settle for the lesser of some evils.
That said, my point is not that we shouldn't change the status quo, on the contrary! Just that the proposed alternative is worse for the people you are supposedly trying to help.
The only scripting functionality in HTML5 is the same as HTML has had since Netscape introduced JavaScript in '95. There's nothing new there. You can see for yourself: http://www.whatwg.org/specs/web-apps/current-work/multipage/scripting-1.html
It's true that HTML5 includes a scripting functionality, but it's like saying that the new Volvo has a steering wheel.
Most websites are essentially the same as they were in the 90s; just a bunch of text and a few images. I don't know what "Next generation services" are you referring to, but I'm pretty sure that current service models will be around for a long time.
Those seem perfectly reasonable to me. Why exactly do you expect people to solve your problems for you?
What does HTML5 have to do with this?
The most important sign: huge message posted at the exact same minute as the story.
Seriously people, are you blind?
Oh, please. It's just ASCII, you can "decrypt" that with Notepad! Search for "GET" and you can see each and every HTTP request in clear text, and they all include the Host: header with the domain.
Just try it: capture some packets, open the file with a text editor and search for GET. It's all there.
OK! Using MacOSX (or is that too specialized for you?):
cd /tmp /System/Library/PrivateFrameworks/Apple80211.framework/Versions/Current/Resources/airport sniff // wait a few minutes/hours/etc .* HTTP' airportSniff*.cap
sudo
CTRL+D to stop
grep 'GET
Now what?
Yes! Instead of two month forced labor, the Chinese students can return to the grand times of famine and poverty, but it's OK since at least your conscience is clean, right?
http://web.mit.edu/krugman/www/smokey.html
(And no, I DO NOT own an iPhone)
That's what my mother thought until she had her second kid. Turns out genetics and other environmental factors are extremely important for accepting such concepts too.
You highlight another reason investments shouldn't be taxed -- risk.
By that logic you wouldn't tax any wages in at-will states either, since the work risks losing his/her job at any moment.
Ok, so if it's not really a hash, but more of a public key
It's the former of the latter:
"A Bitcoin address is a 160-bit hash of the public portion of a public/private ECDSA keypair."
Polygamists can and are often married to the same woman for their entire lives. They're just not only married to that woman.
And where do all these "earnings" go? Is there a giant bank account that grows indefinitely? Does Oracle not need liquid capital to, oh I don't know, supply a stable budget for hiring new engineers and branching out new departments?
Sure, and regular people need money to eat. That doesn't mean that $2 isn't pocket money.
Do you make more than $26000? Maybe you should give some of that to me, you're rich.
I wish. Not even half of that. But I still give more $2 rather freely. Not to corporate apologists, though.
The IR wavelengths that webcams can detect are not the same at which our bodies emit; the object needs to be at least at 280 degrees Celsius (536F) to be possibly detected by regular camera sensors.
The problem is that you have no fucking idea of the real disparity, while you cry about the poor corporations. $50? You wish.
Last quarter, Oracle earnings (not revenue) was $3.45 Billion dollars. That's 1.15 Billion per month.
Comparitively, the average household member in the US makes $26000 per year.
If you do the math, the equivalent of $1 million to Oracle is less than 2 bucks for the average person.
You're just too blind to see the obscene inequality.
I'm hardly a believer in trickle-down economy, but won't most of that money be spent paying for a bunch of people's salaries and such? It's not like it's being used to buy financial products or private beaches.
But my point is that we already have many laws that are designed to protect rights; the fact that those particular examples don't translate well into laws is not a reason why some robot rights couldn't.
For example, a law prohibiting the intentional and non-justified destruction of robots of a certain legally defined category would be testable, finite and specific.
But what is actual intelligence, and is it really required to fight for its existence?
A swarm of self-replicating (this mechanism could be programmed) and whose program could be mutated (possibly by simple copying errors) that was attacked by people and/or other animals could evolve emergent defense mechanisms, which wouldn't be conscious or even particularly sophisticated.
In fact, I'm pretty sure events like these have already been observed in simulations.
Would they have rights, even though they're just a dumb collection of devices that happen to react to attacks?
(By the way, a great related read is Stanislaw Lem's The Invincible)
I see you support the author of the article by providing illustration to the fact that the necessary requirements for obtaining rights are quite diminute.
What if you said (and wrote down), "you can use my barn for free, but beware because I might want to shut down the light at any time during your event"? Because Worldcon had to agree with those terms to use the service.
So if we could reliably restore their memories, it would be OK?
You haven't "bitten", since you didn't answer my question.
But in any case, just because it doesn't work for your car doesn't mean it doesn't work for anything. TFA is about social robots, not dumb cars.
Take the Tamagotchi; even for a crude device like it was, back then there were many kids (and some not-so-kids) who felt a real emotional connection to the machine. In fact, during v1 - when the thing couldn't be paused - there were actually people making money by babysitting them.
Now, you may think that's just because they're kids and/or crazy people, but I think it takes a great lack of imagination not to see how one could become emotionally attached enough to a sufficiently advanced social robot, enough to support giving them rights.