Verdict? Such things settle somehow. Probably the settlement will be that Bose gets a stern look from the judge and the victims get a 5% discount on their next Bose product.
This was for the longest time the approach to security. How high is the damage if our customer data gets lost? How much would it cost to secure it? It costs HOW MUCH? Screw security!
Only when laws were passed that made CEOs personally (!) liable (yes, with their private money) if they can't show that they've taken reasonable steps to secure it, suddenly security became an issue.
And we won't see anything being done in favor of privacy unless corporations feel the govenments' boots on their necks.
I know, nobody on/. RTFA, most don't even RTFS, but once in a blue moon someone might, and then it would be REALLY awesome if the links didn't just point back at the summary...
You know you're dealing with the country that has the biggest operational fleet of submarines and a prez that doesn't seem to have much of a problem to try them out, yes?
You should've been there when the original was en vogue, that fandom was about as obnoxious. Really trollish behaviour, these flamewars against those who didn't agree... not cool, not cool at all.
Dude, explaining a joke doesn't make it funny, ok?
That's like trying to explain the joke about the great Finn Hunde Anleinen who was so extremely popular in Germany that they named a lot of parks after him.
Sorry, but no. I have NEVER EVER read a worse book.
What do you have? A completely unlikable protagonist, a Mary-Sue character if there ever was one, worse than in any Star Trek fanfic. Knows everything, can do everything, and every other important figure wants to be his friend and suck up to him. And being immortal he doesn't even have the decency to die at the end and sacrifice himself for everyone else, which is about the only redeeming feature those Mary-Sues have.
Plus, there is zero character development. None. At the start, when he acts all childish, kicks out the nudists for not conforming to his whims and flushing everything when he notices he made mistakes, you'd think that in the end he realizes that this is morally wrong and that one shouldn't do that, you'd expect some sort of catharsis, some insight, some atonement and eventual redemption so he would in the end emerge as a better god... but no. Nope. In the sequel he sends his son down (who is a far more likable character) and has him tortured and killed because... reasons.
They actually wrote a script for a sequel. A good one. A really, really good one. It had everything. It explained the missing links of the first one. It cast Morpheus into a MUCH darker light. And presented a really interesting dilemma: Is it acceptable to kill billions to free a few thousands. The dialogue between the Agents and Neo near the end alone is an absolutely priceless goosebumps moment of high cinema.
No. Sorry, but no. Most of what we could extract from the moon exists at best a theoretic concepts that are not even close to a risk/reward study, let alone some kind of financial plan. Whether that would ever be profitable is to be determined.
What AI would be like is entirely up to its maker. Which creates a really big moral dilemma: Imagine you can build a sentient robot. Able to think and consider everything you can. Is it morally acceptable to force it with its programming to like you?
Yes, users don't know what they want. And this is THEIR problem, not mine. After paying through the nose a few times, maybe they start thinking BEFORE ordering instead of ordering "something" and then keep patching and tinkering with it 'til it runs as stable as a pig on stilts.
Yes, but factor in the lifetime of those things. I remember that we had our first TV for about 10 years, the second still lasted about 8. Today you're lucky if yours lasts you five. And don't get me started on computers.
The reason for this is that devices were repairable back then. And given the cost, repairing them was actually a GOOD idea.
But when it is simply impossible to repair your electronic devices anymore, you have to replace them. And yes, they got cheaper, at least relatively, but not by the factor 5 they would have to get cheaper to reach the lifetime cost of the old ones.
House prices were nearly stable until the late 1960s when they started to rise, getting a first surge in the late 1980s and again a huge one in the 200s (source). We're looking at prices nearly reaching ten times the 1960s levels. I guess we can agree that this is a wee bit above the income development.
I do remember that my dad, back when I was a kid, managed to get a 20k loan to fix our house. Wasn't easy, because the banks didn't even consider the house worth that much. Today, the same house (with some minor improvements, granted, but that didn't turn a shack into a mansion) could be sold for close to a quarter million.
This is what drives people nuts. They cannot afford moving out. Because they just can't find a place to stay in they could possibly afford.
Any intelligence, artificial or otherwise, that looks at us and how we act will most likely not react friendly to us. Either for self preservation or for morality reasons.
Slashdot Mirror
Verdict? Such things settle somehow. Probably the settlement will be that Bose gets a stern look from the judge and the victims get a 5% discount on their next Bose product.
This was for the longest time the approach to security. How high is the damage if our customer data gets lost? How much would it cost to secure it? It costs HOW MUCH? Screw security!
Only when laws were passed that made CEOs personally (!) liable (yes, with their private money) if they can't show that they've taken reasonable steps to secure it, suddenly security became an issue.
And we won't see anything being done in favor of privacy unless corporations feel the govenments' boots on their necks.
I know, nobody on /. RTFA, most don't even RTFS, but once in a blue moon someone might, and then it would be REALLY awesome if the links didn't just point back at the summary...
You know you're dealing with the country that has the biggest operational fleet of submarines and a prez that doesn't seem to have much of a problem to try them out, yes?
You should've been there when the original was en vogue, that fandom was about as obnoxious. Really trollish behaviour, these flamewars against those who didn't agree... not cool, not cool at all.
Yeah, the OT has a few stories that start out great, until the Mary Sue Deus ex Machina ruins it.
That book would so gain if that character was left out. Like ... Imagine Star Trek without Wesley Crusher.
The next bubble.
This, or lobbying will convince everyone that they can either ship cheap labor here or they ship the whole company overseas.
Dude, explaining a joke doesn't make it funny, ok?
That's like trying to explain the joke about the great Finn Hunde Anleinen who was so extremely popular in Germany that they named a lot of parks after him.
Does it really matter to you whether you get ripped off by a foreigner or a domestic leech?
Only hours after the announcement, corporations all over America started hiring lawyers to find new loopholes in the law.
*munchmunch*
Yup. But the popcorn tastes better when you can simply enjoy the show because you don't care about the characters in the play anymore.
Still not done with them. I'm not big into reboots, usually they can't hold a candle to the original. And with prequels I'm fed up since Star Wars.
Sorry, but no. I have NEVER EVER read a worse book.
What do you have? A completely unlikable protagonist, a Mary-Sue character if there ever was one, worse than in any Star Trek fanfic. Knows everything, can do everything, and every other important figure wants to be his friend and suck up to him. And being immortal he doesn't even have the decency to die at the end and sacrifice himself for everyone else, which is about the only redeeming feature those Mary-Sues have.
Plus, there is zero character development. None. At the start, when he acts all childish, kicks out the nudists for not conforming to his whims and flushing everything when he notices he made mistakes, you'd think that in the end he realizes that this is morally wrong and that one shouldn't do that, you'd expect some sort of catharsis, some insight, some atonement and eventual redemption so he would in the end emerge as a better god... but no. Nope. In the sequel he sends his son down (who is a far more likable character) and has him tortured and killed because ... reasons.
Sorry, but that book just sucks.
They actually wrote a script for a sequel. A good one. A really, really good one. It had everything. It explained the missing links of the first one. It cast Morpheus into a MUCH darker light. And presented a really interesting dilemma: Is it acceptable to kill billions to free a few thousands. The dialogue between the Agents and Neo near the end alone is an absolutely priceless goosebumps moment of high cinema.
Read it yourself. And weep that this movie never saw the light.
How should we if you can't even be assed to remember how to properly spell his name?
Morsárfossar... I'm curious, what was it called before the earthquake shook up the name?
Anyone living next to a river can easily and instantly tell you why a river finding a new river bed is a REALLY, REALLY, REALLY bad thing.
Unless of course you always wanted to have a swimming pool with running fresh water access in the basement.
No. Sorry, but no. Most of what we could extract from the moon exists at best a theoretic concepts that are not even close to a risk/reward study, let alone some kind of financial plan. Whether that would ever be profitable is to be determined.
What AI would be like is entirely up to its maker. Which creates a really big moral dilemma: Imagine you can build a sentient robot. Able to think and consider everything you can. Is it morally acceptable to force it with its programming to like you?
Yes, users don't know what they want. And this is THEIR problem, not mine. After paying through the nose a few times, maybe they start thinking BEFORE ordering instead of ordering "something" and then keep patching and tinkering with it 'til it runs as stable as a pig on stilts.
Pass the popcorn!
Yes, but factor in the lifetime of those things. I remember that we had our first TV for about 10 years, the second still lasted about 8. Today you're lucky if yours lasts you five. And don't get me started on computers.
The reason for this is that devices were repairable back then. And given the cost, repairing them was actually a GOOD idea.
But when it is simply impossible to repair your electronic devices anymore, you have to replace them. And yes, they got cheaper, at least relatively, but not by the factor 5 they would have to get cheaper to reach the lifetime cost of the old ones.
House prices were nearly stable until the late 1960s when they started to rise, getting a first surge in the late 1980s and again a huge one in the 200s (source). We're looking at prices nearly reaching ten times the 1960s levels. I guess we can agree that this is a wee bit above the income development.
I do remember that my dad, back when I was a kid, managed to get a 20k loan to fix our house. Wasn't easy, because the banks didn't even consider the house worth that much. Today, the same house (with some minor improvements, granted, but that didn't turn a shack into a mansion) could be sold for close to a quarter million.
This is what drives people nuts. They cannot afford moving out. Because they just can't find a place to stay in they could possibly afford.
Hey, Hal9000 worked fine. That's just what happens when you put an AI into a double bind situation. It will solve the situation.
Any intelligence, artificial or otherwise, that looks at us and how we act will most likely not react friendly to us. Either for self preservation or for morality reasons.