At other times Bianchi borders on bazaar. When he rationalizes Complainant's rights to protection despite the fact that they don't even have a Trademark for "CORINTHIANS" (in Brazil or anywhere else), Bianchi says this about their nearest T.M., "CORINTHIAO":
"CORINTHIAO in Portuguese is pronounced as Corinthian in English. In fact, unless the English word itself is used, phonetics (because of the nasal pronunciation) and correct spelling require that the word Corianthiao is used in Portuguese. Thus, when comparing Corinthians with Corianthiao, the Panel concludes that the domain name at issue is phonetically nearly identical to the Complainants trademark CORINTHIAO."
So if I was the owner of pear.com, I could legally take away pair.com and pare.com, as well as phoenetically similar words in other languages, simply because they are pronounced the same? That's bullshit.
I've read the book. Excellent piece of work, you should read it sometime.
I do NOT think that making government transparent will in any shape or form compensate me for the loss of my privacy. The problem is that a big chunk of accountability of people (not just government, but managers, nursing home workers, cops, basically everyone) involves getting rid of their privacy. Brin pointed this out: everyone wants to have surveillance of everyone else but not to lose their own privacy. They want to be able to watch their kids at the day care center (and spot any screw-ups by the staff), yet they get in an uproar when they find out their boss has been counting their restroom breaks. You want to find out about the criminal record of suspicious people in your neighborhood but don't want anyone to find out about that little item on your driving record. You cannot have it both ways. With surveillance equipment becoming cheaper all the time, you have two choices. You can either open everything up (Transparent Society) or close it down and try to keep everything a secret from everyone. The latter would obviously benefit criminals and people in positions of power (the two would often describe the same people).
But one can perfectly well stop its use by the government and law enforcement. No, you can stop the use of privacy-invading technology by those who are easily controlled by the government and law enforcement. Criminals and anyone in power who is less than perfectly honest will be more free to use the tech than the average citizen, which is exactly the situation we don't want. I mean, look how well Prohibition worked and that would be a hell of a lot easier than keeping people from misusing a camera.
how does [outlawing surveillance tech] create the police state? Because it's an utterly stupid thing to try. Let's take your example, outlawing face recognition. What about fingerprint and voice recognition? It's pretty much the same thing, right? Congratulations! You've just destroyed the entire biometrics industry! How long after that until it becomes illegal to have video cameras and voice recorders? They can be used for surveillance, after all, and we can't have that. You see a trend here?
To repeat myself, your loss of privacy does not compensate me for my loss of privacy. Except that to a great extent, you do not have privacy right now and even that will decrease in the future. The question is not whether or not you will lose your privacy but who will have access to your data when you do: Everyone? Or a select bunch of people who are unaccountable to you?
Yes, the power plants usually burn fossil fuels, at least here in the US. But there are many important differences between them and a car. They don't have to move, so equipment can be made more efficient without considerations of weight. They don't have to constantly change output by huge percentages, so they can be tweaked to optimum performance. And the electric car only has to be able to plug into a socket. Any upgrades can be done on the power plant. Which is easier: upgrading a (comparative) handful of power plants or getting millions of car owners of various income levels to make major modifications to their cars?
Yeah, H2 is kickass, but it costs too much right now (Anyone know how O2 would compare for performance with gasoline and H2? It's a hell of a lot cheaper.) With mass production, it could easily come down to more reasonable prices. And yeah, the Hindenburg Syndrome is real stupid. A) it's believed that it was the fabric of the balloon that caught fire and ignited the hydrogen and b) gasoline is just as bad.
I seem to recall a post that mentioned a microbe engineered to produce H2. Is that just vaporware or what?
Umm, a sphere of radius 8.5" (8.25" interior w/ 0.25" wall width) has a total wall volume of 220 cubic inches. I don't know what kind of steel you're using, but at 8 lbs/in^3, that's some pretty impressive stuff.
Let's be pessimistic and say steel is 0.3 lb/in^3 (it's really more like 0.28). That gives a total wieght of 66 lbs. Much easier to deal with, yes?
I found that when they work, they work rather well. Problem is, the frequency selector constantly changes by small amounts, thus giving you static, and you have to reset it. Very annoying; don't get one.
Ok, so we've got one schmuck who says "Aww, there's very little chance of the human race becoming extinct, let's not worry about it. After all, $.10 per US citizen is way too expensive". Here's $10, that takes care of everyone in my apartment building.
Lemme get this straight. Talking about sex and playing basketball are key activities conducted by us insidious men that help keep women out of the CS field? I guess we should have a rulebook listing permitted conversation topics and social activities.
This may explain a few things, actually. I recall that back at my middle school, a couple of the female teachers kept posters of Kevin Costner and various other actors in their offices. I guess that's why there were fewer male teachers there, right? We should sue!
Ok, how about we have the/. crowd be the sys admins for a K-12 school. We have an unlimited budget and the last word in who gets what, as well as deciding when students will start taking programming or any 'Learn to Use Computers' courses. Please remember we're not just trying to spend vast amounts of money, but actually make good use of computers as an educational tool.
What kind of systems should we set up in the various classes. How much is too much to spend on a particular room? What kind of OS's and other software should we put on them?
Sorry, but I don't understand how you can blame HavenCo for a physician's death. They didn't make the information. They didn't kill the doctor. That's on par with blaming the owners of billboards for deaths caused by smoking. Bear in mind, the extremists could just as easily have walked down to your clinic and blown you away.
Go after the guys who are actually pulling the triggers.
First you'll have to prove to me that having a government would in no uncertain terms be better than not having one. And terrorists are in rather a whole different category than 0's and 1's.
How exactly can They be sure that this capsule won't be opened until around 12k AD? Put a bumber sticker on it asking future generations to kindly wait until the appointed time?
Broadcasting into US territory is a crime? That's gotta be the dumbest charge I've ever heard of. So any schmuck who sends a signal over the border can be arrested? What kind of specifications are there on type of broadcast, power of said broadcast, etc?
Oh just fucking brilliant. Let's use frequencies that a) lose coherence and degrade amazingly quickly in an atmosphere and b) are somewhat, how shall I say it, toxic to us ordinary humans.
someone I know very well is planning on doing this soon - next summer. In that case, I suggest you leave town ASAP.
Beats me. Usually it's just ordinary radio on smack, but sometimes it's like alternate dimensions that you can go to. Those writers have no idea what the word continuity means.
AFAIK, the closest thing to it in the real world are tachyons (travel faster than light and backwards in time), and they are purely hypothetical.
Well Jon, since you seem to be such a monumental expert on this topic, what exactly is the best-qualified country for the task of researching genetic engineering? I saw an awful lot of "Americans are stupid", "Americans can't read", "All Americans love to have 6 or 7 kids per pregnancy (which is patently bullshit)", and a general "Those filthy barbarians will end the world with their ignorant tinkering". How about next time you want to rant and make totally unfounded statements ("the U.S. might not have thought much about the evolution of genetic research, but it sure loves a high-stakes contest", "world capital of technological hubris and arrogance") you not post it on/.
This was my favorite: "Critics are quickly dismissed as Luddites or simpletons". Well geez, look at the kind of arguments most critics make. "It's against God's will". "It's not natural". "It's too dangerous to society/life on earth" is the only one with any potential, but you know, every technology has unforseen side-effects, good and bad, which will NEVER be thought of before it's used. So I guarantee you that sitting on it until a committee decides that 'the time is right' is a waste of a valuable technology.
One more thing, what makes you think the septuplet parents received all that stuff from fans? If I were to send anything to them, it'd be out of pity, not because I thought their bonehead move was a good thing.
Well, if I build a robot that builds a smaller robot, who is credited with the invention of the smaller bot? Me?--or my robot. Following the same line of logic anything that a created object builds (nanotech, for example) is credited to the original creator.
I hate to be rude, but that's bullshit. Should my parents get credit for everything I make? Why not, they created me, right? How about self-replicating programs that mutate every now and then?(ie, Tierra. Sorry, don't have the link) There was one that went from 80 commands down to 22 all by its little ole self. Can you say the original programmer 'wrote' it?
And how is it human-centric to admit to ourselves that the earth does not exist simply for our presence? That yes, we are a totally random fluke in the fossil record? That we exist solely because of the toss of genetic dice over the past few billion years? I think that's being very honest with oneself and facing the facts without fear of making yourself seem insignificant.
That's funny, I had a summer job writing VB and when my classes started in fall I jumped right into Smalltalk/Squeak. And to think I got an A without being able to wrap my head around it.
But you're right, it's a crummy language. Last thing we need is another M$ proprietary language.
I read a fictional story (can't remember where) about a computer system that was 'seeded' with a very short program (30 or 40 bytes). This program basically contained the minimum amount of code that it needed to be able to reproduce itself (it's more or less a virus). Now they set it running and had the system hardware take on a few additional features, like occasionally screwing up a few bits when the virus copied itself (read: mutations). Lo and behold, after a little while of this, a program evolved that could do the same job but with something like half the code as the original.
Except that the the paintings/photos analogy isn't even close to the same thing. This is more like the judges at a painting contest disqualifying an entry because it's in watercolor and they only want oils.
Oh absolutely. The Japanese Navy was tired and depleted from its battle with the fearsome and indestructible Chinese junks. The Germans, I recall, had a paltry 80 divisions on the western front and only another 160 on the east. Yes, they sure were beaten. We could have looked at them funny and they'd have fallen over.
Slashdot Mirror
At other times Bianchi borders on bazaar. When he rationalizes Complainant's rights to protection despite the fact that they don't even have a Trademark for "CORINTHIANS" (in Brazil or anywhere else), Bianchi says this about their nearest T.M., "CORINTHIAO":
"CORINTHIAO in Portuguese is pronounced as Corinthian in English. In fact, unless the English word itself is used, phonetics (because of the nasal pronunciation) and correct spelling require that the word Corianthiao is used in Portuguese. Thus, when comparing Corinthians with Corianthiao, the Panel concludes that the domain name at issue is phonetically nearly identical to the Complainants trademark CORINTHIAO."
So if I was the owner of pear.com, I could legally take away pair.com and pare.com, as well as phoenetically similar words in other languages, simply because they are pronounced the same? That's bullshit.
--
I do NOT think that making government transparent will in any shape or form compensate me for the loss of my privacy.
The problem is that a big chunk of accountability of people (not just government, but managers, nursing home workers, cops, basically everyone) involves getting rid of their privacy. Brin pointed this out: everyone wants to have surveillance of everyone else but not to lose their own privacy. They want to be able to watch their kids at the day care center (and spot any screw-ups by the staff), yet they get in an uproar when they find out their boss has been counting their restroom breaks. You want to find out about the criminal record of suspicious people in your neighborhood but don't want anyone to find out about that little item on your driving record. You cannot have it both ways. With surveillance equipment becoming cheaper all the time, you have two choices. You can either open everything up (Transparent Society) or close it down and try to keep everything a secret from everyone. The latter would obviously benefit criminals and people in positions of power (the two would often describe the same people).
But one can perfectly well stop its use by the government and law enforcement.
No, you can stop the use of privacy-invading technology by those who are easily controlled by the government and law enforcement. Criminals and anyone in power who is less than perfectly honest will be more free to use the tech than the average citizen, which is exactly the situation we don't want. I mean, look how well Prohibition worked and that would be a hell of a lot easier than keeping people from misusing a camera.
how does [outlawing surveillance tech] create the police state?
Because it's an utterly stupid thing to try. Let's take your example, outlawing face recognition. What about fingerprint and voice recognition? It's pretty much the same thing, right? Congratulations! You've just destroyed the entire biometrics industry! How long after that until it becomes illegal to have video cameras and voice recorders? They can be used for surveillance, after all, and we can't have that. You see a trend here?
To repeat myself, your loss of privacy does not compensate me for my loss of privacy.
Except that to a great extent, you do not have privacy right now and even that will decrease in the future. The question is not whether or not you will lose your privacy but who will have access to your data when you do: Everyone? Or a select bunch of people who are unaccountable to you?
--
Yeah, H2 is kickass, but it costs too much right now (Anyone know how O2 would compare for performance with gasoline and H2? It's a hell of a lot cheaper.) With mass production, it could easily come down to more reasonable prices. And yeah, the Hindenburg Syndrome is real stupid. A) it's believed that it was the fabric of the balloon that caught fire and ignited the hydrogen and b) gasoline is just as bad.
I seem to recall a post that mentioned a microbe engineered to produce H2. Is that just vaporware or what?
--
Let's be pessimistic and say steel is 0.3 lb/in^3 (it's really more like 0.28). That gives a total wieght of 66 lbs. Much easier to deal with, yes?
--
I found that when they work, they work rather well. Problem is, the frequency selector constantly changes by small amounts, thus giving you static, and you have to reset it. Very annoying; don't get one.
--
Since when is a technology not feasible simply because NASA doesn't use it? Nuclear pulsedrives come to mind.
--
Ok, so we've got one schmuck who says "Aww, there's very little chance of the human race becoming extinct, let's not worry about it. After all, $.10 per US citizen is way too expensive". Here's $10, that takes care of everyone in my apartment building.
--
Funny, I thought that was how everyone in 2010+ would refer to the upcoming decade.
--
This may explain a few things, actually. I recall that back at my middle school, a couple of the female teachers kept posters of Kevin Costner and various other actors in their offices. I guess that's why there were fewer male teachers there, right? We should sue!
--
What kind of systems should we set up in the various classes. How much is too much to spend on a particular room? What kind of OS's and other software should we put on them?
--
You'll love this. A girl in one of my CS classes last semester declared that she would love to do the trampoline bit once or twice on The Man Show.
--
Go after the guys who are actually pulling the triggers.
--
First you'll have to prove to me that having a government would in no uncertain terms be better than not having one. And terrorists are in rather a whole different category than 0's and 1's.
--
How exactly can They be sure that this capsule won't be opened until around 12k AD? Put a bumber sticker on it asking future generations to kindly wait until the appointed time?
--
Broadcasting into US territory is a crime? That's gotta be the dumbest charge I've ever heard of. So any schmuck who sends a signal over the border can be arrested? What kind of specifications are there on type of broadcast, power of said broadcast, etc?
--
Dyolf Knip
--
Just testing my sig.
--
someone I know very well is planning on doing this soon - next summer.
In that case, I suggest you leave town ASAP.
Dyolf Knip
--
AFAIK, the closest thing to it in the real world are tachyons (travel faster than light and backwards in time), and they are purely hypothetical.
Dyolf Knip
--
This was my favorite: "Critics are quickly dismissed as Luddites or simpletons". Well geez, look at the kind of arguments most critics make. "It's against God's will". "It's not natural". "It's too dangerous to society/life on earth" is the only one with any potential, but you know, every technology has unforseen side-effects, good and bad, which will NEVER be thought of before it's used. So I guarantee you that sitting on it until a committee decides that 'the time is right' is a waste of a valuable technology.
One more thing, what makes you think the septuplet parents received all that stuff from fans? If I were to send anything to them, it'd be out of pity, not because I thought their bonehead move was a good thing.
Dyolf Knip
--
I hate to be rude, but that's bullshit. Should my parents get credit for everything I make? Why not, they created me, right? How about self-replicating programs that mutate every now and then?(ie, Tierra. Sorry, don't have the link) There was one that went from 80 commands down to 22 all by its little ole self. Can you say the original programmer 'wrote' it?
And how is it human-centric to admit to ourselves that the earth does not exist simply for our presence? That yes, we are a totally random fluke in the fossil record? That we exist solely because of the toss of genetic dice over the past few billion years? I think that's being very honest with oneself and facing the facts without fear of making yourself seem insignificant.
Dyolf Knip
--
But you're right, it's a crummy language. Last thing we need is another M$ proprietary language.
Dyolf Knip
--
Now that would be a cool thing to try sometime.
Dyolf Knip
--
Dyolf Knip
--
Dyolf Knip
--