16 year olds care more about their friends than their family. This happens regardless of technology and is a perfectly natural part of psychological development.
It's about memes, not genes. Every time you say something, the cultural ideas that are in you spread to your listener. Society these days is changing way too fast for genetic evolution to make a difference, and these days children interact more with the media, which includes you and me here on slashdot, than they do with their parents.
Wait, what's the point of making it illegal to use something to commit a crime? I rob a bank, I commit one crime, I rob a bank using radio interception, I've committed that crime, and a completely new crime? Doesn't make much sense to me.
This is not a serious war. Look at Libya: there are hundreds of thousands of protesters, but an average battle over a city has about 50 casualties on each side. I don't think the real fighting has even begun yet.
The answer to all questions outside the realm of abstract logic and mathematics is "we don't know". For all we know, there could be a wave of destruction sweeping through the galaxy at light speed and it will destroy our entire solar system before the Sun will rise tomorrow. But rather than going into nihilistic panagnosticism, I think it's better to try and make informed guesses.
You are attending a giant industry conference. Industries make products. Video game products contain plenty of art, but it's product art, which is to say, kitsch art.
Logical according to what parameters? Computers are not immoral, their morality is defined by the set of priorities put into them by their programmers. Morality is not the enemy of logic, the two work together: morality is the set of priorities according to which logic tries to optimize.
You're essentially arguing elves vs spaceships. I, on the other hand, find the conservatism/progressivism distinction much more meaningful. It is true that in fantasy, magic is used as military force, in science fiction lasers are, but that isn't a very useful distinction - it's all the same story with different eye candy. We "have to inject our politics into everything" because politics is interesting.
Keep within urban areas where you always have lots of escape routes, and know what they are beforehand. Take a shot and move on. Never return the same place twice.
The Wikileaks system is set up so that Wikileaks does not know where the leaks came from. Even if the fate of the world depended on it, Julian Assange would not be able to prove that Bradley Manning was the one who sent the leaks that he allegedly sent.
Ok, so a dozen transnational megacorps are as powerful as governments. That's still off by an order of magnitude.
Corporations cannot use violent force to achieve their aims, while governments cans, and do (for every regulation is, by definition, enforced by the threat of violence), even against corporations. Also, if governments combine their power and act together, that's called an international trade agreement. When corporations do the same, it's called antitrust and governments quickly put a stop to it. As powerful as they are, governments can far more powerful. And corporations do have themselves to run.
Unfortunately, that's the way the game is played, this is accepted by all parties involved with large investments of capital made with an understanding of , and Google is trying to cheat.
Google is not trying to cheat, they're trying to improve the rules of the game. Just because software patents are the way things are doesn't mean they have to be.
The day of reckoning is coming for Google because the world of computing is shifting away from the desktop at a rapid rate, and if Apple's iPad wins, then Google's ad revenue will dry up at the expense of iOS.
Possibly. Then there is the analogy of watching a woman getting raped... I'm not the local police, but I'm going to step in. Doesn't that apply to larger situations as well?
This is a collectivist fallacy. The country is not one indivisible unit that always acts as one with every citizen supporting its actions. A country does not act, a government acts, and its action necessarily tramples on the rights of people who would much rather do something better with their money or their lives. When you step in to help a woman getting raped, you're getting yourself and only yourself (well, aside from the criminal, obviously) in danger. When a government does the same, it is doing so with other people's tax money risking the lives of other people in the conflict. If some politicians want to help out, they should buy some weapons out of pocket and go in themselves.
which is why Apple has about 5% market share of desktop OS right now.
My whole point is that Apple's strategy is not to be the ones with the 94% market share. Apple realizes that other companies are much better at doing that than they are, and prefer to focus on the high end market. They already are reaping huge profits, and their market capitalization is greater than Microsoft's. If they based their business on iOS and third party vendors, they would be catering to the low-end $200 phone market, where there are far less profits to be made.
They don't fail to see that that's the real gold. They just realize that if they go that way they'll be hitting a lot of competition and would have razor thin profit margins. Apple's strategy never is to be the majority player - not in the desktop, and not in the smartphone.
Even if you have an unlocked door, it's still illegal to break into a person's house. This is completely different - the man paid for the right to interact with the machines, and he interacted with the machines. He did not take a hammer and break the machine, he played the game according to the rules that the machine enforced. The fact that the casino screwed up and made the rules have a loophole in them changes nothing.
So, instead of the current system, where the 10% of a creative work's users/viewers/listeners that don't pirate pay for its production, we'll have a system where you essentially have to pay for a creative work whether you use it or not?
Slashdot Mirror
16 year olds care more about their friends than their family. This happens regardless of technology and is a perfectly natural part of psychological development.
There's always the Libertarian-like Freedom Party.
It's about memes, not genes. Every time you say something, the cultural ideas that are in you spread to your listener. Society these days is changing way too fast for genetic evolution to make a difference, and these days children interact more with the media, which includes you and me here on slashdot, than they do with their parents.
You willing to kill yourself and your family?
No, but I am willing to abstain from having children.
Wait, what's the point of making it illegal to use something to commit a crime? I rob a bank, I commit one crime, I rob a bank using radio interception, I've committed that crime, and a completely new crime? Doesn't make much sense to me.
(the real unit behind the sievert is the J/s, which is equivalent to Watts) is the same as being exposed to 1 milisievert for 1000 seconds
True mathematically, but not medically
This is not a serious war. Look at Libya: there are hundreds of thousands of protesters, but an average battle over a city has about 50 casualties on each side. I don't think the real fighting has even begun yet.
The answer to all questions outside the realm of abstract logic and mathematics is "we don't know". For all we know, there could be a wave of destruction sweeping through the galaxy at light speed and it will destroy our entire solar system before the Sun will rise tomorrow. But rather than going into nihilistic panagnosticism, I think it's better to try and make informed guesses.
With the kind of companies on there I'd pay to get off of the list.
You are attending a giant industry conference. Industries make products. Video game products contain plenty of art, but it's product art, which is to say, kitsch art.
No shit, Sherlock.
Post ten things about yourself that are false.
A purely logical computer might not.
Logical according to what parameters? Computers are not immoral, their morality is defined by the set of priorities put into them by their programmers. Morality is not the enemy of logic, the two work together: morality is the set of priorities according to which logic tries to optimize.
You're essentially arguing elves vs spaceships. I, on the other hand, find the conservatism/progressivism distinction much more meaningful. It is true that in fantasy, magic is used as military force, in science fiction lasers are, but that isn't a very useful distinction - it's all the same story with different eye candy. We "have to inject our politics into everything" because politics is interesting.
he's the one who allegedly put his ass on the line to steal those documents and expose the secrets
Let's keep this in mind.
Be a sniper.
Keep within urban areas where you always have lots of escape routes, and know what they are beforehand. Take a shot and move on. Never return the same place twice.
The Wikileaks system is set up so that Wikileaks does not know where the leaks came from. Even if the fate of the world depended on it, Julian Assange would not be able to prove that Bradley Manning was the one who sent the leaks that he allegedly sent.
Ok, so a dozen transnational megacorps are as powerful as governments. That's still off by an order of magnitude.
Corporations cannot use violent force to achieve their aims, while governments cans, and do (for every regulation is, by definition, enforced by the threat of violence), even against corporations. Also, if governments combine their power and act together, that's called an international trade agreement. When corporations do the same, it's called antitrust and governments quickly put a stop to it. As powerful as they are, governments can far more powerful. And corporations do have themselves to run.
Revenue of Google: 29.321 billion
GDP of China: 4.99 trillion
Sorry, but governments now are stronger than corporations will ever be.
Unfortunately, that's the way the game is played, this is accepted by all parties involved with large investments of capital made with an understanding of , and Google is trying to cheat.
Google is not trying to cheat, they're trying to improve the rules of the game. Just because software patents are the way things are doesn't mean they have to be.
The day of reckoning is coming for Google because the world of computing is shifting away from the desktop at a rapid rate, and if Apple's iPad wins, then Google's ad revenue will dry up at the expense of iOS.
That's the whole point of Android...
Possibly. Then there is the analogy of watching a woman getting raped... I'm not the local police, but I'm going to step in. Doesn't that apply to larger situations as well?
This is a collectivist fallacy. The country is not one indivisible unit that always acts as one with every citizen supporting its actions. A country does not act, a government acts, and its action necessarily tramples on the rights of people who would much rather do something better with their money or their lives. When you step in to help a woman getting raped, you're getting yourself and only yourself (well, aside from the criminal, obviously) in danger. When a government does the same, it is doing so with other people's tax money risking the lives of other people in the conflict. If some politicians want to help out, they should buy some weapons out of pocket and go in themselves.
It's a new format and it's not supported on my DVD and Blu-ray player.
Why do you care about DVD and Blu-ray players? This is't about movies, it's about videos you stream while browsing the World Wide Web.
which is why Apple has about 5% market share of desktop OS right now.
My whole point is that Apple's strategy is not to be the ones with the 94% market share. Apple realizes that other companies are much better at doing that than they are, and prefer to focus on the high end market. They already are reaping huge profits, and their market capitalization is greater than Microsoft's. If they based their business on iOS and third party vendors, they would be catering to the low-end $200 phone market, where there are far less profits to be made.
They don't fail to see that that's the real gold. They just realize that if they go that way they'll be hitting a lot of competition and would have razor thin profit margins. Apple's strategy never is to be the majority player - not in the desktop, and not in the smartphone.
Even if you have an unlocked door, it's still illegal to break into a person's house. This is completely different - the man paid for the right to interact with the machines, and he interacted with the machines. He did not take a hammer and break the machine, he played the game according to the rules that the machine enforced. The fact that the casino screwed up and made the rules have a loophole in them changes nothing.
So, instead of the current system, where the 10% of a creative work's users/viewers/listeners that don't pirate pay for its production, we'll have a system where you essentially have to pay for a creative work whether you use it or not?