Wait, I WANT a Gundam suit!
on
The Drone War
·
· Score: 4, Insightful
You've got a bad case of function guilt if you think robots will ever supplant people on the front lines -- It simply isn't feasable.
I'm not so sure about that. We've already got automatic artillery. We've got flying drones with cameras and weapons. A miniature robot tank on the front lines certainly sounds feasible to me; not from guilt, but from a quick analysis of function and form. And what about landmines? While not classically "robots", these could be classified as the dumbest war robots ever built.
Wars are rarely fought with singular orders. The typical soldier in a wartime scenario relies heavilly upon the information he recieves, the situation he percieves around him, and is capable of making rational & complex decisions based upon that information. Sure, a machine can be taught to do all that, but how is that information going to get there? And if your ultimate goal is programmable warfare, isn't the most flexible solider the human?
All true. But would a drone have to be self-controlled? Why not remotely controlled by the flexible human soldier? Or part both? There are already robots that work as a team; there could be war robot teams, too.
Flesh robots do not require battery power. Metal robots would be prone to power loss at critical times.
Flesh robots require food, get knocked out, and are susceptible to gas attacks. Metal robots could use gasoline, or electrical power (which is available without supply lines, from a ubiquitous source).
Flesh robots can usually continue to fight, even after physical injury. Metal robots would be severely impaired if even one portion of their body is rendered useless.
Only humaniform ones. Insect robots could still travel with three legs gone. Tank robots could still fire even if immobilized.
And, above all, we have nukes.
Eh. So who wants to nuke their own country to glass in order to fight off the drones?
I just don't think you'll ever see 5000 robots cross a river chest deep in water, scaling the cliffs of Normandy, or making it through a Korean winter.
But you will see them floating down the river, flying over the cliffs, and hibernating while they store enough energy for spring. And crossing hostile terrain relentlessly, without food or water.
Why bother making metal robots then, when you've already got flesh robots who can do the same?
Because we can! No, seriously, because it saves the lives of many flesh robots. Not necessarily our own soldiers, but opposing countries' civilians, too.
Why bother waging war, when we could make a neutron bomb and destroy the people, leaving the buildings behind? Because we don't really like killing. It's not good for the economy. At least not in the long run.
Judebert
We're out of dynamite. What we need now is a plan!
Sure, these things happen. But obsolescence is an easy sell in good economic times. It's much tougher in times like these.
Joe Public would see that his DVD / CD player still won't play it, and refuse to buy it.
Additionally, there is the possibility that the music industry will learn from its (soon to be) defunct music service and get a clue.
These people aren't evil or immoral, just amoral. They'll make money any way they can. Downloadable music is no further away than their learning curve.
I thought the copy-protection schemes only introduced noise when you tried to convert an audio track to a file (i.e. WAV, MP3).
Well, kinda.
An audio CD player has error-correction hardware that interpolates through any bad bytes that get read. Arguably this could be called "noise", although it's not the same as the noise we're discussing. In any case, this behavior is good for audio, since it allows you to interpolate over the inevitable dust, minor scratches, and other imperfections.
However, you can't just interpolate a missing byte from an executable program or word-processor document -- that could destroy the entire thing. So the data CD players (like the CD-ROM drive in your computer) don't have the error-correction hardware that audio CD drives do.
That allows you to deliberately add noise -- especially annoying noise -- to an audio CD. When the audio CD player reads it, interpolation occurs and you hardly notice. When a data CD player reads it, you get every stinkin' byte -- including the annoying ones. This is the case whether you send the bytes directly to the sound card for playback, or to the hard drive for recording.
(Note that this inevitably reduces the quality of the CD. Besides losing the actual data where imperfect bytes were written, you get less room for the correction of actual errors. I suppose you could only replace bytes that would be correctly interpolated, but I doubt that's what's actually happenning.)
So really, you don't need to save to a file to hear the noise. You just need to use a data CD player. Like the one in your DVD player. It doesn't matter where the bytes go after that.
No problem I can see, anyway. These players (especially the Apex) support all kinds of formats -- just check out vcdhelp.com's compatibility list. For instance, MP3 is widely supported; but there are very few MP3 DVDs or CDs other than the ones individuals burn for themselves.
Likewise, I expect that there will be very few WMA or WMF DVDs. And if there are, we'll just refuse to buy them... or buy them and return them to demonstrate our dissatisfaction more clearly. Much like the copy-protected CDs.
Really, there's a large installed base of standard DVD players, and very little incentive to get a WM* compatible one. I expect there will be very few such disks.
The parent post is an excellent summary of the advantages of each type of degree. I personally have a BS/CS; you can see the requirements at UCF's Computer Science page.
However, you may not need a degree with quite so much theory. From your question, you already have a job, and you're just interested in improving your salary. In this case, a lighter course of study (like MIS) would probably be sufficient.
However, if you're interested in moving to another company (and if your current employer is more interested in some vague measure of qualifications than your actual results, perhaps you should examine your options), you need to consider what potential employers will look for.
While many companies will hire you simply because you have a degree, many others are much more interested in your actual qualifications, as demonstrated in your experience, references, and even an entrance exam. (My current job was contingent on an entrance exam, administered by the technical lead of the project.)
Of course, while your current job is technical, you may be interested in a more managerial position. In this case, an MIS would be more appropriate, and more impressive to a potential employer. In fact, your technical experience and expertise, coupled with a managerial degree, sets you up for a technical management position.
Get the degree for your plan. (You do have a plan?) If you want to go into management, go MIS. If you like your current company, but just want to pump your salary with the least amount of hassle possible, go for a CIS. But if you really want to get down and dirty in a technical position for the rest of your life, go for the CS.
You could also talk to a school counselor. They love this kind of stuff.
Judebert
We're out of explosives. What we need now is a plan!
We're accustomed to being recorded regularly: practically anywhere we purchases anything, at ATMs, etc. The technology everyone is getting so upset about is just a logical enhancement to the camera... and a d*mn poor one, at that.
According to the report, it almost doesn't work at all. Other installations using face recognition have degenerated into checking out the girls. I understand; it's gotta be boring as can be after the first 50,000 false alarms.
It seems to me that this software isn't really an invasion of our privacy. The cameras themselves may be, but if we accept the cameras, we can't really quibble about the face recognition software.
It's time to reconsider our concepts of privacy, anyway. Read David Brin's The Transparent Society and see if you don't come up with a new view.
I think the cameras should be everywhere... especially the police station. And we should all be allowed to watch them. It would certainly make everyone think twice about their biases before taking drastic action.
The strong enough string is coming. In the December Analog, a fact article reported on buckytubes. They have many amazing properties; among these are their tensile strength, which surpasses steel's by more than an order of magnitude. (A quick discussion can be found through Google at http://www.islandone.org/LEOBiblio/SPBI1MA.HTM.)
The only problem is that we need lengths of about 4 meters to build the space elevator; currently we can build buckytubes about 3 mm, at best. But with self-assembly techniques like the one referenced in this article at Science Daily, which allowed the authors to build buckytubes with buckyballs inside, we may have the necessary materials soon.
While there have been many replies to this post, I can't say I necessarily agree with any of them, or that any have really answered your question.
I'll make the attempt.
"The moral or ethical mandate that supports/justifies this sort of vigilante thinking" is very well illustrated in your examples. It's the golden rule.
First example: assume the security system protects your building. The security company knows about it; the criminals almost certainly know about it. Would you want to know? I sure would. That way I could take steps to protect my family and property, such as adding a deadlock, barring the door, getting a dog, or hiring an armed guard. In any case, if I don't know about the problem, I'm vulnerable.
Second example: assume it's your car with vulnerable locks. GM knows. The criminals almost certainly know. Wouldn't you want to know? I sure would. That way I could park where there is less chance of getting robbed, carry a gun, hire an armed guard, install a supplemental security system, or empty my car of any valuables. In any case, if I don't know about the problem, I'm vulnerable.
Third example: free calls. AT&T knows. The criminals almost certainly know. Wouldn't you want to know. I sure would, if my own calling card number could be generated, forcing me to pay for someone else's calls. That way, I could cancel the card, switch providers, or check my bill more often or more closely to avoid paying for services I never received. While other responses have indicated that this scenario is "irrelevant," I have to disagree. If I could be hurt, I want to know. (Of course, if it's entirely AT&T's problem, I don't care.)
While we can say that the above actions recklessly endanger security, that is only the case if we assume the criminals are as ignorant as we are. And they aren't. I want to be as informed as the criminals. I support disclosure for security problems, even real-world ones.
I know most of you slashdotters are geeks, but most of the world is not. And I think there's a viable Open Source business model that no one is paying any attention to: paying for binaries.
While any geek who knows his system and can type "make" could download the source, build, and run, the vast majority of users can't. Heck, I'm a programmer, and half the time I won't download source -- building is just a hassle I don't need.
The big idea behind Free Software is that everyone has the freedom to contribute. People who just use the binaries aren't really contributing (except perhaps in finding bugs): they're just using the program. By freely distributing source code, but charging for binaries, everyone retains their freedom to contribute while the developers get money from the people who are just using their applications.
Even the side-effects of Free Software are still there: lots of eyes to find bugs in the source, advancement of the state of the art through easy examination of the techniques of programming, the ability to fix what you need fixed and scratch your own itches... for anyone who has the ability to improve, improvement is free and easy. The rest buy the binary, install, and run happy. It even fits with the GPL.
Consider the new situation:
Hacker with bullhorn: "Save your money! Come buy our cheap tank! Invulnerable, 100 miles to the gallon, and a fully-staffed garage for all your maintenance needs!"
Prospective station wagon buyer: "Sounds good to me. I'll take two!"
Second Hacker: "Hey, I know a little something about transmissions. Can I see how you've put your tanks together?"
First Hacker: "Sure, come right in! The garage is open to anybody. Maybe you can even help us out."
OK, I'm enthusiastic about it. Sorry. But if you can see the downside to "buy-naries" (other than my stupid marketing nomenclature), tell me now.
I don't know how banks are usually started, but I imagine we could start an online credit union without too much trouble. Members start with a minimum account balance, then pay piecemeal for whatever they want: $1 for a good song, $10 for your new window manager... They just can't pay more than they put in.
The bank has a big pool of money from all the user accounts. We invest it to pay for our machines, net connection, and admins.
We could even make loans, charge for accounts below minimum balance, offer CDs... just like a regular credit union.
Well, yes. But not for the water, as it's probably coming off the fuel cell in the form of steam, and it would therefore wind up as exhaust, just like the byproducts of an ICE.
Of course, Millenium Cell's FAQ states that the fuel is actually stored in a water-based solution, so all the necessary water is already available; it's just waiting for the catalyst. Afterwards you get soap (Borax, actually) and hydrogen, with the hydrogen going through the fuel cell. So what happens to the soap? You put it into the waste tank.
The car has the same space as a regular car because the electric motors take less space than the ICE; enough so that the extra tank and electric control circuitry fit into the leftover space.
So, when you go to the Sodium Borohydride station, you'll empty your waste tank and fill your fuel tank. I expect it'll be the cleanest fuel station ever!
In the spirit of David Brin's Transparent Society, I believe that face-recognition systems and other biometric technologies are not a bad idea... as long as the citizens have access to them.
It seems especially important to me that cameras be installed within the police station. We should know what's going on with our public defenders.
In any case, I'm willing to allow others access to my "privacy" if they're willing to reciprocate.
You're not completely missing the point. Here are a few things you are missing that might help you understand the issue:
Even the staunch opponents of embryonic stem cell research would agree that your life is just as valid as any other -- even that cluster of cells they believe is human.
The difference in the cases you cite is that you are already dead before we do research with your corpse. The child is already dead before we do research with its corpse. We have to kill the embryo before we can do research on its corpse.
You noted that the embryo will be flushed anyway; killed in any case. That's another point the opponents dislike. They believe that flushing the embryo is a problem, too.
The US government itself just said that it won't spend people's money on research that involves killing an embryo. It also said that it would continue to fund research where the embryo is already dead, and it would increase research funding for stem cells obtained from sources where human life isn't an issue.
Note that the US government didn't say that it doesn't want research to happen. The House of Representatives may say such a thing later this month, but I'll hold comment on that until it happens.
Judebert
"We're out of explosives. What we need is a plan!"
Yes, stem cells can come from adults. Interesting article over at Science News (too depressed to search for it myself) said that stem cells can be obtained easily, cheaply, and abundantly from adult fat. I'm ready to contribute.
How did this get rated "5, Insightful" when it contains such blatantly inflammatory language and has no new information?
Here's the insight: Our determination of when the collection of cells becomes human is entirely arbitary, with no hope of becoming factual at any point in the near future. Until we can find some way to make the determination, we will be spending public money on actions that part of the public believes to be equivalent to murder.
The assertion that 4-5 cells do not constitute human life was correctly labeled as a "belief." The belief that a single fertilized cell is also human life is another widely held belief, and until you can produce refuting evidence, it is just as valid as any other belief.
Judebert
"We're out of explosives. What we need is a plan!"
Actually, the 4K memo limit is a limit of the Memopad input functions, not the processor or the OS. I wrote a program that exported its log to a memo, and occasionally this would go over 4KB. The Memopad had no problem displaying it, or keeping it in the database.
There was a problem on HotSync, though -- the desktop software enforced a 4K limit.
As for the slowness, the only time I've noticed a problem is in searching VERY large compressed text files. Trying to find a particular card in the Magic: the Gathering card rulings can take a while. I'm looking forward to the faster processor to take care of that.
Judebert
We're out of explosives. What we need is a plan.
In Science Daily, there's a more scholarly research report. Of 257 people at the Mayo clinic who used their computers about 6 hours a day, 30% complained of numbness or pins-and-needles. When they filled out a questionnaire on CTS, only 10.5% actually had the symptoms qualifying as CTS. When they ran an electrodiagnostic test, only 3.5% actually had CTS -- about the same as in the general population.
Well, that used to be the concern. (Although, considering your analogy, how much of the scrambled eggs need to be cooked before there's a problem? We are talking about brains, here.) The new concern (of scientists, not all the emotionally-motivated common folk) is the magnetic field from the big 'ol speaker magnet right next to your ear.
Interestingly, a 13-year study in Denmark found no increase in cancer rates for cell phone users:
http://telecomasia.net/dailystories/2001/02-2001/0 8022001/firstnews.html. (Now, if only I could find that magnetic field article...)
The T0 is a hybrid gas/electric. It gets 60mpg and still out-accelerates the Ferrari.
It uses regenerative braking, its maximum range is 90 miles (yes, that would mean a 1.5 gallon tank), and it recharges in 1 hour with a high-current supply.
The other nice thing is the drivetrain; lightweight equates to more than great performance, it means better efficiency too. The T0 is just to show off the technology, which could be used in much more practical electric cars.
Still, it's less than 15 miles to where I work. With the T0, I could get there in, what, 5 minutes? Supposing I didn't get stuck at lights. Or by cops.
Whoof. Wow, you guys are a bunch of critics. I watched it with my wife, at full price, and it wasn't all that bad. It wasn't as entertaining as watching Star Wars for the first time, but it wasn't horrible, either. (My theater and my popcorn, on the other hand, sucked. But that's not part of an impartial review.)
The scenery, sets, CGI, costumes, and general stuff were all excellent. I have only three complaints, and they all deal with plot. Many of Snails's actions bothered me; one of the Empress's actions was difficult to understand; and much of the acting was just bad.
Some specific good stuff: I hope Anne McCafferey watches. The dragons were great. I'd love to see a Pern movie soon.
I thought the main thief character (who I'll always remember as Jimmy Olsen) showed talent and charisma. I believe he was a major hunk. I'm not qualified to make these determinations, though; my wife says "He looked good, but he wasn't THAT good."
I liked the maze. He did everything I would have done, were I the thief. I value cleverness.
The fight scenes were interesting enough, but not spectacular. Luckily, the director didn't dwell on them.
Before moving on to the bad stuff, which contains minor spoilers, I do want to address something I've seen a lot of lately, dealing with Star Wars.
While watching D&D, I knew that there would be lots of comments on how it swiped from Star Wars. I think they're unfounded.
Star Wars was built on ancient archetypes. Lucas admits it, even advertises it. Any other movie built around old storytelling ideals will have elements similar to Star Wars. All the films are stealing from the same source. Learn to live with it, or come up with something new yourself.
* Spoiler Warning *
I was very disappointed with Snails' death. It served no purpose, other than getting rid of a character we didn't really need in the first place. The Mage justifies his death by saying he died for a good cause; but he didn't know what the Empress's position was when he died. Why did he throw away the map? Idiot.
I also had trouble understanding why the Empress brought out the gold dragons. It didn't seem necessary. Perhaps this is a side-effect of the lack of urgency I felt; the Empress mentioned a three-day deadline early on, but didn't explain why. It seemed very arbitrary, and bringing out the dragons was arbitrary, too.
What kind of sequel setup was that? Completely unexplained. Ridiculous. Could've made a sequel any time, with almost no explanation, in a completely different plotline, with an entirely different character set... but NOOOooooo...
* End Spoiler Warning *
Anyway, it was good enough to go see, but not to see twice. Based on how long we talked about it afterwards, this is a 4-mile movie.
Take your pick. Having children, I can authoritatively say that the only way I could raise them to "*freely choose* not to play them" would be to remove all game consoles and computers from my house. And then I'd still have to forbid the kids to go anywhere such a device existed. They like the games because they're exciting (not to mention the peer pressure); the way I raise them won't do anything about that.
Instead, I'm trying to raise them to realize that the solutions presented by violent video games are not the right solution for all situations; not even for any situation, necessarily. I don't condone laws forbidding kids to play the games, but I do like the idea that they're labeled, so I can have some idea of what my kids are considering buying right off the bat.
I wonder if this could be used as an electrical storage device? Or a generator?
One commonly-discussed method of generating electricity is to convert solar energy to microwaves in space, then "beam" it to Earth. This plasma would absorb the microwave energy; would it then be converted into electrical potential at the electrodes?
Even better, would it do the same thing with radioactive decay?
I remember reading about Inferno for the first time almost five years ago. I loved the idea; I tried some development and got programs that looked the same on WinNT and an SG Onyx. I was so impressed I told everybody I knew.
Then one of my friends said he would be doing Java instead... because there were no books available for Inferno or Limbo.
I wrote it off after that. It was still fun to come up with TV commercials, though. There's just so much potential!
My favorite was a young couple fleeing from the Microsoft building, with zombies close behind ("Brains! Brains!" One should look like Bill). The ditzy girl, in true horror-movie style, cries, "What do they want from us?" The shotgun-toting hero replies, "They want our intelligent operating system!" as we cut to a close-up of the Inferno box the girl is carrying. After the announcer finishes his spiel, we see the couple cornered in an alley, zombies close and threatening. The hero points his shotgun at the camera, we fade to white, two shots ring out, and blood drips on the screen in the form of the Lucent "brown ring of quality." It bursts into flame and the text "Inferno" is added as the announcer proclaims, "Inferno: Welcome to HELL!" Fade to black.
Whew! End Creativity. Anyway, if they can just get some books out, maybe they'll have a go at it.
Am I like, the oldest slashdot reader there is? Probably the oldest leap day kid.
Never really cared much about the idiots screaming "You're only 2 (3, whatever)!" I never liked them in the first place, and if they were innumerate enough not to understand the difference between birthdays and years when I explained it nicely, then I sided with Heinlein: not human enough to worry about.
Slashdot Mirror
I'm not so sure about that. We've already got automatic artillery. We've got flying drones with cameras and weapons. A miniature robot tank on the front lines certainly sounds feasible to me; not from guilt, but from a quick analysis of function and form. And what about landmines? While not classically "robots", these could be classified as the dumbest war robots ever built.
Wars are rarely fought with singular orders. The typical soldier in a wartime scenario relies heavilly upon the information he recieves, the situation he percieves around him, and is capable of making rational & complex decisions based upon that information. Sure, a machine can be taught to do all that, but how is that information going to get there? And if your ultimate goal is programmable warfare, isn't the most flexible solider the human?
All true. But would a drone have to be self-controlled? Why not remotely controlled by the flexible human soldier? Or part both? There are already robots that work as a team; there could be war robot teams, too.
Flesh robots do not require battery power. Metal robots would be prone to power loss at critical times.
Flesh robots require food, get knocked out, and are susceptible to gas attacks. Metal robots could use gasoline, or electrical power (which is available without supply lines, from a ubiquitous source).
Flesh robots can usually continue to fight, even after physical injury. Metal robots would be severely impaired if even one portion of their body is rendered useless.
Only humaniform ones. Insect robots could still travel with three legs gone. Tank robots could still fire even if immobilized.
And, above all, we have nukes.
Eh. So who wants to nuke their own country to glass in order to fight off the drones?
I just don't think you'll ever see 5000 robots cross a river chest deep in water, scaling the cliffs of Normandy, or making it through a Korean winter.
But you will see them floating down the river, flying over the cliffs, and hibernating while they store enough energy for spring. And crossing hostile terrain relentlessly, without food or water.
Why bother making metal robots then, when you've already got flesh robots who can do the same?
Because we can! No, seriously, because it saves the lives of many flesh robots. Not necessarily our own soldiers, but opposing countries' civilians, too.
Why bother waging war, when we could make a neutron bomb and destroy the people, leaving the buildings behind? Because we don't really like killing. It's not good for the economy. At least not in the long run.
Judebert
We're out of dynamite. What we need now is a plan!
Sure, these things happen. But obsolescence is an easy sell in good economic times. It's much tougher in times like these.
Joe Public would see that his DVD / CD player still won't play it, and refuse to buy it.
Additionally, there is the possibility that the music industry will learn from its (soon to be) defunct music service and get a clue.
These people aren't evil or immoral, just amoral. They'll make money any way they can. Downloadable music is no further away than their learning curve.
Well, kinda.
An audio CD player has error-correction hardware that interpolates through any bad bytes that get read. Arguably this could be called "noise", although it's not the same as the noise we're discussing. In any case, this behavior is good for audio, since it allows you to interpolate over the inevitable dust, minor scratches, and other imperfections.
However, you can't just interpolate a missing byte from an executable program or word-processor document -- that could destroy the entire thing. So the data CD players (like the CD-ROM drive in your computer) don't have the error-correction hardware that audio CD drives do.
That allows you to deliberately add noise -- especially annoying noise -- to an audio CD. When the audio CD player reads it, interpolation occurs and you hardly notice. When a data CD player reads it, you get every stinkin' byte -- including the annoying ones. This is the case whether you send the bytes directly to the sound card for playback, or to the hard drive for recording.
(Note that this inevitably reduces the quality of the CD. Besides losing the actual data where imperfect bytes were written, you get less room for the correction of actual errors. I suppose you could only replace bytes that would be correctly interpolated, but I doubt that's what's actually happenning.)
So really, you don't need to save to a file to hear the noise. You just need to use a data CD player. Like the one in your DVD player. It doesn't matter where the bytes go after that.
Judebert
We're out of dynamite. What we need is a plan!
Likewise, I expect that there will be very few WMA or WMF DVDs. And if there are, we'll just refuse to buy them... or buy them and return them to demonstrate our dissatisfaction more clearly. Much like the copy-protected CDs.
Really, there's a large installed base of standard DVD players, and very little incentive to get a WM* compatible one. I expect there will be very few such disks.
Judebert
We're out of dynamite. What we need is a plan!
However, you may not need a degree with quite so much theory. From your question, you already have a job, and you're just interested in improving your salary. In this case, a lighter course of study (like MIS) would probably be sufficient.
However, if you're interested in moving to another company (and if your current employer is more interested in some vague measure of qualifications than your actual results, perhaps you should examine your options), you need to consider what potential employers will look for.
While many companies will hire you simply because you have a degree, many others are much more interested in your actual qualifications, as demonstrated in your experience, references, and even an entrance exam. (My current job was contingent on an entrance exam, administered by the technical lead of the project.)
Of course, while your current job is technical, you may be interested in a more managerial position. In this case, an MIS would be more appropriate, and more impressive to a potential employer. In fact, your technical experience and expertise, coupled with a managerial degree, sets you up for a technical management position.
Get the degree for your plan. (You do have a plan?) If you want to go into management, go MIS. If you like your current company, but just want to pump your salary with the least amount of hassle possible, go for a CIS. But if you really want to get down and dirty in a technical position for the rest of your life, go for the CS.
You could also talk to a school counselor. They love this kind of stuff.
Judebert
We're out of explosives. What we need now is a plan!
According to the report, it almost doesn't work at all. Other installations using face recognition have degenerated into checking out the girls. I understand; it's gotta be boring as can be after the first 50,000 false alarms.
It seems to me that this software isn't really an invasion of our privacy. The cameras themselves may be, but if we accept the cameras, we can't really quibble about the face recognition software.
It's time to reconsider our concepts of privacy, anyway. Read David Brin's The Transparent Society and see if you don't come up with a new view.
I think the cameras should be everywhere... especially the police station. And we should all be allowed to watch them. It would certainly make everyone think twice about their biases before taking drastic action.
The only problem is that we need lengths of about 4 meters to build the space elevator; currently we can build buckytubes about 3 mm, at best. But with self-assembly techniques like the one referenced in this article at Science Daily , which allowed the authors to build buckytubes with buckyballs inside, we may have the necessary materials soon.
We're out of explosives. What we need is a plan!
I'll make the attempt.
"The moral or ethical mandate that supports/justifies this sort of vigilante thinking" is very well illustrated in your examples. It's the golden rule.
While we can say that the above actions recklessly endanger security, that is only the case if we assume the criminals are as ignorant as we are. And they aren't. I want to be as informed as the criminals. I support disclosure for security problems, even real-world ones.
It's the only way to know you are protected.
We're out of dynamite. What we need is a plan!
While any geek who knows his system and can type "make" could download the source, build, and run, the vast majority of users can't. Heck, I'm a programmer, and half the time I won't download source -- building is just a hassle I don't need.
The big idea behind Free Software is that everyone has the freedom to contribute. People who just use the binaries aren't really contributing (except perhaps in finding bugs): they're just using the program. By freely distributing source code, but charging for binaries, everyone retains their freedom to contribute while the developers get money from the people who are just using their applications.
Even the side-effects of Free Software are still there: lots of eyes to find bugs in the source, advancement of the state of the art through easy examination of the techniques of programming, the ability to fix what you need fixed and scratch your own itches... for anyone who has the ability to improve, improvement is free and easy. The rest buy the binary, install, and run happy. It even fits with the GPL.
Consider the new situation:
Hacker with bullhorn: "Save your money! Come buy our cheap tank! Invulnerable, 100 miles to the gallon, and a fully-staffed garage for all your maintenance needs!"
Prospective station wagon buyer: "Sounds good to me. I'll take two!"
Second Hacker: "Hey, I know a little something about transmissions. Can I see how you've put your tanks together?"
First Hacker: "Sure, come right in! The garage is open to anybody. Maybe you can even help us out."
OK, I'm enthusiastic about it. Sorry. But if you can see the downside to "buy-naries" (other than my stupid marketing nomenclature), tell me now.
Before I start selling.
Judebert
We're out of explosives. What we need is a plan!
I don't know how banks are usually started, but I imagine we could start an online credit union without too much trouble. Members start with a minimum account balance, then pay piecemeal for whatever they want: $1 for a good song, $10 for your new window manager... They just can't pay more than they put in.
The bank has a big pool of money from all the user accounts. We invest it to pay for our machines, net connection, and admins.
We could even make loans, charge for accounts below minimum balance, offer CDs... just like a regular credit union.
It could drive a new economy!
Of course, Millenium Cell's FAQ states that the fuel is actually stored in a water-based solution, so all the necessary water is already available; it's just waiting for the catalyst. Afterwards you get soap (Borax, actually) and hydrogen, with the hydrogen going through the fuel cell. So what happens to the soap? You put it into the waste tank.
The car has the same space as a regular car because the electric motors take less space than the ICE; enough so that the extra tank and electric control circuitry fit into the leftover space.
So, when you go to the Sodium Borohydride station, you'll empty your waste tank and fill your fuel tank. I expect it'll be the cleanest fuel station ever!
Woo-hoo! Another Amiga user!
It seems especially important to me that cameras be installed within the police station. We should know what's going on with our public defenders.
In any case, I'm willing to allow others access to my "privacy" if they're willing to reciprocate.
You're not completely missing the point. Here are a few things you are missing that might help you understand the issue:
Even the staunch opponents of embryonic stem cell research would agree that your life is just as valid as any other -- even that cluster of cells they believe is human.
The difference in the cases you cite is that you are already dead before we do research with your corpse. The child is already dead before we do research with its corpse. We have to kill the embryo before we can do research on its corpse.
You noted that the embryo will be flushed anyway; killed in any case. That's another point the opponents dislike. They believe that flushing the embryo is a problem, too.
The US government itself just said that it won't spend people's money on research that involves killing an embryo. It also said that it would continue to fund research where the embryo is already dead, and it would increase research funding for stem cells obtained from sources where human life isn't an issue.
Note that the US government didn't say that it doesn't want research to happen. The House of Representatives may say such a thing later this month, but I'll hold comment on that until it happens.
Judebert
"We're out of explosives. What we need is a plan!"
Yes, stem cells can come from adults. Interesting article over at Science News (too depressed to search for it myself) said that stem cells can be obtained easily, cheaply, and abundantly from adult fat. I'm ready to contribute.
How did this get rated "5, Insightful" when it contains such blatantly inflammatory language and has no new information?
Here's the insight: Our determination of when the collection of cells becomes human is entirely arbitary, with no hope of becoming factual at any point in the near future. Until we can find some way to make the determination, we will be spending public money on actions that part of the public believes to be equivalent to murder.
The assertion that 4-5 cells do not constitute human life was correctly labeled as a "belief." The belief that a single fertilized cell is also human life is another widely held belief, and until you can produce refuting evidence, it is just as valid as any other belief.
Judebert
"We're out of explosives. What we need is a plan!"
Actually, the 4K memo limit is a limit of the Memopad input functions, not the processor or the OS. I wrote a program that exported its log to a memo, and occasionally this would go over 4KB. The Memopad had no problem displaying it, or keeping it in the database.
There was a problem on HotSync, though -- the desktop software enforced a 4K limit.
As for the slowness, the only time I've noticed a problem is in searching VERY large compressed text files. Trying to find a particular card in the Magic: the Gathering card rulings can take a while. I'm looking forward to the faster processor to take care of that.
Judebert
We're out of explosives. What we need is a plan.
You can find the article here.
Interestingly, a 13-year study in Denmark found no increase in cancer rates for cell phone users: http://telecomasia.net/dailystories/2001/02-2001/0 8022001/firstnews.html. (Now, if only I could find that magnetic field article...)
The T0 is a hybrid gas/electric. It gets 60mpg and still out-accelerates the Ferrari.
It uses regenerative braking, its maximum range is 90 miles (yes, that would mean a 1.5 gallon tank), and it recharges in 1 hour with a high-current supply.
The other nice thing is the drivetrain; lightweight equates to more than great performance, it means better efficiency too. The T0 is just to show off the technology, which could be used in much more practical electric cars.
Still, it's less than 15 miles to where I work. With the T0, I could get there in, what, 5 minutes? Supposing I didn't get stuck at lights. Or by cops.
Whoof. Wow, you guys are a bunch of critics. I watched it with my wife, at full price, and it wasn't all that bad. It wasn't as entertaining as watching Star Wars for the first time, but it wasn't horrible, either. (My theater and my popcorn, on the other hand, sucked. But that's not part of an impartial review.)
The scenery, sets, CGI, costumes, and general stuff were all excellent. I have only three complaints, and they all deal with plot. Many of Snails's actions bothered me; one of the Empress's actions was difficult to understand; and much of the acting was just bad.
Some specific good stuff: I hope Anne McCafferey watches. The dragons were great. I'd love to see a Pern movie soon.
I thought the main thief character (who I'll always remember as Jimmy Olsen) showed talent and charisma. I believe he was a major hunk. I'm not qualified to make these determinations, though; my wife says "He looked good, but he wasn't THAT good."
I liked the maze. He did everything I would have done, were I the thief. I value cleverness.
The fight scenes were interesting enough, but not spectacular. Luckily, the director didn't dwell on them.
Before moving on to the bad stuff, which contains minor spoilers, I do want to address something I've seen a lot of lately, dealing with Star Wars.
While watching D&D, I knew that there would be lots of comments on how it swiped from Star Wars. I think they're unfounded.
Star Wars was built on ancient archetypes. Lucas admits it, even advertises it. Any other movie built around old storytelling ideals will have elements similar to Star Wars. All the films are stealing from the same source. Learn to live with it, or come up with something new yourself.
* Spoiler Warning *
I was very disappointed with Snails' death. It served no purpose, other than getting rid of a character we didn't really need in the first place. The Mage justifies his death by saying he died for a good cause; but he didn't know what the Empress's position was when he died. Why did he throw away the map? Idiot.
I also had trouble understanding why the Empress brought out the gold dragons. It didn't seem necessary. Perhaps this is a side-effect of the lack of urgency I felt; the Empress mentioned a three-day deadline early on, but didn't explain why. It seemed very arbitrary, and bringing out the dragons was arbitrary, too.
What kind of sequel setup was that? Completely unexplained. Ridiculous. Could've made a sequel any time, with almost no explanation, in a completely different plotline, with an entirely different character set... but NOOOooooo...
* End Spoiler Warning *
Anyway, it was good enough to go see, but not to see twice. Based on how long we talked about it afterwards, this is a 4-mile movie.
Judebert
This research shows that playing agressive video games increases agression, at least in the study group: http://www.sciencedaily .co m/releases/2000/04/000424094004.htm.
While this one shows that childrend's core personality is not changed by video games: http://www.sciencedaily .co m/releases/2000/08/000811061557.htm.
Take your pick. Having children, I can authoritatively say that the only way I could raise them to "*freely choose* not to play them" would be to remove all game consoles and computers from my house. And then I'd still have to forbid the kids to go anywhere such a device existed. They like the games because they're exciting (not to mention the peer pressure); the way I raise them won't do anything about that.
Instead, I'm trying to raise them to realize that the solutions presented by violent video games are not the right solution for all situations; not even for any situation, necessarily. I don't condone laws forbidding kids to play the games, but I do like the idea that they're labeled, so I can have some idea of what my kids are considering buying right off the bat.
I wonder if this could be used as an electrical storage device? Or a generator?
One commonly-discussed method of generating electricity is to convert solar energy to microwaves in space, then "beam" it to Earth. This plasma would absorb the microwave energy; would it then be converted into electrical potential at the electrodes?
Even better, would it do the same thing with radioactive decay?
Judebert
Then one of my friends said he would be doing Java instead... because there were no books available for Inferno or Limbo.
I wrote it off after that. It was still fun to come up with TV commercials, though. There's just so much potential!
My favorite was a young couple fleeing from the Microsoft building, with zombies close behind ("Brains! Brains!" One should look like Bill). The ditzy girl, in true horror-movie style, cries, "What do they want from us?" The shotgun-toting hero replies, "They want our intelligent operating system!" as we cut to a close-up of the Inferno box the girl is carrying. After the announcer finishes his spiel, we see the couple cornered in an alley, zombies close and threatening. The hero points his shotgun at the camera, we fade to white, two shots ring out, and blood drips on the screen in the form of the Lucent "brown ring of quality." It bursts into flame and the text "Inferno" is added as the announcer proclaims, "Inferno: Welcome to HELL!" Fade to black.
Whew! End Creativity. Anyway, if they can just get some books out, maybe they'll have a go at it.
Judebert
Am I like, the oldest slashdot reader there is? Probably the oldest leap day kid.
Never really cared much about the idiots screaming "You're only 2 (3, whatever)!" I never liked them in the first place, and if they were innumerate enough not to understand the difference between birthdays and years when I explained it nicely, then I sided with Heinlein: not human enough to worry about.
Judebert