I don't know, I'd kind of like it if those content creating people would just let me buy/use their products in my country. I live in Canada for frig sakes and I can't subscribe to Hulu and get the crappy watered down version of netflix without a proxy server or VPN. It's like they go out of their way to limit their markets to stop us from giving them our money. I can't count the number of times I've clicked on a link in an article to some news story or a youtube music video and received the "Content not available in your region".
It's a fine balance for the media cartel. They can't come out and say, "Yeah, piracy is helping improve our profit margins." because 1) they make money from suing pirates, while making money from piracy promoting their products and 2) if they admit they've been lying and everyone starts pirating content there's a chance piracy could end up hurting their bottom line.
Personally I think it's best for them just to ignore piracy and not comment on in one way or another; just go on selling your products. If you're offering at a reasonable price, in an accessible format and people like it then they'll buy it, but trying to control every aspect, especially with digital content, is just going to generate malice and is just cutting off their nose to spite their face.
Politician's better watch out and rush to make that illegal. It'll be terrible if people realize they can make their own common sense laws rather than depend on politicians taking money from lobby groups to tell them how to think.
How will politicians survive without lobby groups paying their salary?
This is probably more applicable to ISP backbones rather than LANs. Although it'd be nice if I could move digital videos from my standard machine to my media server upstairs that quickly. I ripped my entire DVD collection which took me the better part of a year to do, now whenever we buy a new movie the first thing I do is rip them so I don't end up having to do a dozen+ movies at once.
With the proper sensors they can look around, recognize faces and react to an locate sounds. I'm not sure if giving a machine a mouth so it can shove random objects into it is really Nobel prize worthy...
Yeah, I'm excited. I was programming at seven when my Dad gave me his old Atari 130XE to play with. I can't wait to see what she'll do since computers are so cheap their practically throw away items now.
I see the issue with copying the A.I. is you end up with the breeding weakness issue. By developing A.I. and not copying it you can create a host of experiences for different version of the A.I. as opposed to making sure all A.I. has the same experiences. That allows the A.I. to be more human in that each individual A.I. can contribute something to a collective that other's haven't experienced. I know it sounds silly, but one may have more success at recognizing an abstract dog (think cartoon) because of a combination of different experiences, while another may have issues with it. If you're just copying the A.I. then the one that has issues recognizing the dog may end up copied over and over and all A.I. will have issues with the task.
I had a six month old a little more than a year ago. They don't do much at six months other than eat, sleep and grow, my daughter wasn't even interested in toys until around seven to eight months. All the interesting stuff starts taking place around one year when they start learning things like to crawl/walk and mimic sounds. About 18 months they start listening to simple instructions and saying actual words. Development progress not guaranteed and may vary, side effects may include poop on walls, pink eye, vomiting, cuts, violent tantrums and potential death in small furry animals.
My daughter is 21 months now and is forming sentences, can follow "complex" instructions, count to five, solve puzzles rated for four years old and she knows simple shapes and the alphabet. I'm sure the daycare workers are exaggerating, but they've told us she's actually more mentally developed than the other kids in her class.
Using that as a gauge, simple A.I. can mimic behavior, recognize shapes and sounds and form associations. So I'm pretty sure up to ConceptNet4 most A.I. would be about the equivalent level of an 18 to 24 months old. ConceptNet4 I think is showing abilities that are probably consistent with at least a two year old and up.
I think the point is, like in a real child's development this is a stepping stone, it's something A.I. has to go through in order for it to mature.
I never understood why people think a A.I. should learn any faster than a real child could. It's like people think because it's a computer it automagically knows everything there is ever to know, but in reality A.I. still requires training and positive/negative reinforcement just like really children do.
I never really understood Data's issue with using contractions. There are pretty well defined rules for them and rules are something that can be pretty easily programmed so he really shouldn't have had an issue with them.
Although I agree some applause is warranted for the use of the metric system in the summary, and you are correct, I'm from a metric country and we don't use some SI units for whatever reason, maybe we should use them, but we don't. Deci (d), Deca (da) and hecto (h) as examples are often ignored, we typically just go from centimetres (0.01 m) to meters to killometers (1000 m). I think it's probably the same reason that a Furlong isn't used much in the English system. It exists and in some context does get used, but for the most part people will just say an eight of a mile. I mean why wouldn't you say Furlong? It's a fun word to say.
I don't know about that, while I can't argue about most places dropping the bar, my step-mother is a special needs teacher. Many of the students she deals with I've gotten to know personally and have no doubts in my mind they have the same intelligence level as a lot of other people their age. I find a lot of the time their issues revolve around their lack of communication skills, similar to how someone who is super smart is perceived as dumb because they can't talk to others or have trouble writing things down.
Until you add the extensions to Eclipse that let you program in several different languages, maintain different forms of content management systems, include issue tracking systems and run the programming environment on several different platforms. Eclipse is light years ahead because if it's modularity and extendibility.
Is it important that a tree is equal to a fork? I know it's an exaggeration, but both are useful in completely unrelated ways that doesn't require comparison.
Supreme court doesn't disagree with me. I said the constitution grants a "well regulated militia" the right to bear arms, which is factual. Then I said I feel uneasy that pro-gun people support irresponsible gun owners, which the supreme court doesn't get to tell me what I'm allowed to think or what my opinion should be.
But here you are proving the other point I made in another post:
"I'm more pro-gun control, but I consider myself middle of the road. I just think certain people shouldn't be allowed to own them and someone else always jumps in telling me I said don't want anyone to own them. I have a lot of hunters in my family I have no problem with some people owning guns."
Yet another pro-gun nut jumping in to tell me what it was I think.
I agree with you, that's kind of the problem in the US at the moment. Their constitution grants a "well regulated militia" the right to bear arms. Well regulated meaning disciplined and trained, but most gun owners don't belong to a militia, they don't require any regular training to own a gun, background checks aren't required to buy guns at certain venues or at all in some states. As I said before, I'm not anti-gun, I have a lot of hunters in my family and enjoy a good deer stake, I'd settle for people that own guns legally just accepting the fact that they have a deadly weapon in their possession and it's their responsibility to be informed and trained to use it and keep it out of the hands of people (family and friends) who shouldn't have them.
Instead what happens is irresponsible gun owners leave weapons loaded and/or unlocked, some kid or family member gets a hold of it, because it's convenient, and kills people. Then the pro-gun lobby jumps in defending the irresponsible gun owner like they didn't do anything wrong and makes stupid statements like "The only thing that stops a bad guy with a gun is a good guy with a gun". Yes the solution to stupid people with guns is more stupid people with guns, eventually they'll all just kill each other right? People who defend irresponsible people are exactly the kind of people I don't want owning guns. Now if the NRA and similar groups came out and chastised people that didn't take owning a gun seriously I'd feel a whole lot better about people legally owning guns.
Sorry I'm ranting and I didn't intend to, it's all been said before and there's no need to rehash it again.
I'm more pro-gun control, but I consider myself middle of the road. I just think certain people shouldn't be allowed to own them and someone else always jumps in telling me I said don't want anyone to own them. I have a lot of hunters in my family I have no problem with some people owning guns.
I digress, the fact is most people who buy guns are not going to buy "smart" guns basically with DRM included, maybe some people will buy them for the novelty. People who don't buy guns, aren't buying them anyway. It seems pretty clear cut to me.
Although I mostly agree with you, the reason MS has kept their market share is less about their software's technical superiority and more because of the underhanded tactics they use.
Spreading FUD, reputation management, secure boot, OEM installs so every new computer comes with the operating system by default, vendor lock-in as some examples. I can't blame them for it, it's business, but their marketing strategies and ethics are part of the reason they're so despised and what has put them in the current state their in. They've got lots of money so they can drag out their death for a long time, but It'll be a hard fight to get back on top for anything outside of enterprise business, which they're also losing to Linux servers and mobile devices via BYOD.
Slashdot Mirror
I was just thinking how ironic it would be if that link didn't work. I use to be a big south park fan, so I've seen it.
I don't know, I'd kind of like it if those content creating people would just let me buy/use their products in my country. I live in Canada for frig sakes and I can't subscribe to Hulu and get the crappy watered down version of netflix without a proxy server or VPN. It's like they go out of their way to limit their markets to stop us from giving them our money. I can't count the number of times I've clicked on a link in an article to some news story or a youtube music video and received the "Content not available in your region".
"end-of-world-as-we-know-it!", hold onto your socks buddy, the whole universe is about to implode.
It's a fine balance for the media cartel. They can't come out and say, "Yeah, piracy is helping improve our profit margins." because 1) they make money from suing pirates, while making money from piracy promoting their products and 2) if they admit they've been lying and everyone starts pirating content there's a chance piracy could end up hurting their bottom line.
Personally I think it's best for them just to ignore piracy and not comment on in one way or another; just go on selling your products. If you're offering at a reasonable price, in an accessible format and people like it then they'll buy it, but trying to control every aspect, especially with digital content, is just going to generate malice and is just cutting off their nose to spite their face.
Politician's better watch out and rush to make that illegal. It'll be terrible if people realize they can make their own common sense laws rather than depend on politicians taking money from lobby groups to tell them how to think.
How will politicians survive without lobby groups paying their salary?
They might not rip up existing infrastructure, but they might start replacing it as the old stuff starts breaking down or requires maintenance.
This is probably more applicable to ISP backbones rather than LANs. Although it'd be nice if I could move digital videos from my standard machine to my media server upstairs that quickly. I ripped my entire DVD collection which took me the better part of a year to do, now whenever we buy a new movie the first thing I do is rip them so I don't end up having to do a dozen+ movies at once.
Thank you. That makes more sense and I remember the episode where that's explained now. I guess it's time to hand in my TNG card.
so five then?
With the proper sensors they can look around, recognize faces and react to an locate sounds. I'm not sure if giving a machine a mouth so it can shove random objects into it is really Nobel prize worthy...
Yeah, I'm excited. I was programming at seven when my Dad gave me his old Atari 130XE to play with. I can't wait to see what she'll do since computers are so cheap their practically throw away items now.
I see the issue with copying the A.I. is you end up with the breeding weakness issue. By developing A.I. and not copying it you can create a host of experiences for different version of the A.I. as opposed to making sure all A.I. has the same experiences. That allows the A.I. to be more human in that each individual A.I. can contribute something to a collective that other's haven't experienced. I know it sounds silly, but one may have more success at recognizing an abstract dog (think cartoon) because of a combination of different experiences, while another may have issues with it. If you're just copying the A.I. then the one that has issues recognizing the dog may end up copied over and over and all A.I. will have issues with the task.
I had a six month old a little more than a year ago. They don't do much at six months other than eat, sleep and grow, my daughter wasn't even interested in toys until around seven to eight months. All the interesting stuff starts taking place around one year when they start learning things like to crawl/walk and mimic sounds. About 18 months they start listening to simple instructions and saying actual words. Development progress not guaranteed and may vary, side effects may include poop on walls, pink eye, vomiting, cuts, violent tantrums and potential death in small furry animals.
My daughter is 21 months now and is forming sentences, can follow "complex" instructions, count to five, solve puzzles rated for four years old and she knows simple shapes and the alphabet. I'm sure the daycare workers are exaggerating, but they've told us she's actually more mentally developed than the other kids in her class.
Using that as a gauge, simple A.I. can mimic behavior, recognize shapes and sounds and form associations. So I'm pretty sure up to ConceptNet4 most A.I. would be about the equivalent level of an 18 to 24 months old. ConceptNet4 I think is showing abilities that are probably consistent with at least a two year old and up.
I think the point is, like in a real child's development this is a stepping stone, it's something A.I. has to go through in order for it to mature.
I never understood why people think a A.I. should learn any faster than a real child could. It's like people think because it's a computer it automagically knows everything there is ever to know, but in reality A.I. still requires training and positive/negative reinforcement just like really children do.
I never really understood Data's issue with using contractions. There are pretty well defined rules for them and rules are something that can be pretty easily programmed so he really shouldn't have had an issue with them.
Obligatory, I for one welcome our new four year old mentally unstable electronic overlords.
No person is harmed in this
I'm pretty sure the guy being dismembered world have disagreed. Also this is Canada and we choose to be reasonable about what free speech we allow.
Although I agree some applause is warranted for the use of the metric system in the summary, and you are correct, I'm from a metric country and we don't use some SI units for whatever reason, maybe we should use them, but we don't. Deci (d), Deca (da) and hecto (h) as examples are often ignored, we typically just go from centimetres (0.01 m) to meters to killometers (1000 m). I think it's probably the same reason that a Furlong isn't used much in the English system. It exists and in some context does get used, but for the most part people will just say an eight of a mile. I mean why wouldn't you say Furlong? It's a fun word to say.
I don't know about that, while I can't argue about most places dropping the bar, my step-mother is a special needs teacher. Many of the students she deals with I've gotten to know personally and have no doubts in my mind they have the same intelligence level as a lot of other people their age. I find a lot of the time their issues revolve around their lack of communication skills, similar to how someone who is super smart is perceived as dumb because they can't talk to others or have trouble writing things down.
Until you add the extensions to Eclipse that let you program in several different languages, maintain different forms of content management systems, include issue tracking systems and run the programming environment on several different platforms. Eclipse is light years ahead because if it's modularity and extendibility.
Is it important that a tree is equal to a fork? I know it's an exaggeration, but both are useful in completely unrelated ways that doesn't require comparison.
Supreme court doesn't disagree with me. I said the constitution grants a "well regulated militia" the right to bear arms, which is factual. Then I said I feel uneasy that pro-gun people support irresponsible gun owners, which the supreme court doesn't get to tell me what I'm allowed to think or what my opinion should be.
But here you are proving the other point I made in another post: "I'm more pro-gun control, but I consider myself middle of the road. I just think certain people shouldn't be allowed to own them and someone else always jumps in telling me I said don't want anyone to own them. I have a lot of hunters in my family I have no problem with some people owning guns."
Yet another pro-gun nut jumping in to tell me what it was I think.
I agree with you, that's kind of the problem in the US at the moment. Their constitution grants a "well regulated militia" the right to bear arms. Well regulated meaning disciplined and trained, but most gun owners don't belong to a militia, they don't require any regular training to own a gun, background checks aren't required to buy guns at certain venues or at all in some states. As I said before, I'm not anti-gun, I have a lot of hunters in my family and enjoy a good deer stake, I'd settle for people that own guns legally just accepting the fact that they have a deadly weapon in their possession and it's their responsibility to be informed and trained to use it and keep it out of the hands of people (family and friends) who shouldn't have them.
Instead what happens is irresponsible gun owners leave weapons loaded and/or unlocked, some kid or family member gets a hold of it, because it's convenient, and kills people. Then the pro-gun lobby jumps in defending the irresponsible gun owner like they didn't do anything wrong and makes stupid statements like "The only thing that stops a bad guy with a gun is a good guy with a gun". Yes the solution to stupid people with guns is more stupid people with guns, eventually they'll all just kill each other right? People who defend irresponsible people are exactly the kind of people I don't want owning guns. Now if the NRA and similar groups came out and chastised people that didn't take owning a gun seriously I'd feel a whole lot better about people legally owning guns.
Sorry I'm ranting and I didn't intend to, it's all been said before and there's no need to rehash it again.
I like it.
I'm more pro-gun control, but I consider myself middle of the road. I just think certain people shouldn't be allowed to own them and someone else always jumps in telling me I said don't want anyone to own them. I have a lot of hunters in my family I have no problem with some people owning guns.
I digress, the fact is most people who buy guns are not going to buy "smart" guns basically with DRM included, maybe some people will buy them for the novelty. People who don't buy guns, aren't buying them anyway. It seems pretty clear cut to me.
Although I mostly agree with you, the reason MS has kept their market share is less about their software's technical superiority and more because of the underhanded tactics they use.
Spreading FUD, reputation management, secure boot, OEM installs so every new computer comes with the operating system by default, vendor lock-in as some examples. I can't blame them for it, it's business, but their marketing strategies and ethics are part of the reason they're so despised and what has put them in the current state their in. They've got lots of money so they can drag out their death for a long time, but It'll be a hard fight to get back on top for anything outside of enterprise business, which they're also losing to Linux servers and mobile devices via BYOD.