I'd go a step farther and say that nothing should be patented which can "infect" someone else's possessions and thereby change that possession's ownership. For example, Monsanto and their piracy through cross pollenation.
I was thinking more along the lines of long-term un/underemployed "hackers" subsidized by the state.
A converse way of think about it would be a professor who is subsidized to design (through salary support and funding for consumables).
I think the distraction of a job or the necessity to make "a return on an investment" will stifle monumental innovation and promote incremental, albeit still important, refinements.
2 obvious problems:
"State subsidization," i.e. unemployment benefits, are limited in amount and duration; unemployment checks barely pay the essential bills, if that, and for an extremely limited time frame. Also, unless the person receiving those benefits makes a concerted effort to find gainful employment, their support will be removed. The whole process is gamed towards forcing those receiving benefits toward re-entering the workforce, and rightfully so - there's no legitimate reason why I, a gainfully employed, tax paying citizen, should have my tax dollars subsidize someone else's hobby farm. FTR, yes, I feel that way about pretty much every government subsidy given out these days, since the vast majority are completely unnecessary, and only serve to shift the financial burden from the profiteer to the public.
Of course, there's always teh possibility that I've completely misinterpreted your statement regarding "long-term un/underemployed "hackers" subsidized by the state..."
Will it run on bio deisel "out of the box" or will it require a conversion kit or add on package? Bio deisel would make it "greener" and might be a selling point.
Pretty much every diesel engine will run off used, filtered vegetable oil "right out of the box," as seen on Mythbusters
Granted, I wouldn't recommend doing it regularly (and if you live in cold climates, you have to pre-heat the oil to account for gelling issues), but as proof-of-concept, yea, it totally works.
That is also one of the hypothesis, but we'd like first to try if we can avoid wasting the original engine of the SUV. If we can put it to good use, better. If not, we'll take a new approach. R&D is fun.
Dude, you can ALWAYS find a "good" use for an old engine!
Swapping engines isn't really all that time intensive, provided you have the right facilities and tools available.
The real cost will be in re-engineering the engine compartment to fit a drivetrain setup that the vehicle was never meant to carry. Considering that this is a modern SUV, I would estimate at least 7-10 hours of retrofitting work (i.e., cutting and rewelding the frame, engine mounts, altering the firewall for the modified drivetrain, etc.), after the countless hours that will be required to engineer precisely how the retrofit will proceed.
IMO, they would be wiser to choose an older, "mini" SUV, like a Geo Tracker or Suzuki Samurai - rather inexpensive and easy to obtain, smaller and lighter body, and of course, far less BS under the hood to remove/modify.
So the sport is appealing for the same reasons that gladiators were appealing to citizens of Rome.
?
Not really sure what you're trying to get at, aside from the obvious point that audiences, in general, are rather bloodthirsty... but that's not why people like Mario Andretti choose to be race car drivers.
They do it for love of the sport, not to elicit a certain reaction from onlookers.
I wonder if a famous driver didn't occasionally die in a fiery crash would the sport be as popular as it is today.
Probably, otherwise there wouldn't be such a thing as amateur leagues.
I don't quite understand why having a passion for driving is such a difficult concept for a lot of people on/. to grasp...
If the cars they are controlling at the console are actually real cars running in a real track, is the driver still playing a video game?
Yes. Unless they are in direct control of the vehicle, feeling every pebble on the road, the g-forces endured when cornering, accelerating, and braking, the rush of air over the cockpit (in the case of open-top racers such as F1), etc., they are not driving. Don't take my word for it, head to your local track and ask the pros there, they'll tell you pretty much the same thing.
Following the same logic of yours, the military personal controlling the real unmanned drones flying over Afghanistan and dropping real bombs there - are just "playing video games".
You don't seem to get it: the type of person who makes a lifetime career out of driving, does so because they love driving and all that comes with it. The strawman of military drones is non sequitur to the point, as killing people has nothing to do with why professional race car drivers choose driving race cars as their profession.
Snap a photo of someone with a smartphone, analyze an image against a database of social media or Flickr pics and, voila, you have a name. From there, it's easy to get someone's age, hometown, interests, news coverage, you name it.
Finally a solution for stalking pretty girls in bars;-)
FTFY.
Wait... anyone else have a sudden feeling of dejavu?
Today you can order a XPS13 off dell.com which will come with Microsoft pre-loaded.
I hate Windows as much as the next guy, but if they're bundling a $250B company with each XPS laptop purchased, even *I* want to get in on this promotion!
... hadn't thought of it that way....
Truth in advertising, bitches! You owe me a software giant!
I'm all for gadgets, but why not just take the Catan board from the shelf and play?
What about playing in a car? It seems to me that virtual pieces being displayed on a LCD screen would be less prone to jostling then the real board.
Fair enough, although I myself have always been a fan of 'road-trip bingo'
Or what about on a camping trip where compactness is a desired feature? A single tablet could hold alot more board games then you'd normally have room for in the car.
Board games (most of them, anyway) don't require constant power/charging. IMO, if you're in constant need of an electric source, you're not really camping.
Aside from rendering that police force obsolete? Not a thing except maybe killing a bunch of police officers. The military is the elephant in this room not the domestic police force. A pop gun can mess up a squad car pretty well. It's a bit less effective against a 62 metric ton tank or a supersonic fighter jet.
Fortunately, our troops swear an oath to uphold and defend the U.S. Constitution, not the government it authorizes (unlike the police, who swear no such oath).
Why do you think our military is spread thin across the globe, doing bullshit police work, while the local police become more and more militarized? It's all a part of the plan...
"My favorite part is where you pay per-device and get nothing in return"
Surely you get connection to the network and unlimited calls/text for the $30-$45 per device (even if you assume you no extra data because you could have used it all on the first device).
Seems reasonable if an unlimited call/text plan is normally $70 for a single device.
$40/mo bill for services + $45/mo premium for phone ownership = $85/mo (for a single device)
This is to the exclusion of all the excise fees, taxes, and other miscellaneous bullshit telcos charge customers; I foresee a single device costing well over $100/mo on this new plan.
Every year, a new version will come out with less invasive surgery, better resolution, color... night mode... I hope they make these things somewhat easy to upgrade. Just imagining being able to switch visible spectrum has me wanting the future version for myself.
This.
Not knocking the achievement - a journey of 1000 miles begins with a single step, and all, however...
Wake me when we get to the enhancement phase; I always wanted to be able to switch between vision modes like in Predator.
The wrist blades and mini-nuke would be bitchin', too, although that might be asking a bit much...
There's nothing wrong with that mentality. People, generally, can be very intelligent about a great number of issues. However "The Public", as in the mass collection of people, is generally very stupid.
You do realize that you are part of "the Public," right?
Do you think yourself stupid? If so, nevermind. If not, what makes you different than me, or him, or her, or anyone else you don't know from Adam?
Yes, I know as group size increases, collective intellect drops exponentially, but we're not talking about some sort of National Convention here, we're talking about individuals.
Modded negatively because (a) you didn't read through and understand the motive for the assault on Steve Mann (thus you are spreading FUD), and (b) you are trying to justify your ignorance with hearsay. Provide facts or state your case as opinion or just STFU.
Or it could be based on a nuanced study of capital flows to IP thugs, and the lack of investment in other human resources (people), which in turn harms the ROI on other human labor (farming, manufacturing). Thereby reinforcing a class system in which people are unable to escape.
Yea, no.
Look, it's perfectly reasonable to claim that the current iteration of IP/copyright/patent law is fucked, namely because it is. But that is by no means a blanket condemnation of the tools themselves; in fact, to claim the tools are the problem is to show an abject lack of critical thinking ability, as any child could tell you it's not the hammer which ultimately drives the nail, but the man holding the hammer. Yes, the system is oft abused by powerful groups, but that doesn't mean the system itself in inoperable - there are also instances, such as that brought forth by TFA, in which IP/copyright/patent law actually does work to protect the artist/inventor from whom the product originated.
Hardly as subjective as your subjective analysis of "he probably just wants free stuff".
Funny, I don't recall making that statement... *re-reads previous post* Nope, nothing even close to the assumption you've made here. In fact, you're the only one who has broached the idea of wanting something for nothing... perhaps you yourself are unaware of your actual agenda? One has to wonder why a person would be so adamantly opposed to the mere concept of IP, especially when discussing a rare instance in which IP law actually works out in the best interest of the creating artist...
What's your angle here? If you're not attempting to posit the idea that you should have access to other people's creative works without payment, then what are you trying to say?
I am confused. This is a case of IP law working very well. Are you suggesting that this person should receive no payment for their music?
I believe this to be a case of a person making a generalization based upon what they perceive to be popular opinion (Ugh think copyright/IP/patents BAD, Ugh no need know reason why), with zero regard for reality or logical thought processes. Common practice on the 'net these days, what with the apparent obsession with peer acceptance and approval as a means of self-realization.
Otherwise, one would assume they would have realized, prior to posting, that the concept of "not in the best interest of society" is a completely subjective opinion, not fact, and as such, is non sequitur at best and a blatant straw-man argument at worst.
One could posit the argument that the right to free speech is "not in the best interest of society," because bigots use that right as a platform for spreading hate, but you won't see any rational folks calling for its repeal.
No - the problem is that mentality right there. The pervasiveness of the idea that "the Public is stupid" and therefore undeserving of honest, open government, is exactly why we have the dishonest, corrupt, secretive government you see today.
Try giving people credit for once, instead of just instantly assuming that everyone [who doesn't share your particular point of view] is an abject moron - they will surprise you with their intelligence, given the opportunity to express it.
I'm always amazed at how smart individual hillbillies can be, once you get them to actually think for themselves and stop parroting FOX News talking points. I assume the same can be said for coastal elites, save the substitution of "MSNBC" in place of "FOX News"
Slashdot Mirror
I'd go a step farther and say that nothing should be patented which can "infect" someone else's possessions and thereby change that possession's ownership. For example, Monsanto and their piracy through cross pollenation.
Seconded.
It's socially acceptable to hate rednecks, conservatives, and people who work with their hands for a living. Didn't you get the memo?
No, sorry, not a member of Douchebags Anonymous, so that one never made it to my inbox.
I was thinking more along the lines of long-term un/underemployed "hackers" subsidized by the state.
A converse way of think about it would be a professor who is subsidized to design (through salary support and funding for consumables).
I think the distraction of a job or the necessity to make "a return on an investment" will stifle monumental innovation and promote incremental, albeit still important, refinements.
2 obvious problems:
"State subsidization," i.e. unemployment benefits, are limited in amount and duration; unemployment checks barely pay the essential bills, if that, and for an extremely limited time frame. Also, unless the person receiving those benefits makes a concerted effort to find gainful employment, their support will be removed. The whole process is gamed towards forcing those receiving benefits toward re-entering the workforce, and rightfully so - there's no legitimate reason why I, a gainfully employed, tax paying citizen, should have my tax dollars subsidize someone else's hobby farm. FTR, yes, I feel that way about pretty much every government subsidy given out these days, since the vast majority are completely unnecessary, and only serve to shift the financial burden from the profiteer to the public.
Of course, there's always teh possibility that I've completely misinterpreted your statement regarding "long-term un/underemployed "hackers" subsidized by the state..."
Will it run on bio deisel "out of the box" or will it require a conversion kit or add on package? Bio deisel would make it "greener" and might be a selling point.
Pretty much every diesel engine will run off used, filtered vegetable oil "right out of the box," as seen on Mythbusters
Granted, I wouldn't recommend doing it regularly (and if you live in cold climates, you have to pre-heat the oil to account for gelling issues), but as proof-of-concept, yea, it totally works.
That is also one of the hypothesis, but we'd like first to try if we can avoid wasting the original engine of the SUV. If we can put it to good use, better. If not, we'll take a new approach. R&D is fun.
Dude, you can ALWAYS find a "good" use for an old engine!
Swapping engines isn't really all that time intensive, provided you have the right facilities and tools available.
The real cost will be in re-engineering the engine compartment to fit a drivetrain setup that the vehicle was never meant to carry. Considering that this is a modern SUV, I would estimate at least 7-10 hours of retrofitting work (i.e., cutting and rewelding the frame, engine mounts, altering the firewall for the modified drivetrain, etc.), after the countless hours that will be required to engineer precisely how the retrofit will proceed.
IMO, they would be wiser to choose an older, "mini" SUV, like a Geo Tracker or Suzuki Samurai - rather inexpensive and easy to obtain, smaller and lighter body, and of course, far less BS under the hood to remove/modify.
So the sport is appealing for the same reasons that gladiators were appealing to citizens of Rome.
?
Not really sure what you're trying to get at, aside from the obvious point that audiences, in general, are rather bloodthirsty... but that's not why people like Mario Andretti choose to be race car drivers.
They do it for love of the sport, not to elicit a certain reaction from onlookers.
I wonder if a famous driver didn't occasionally die in a fiery crash would the sport be as popular as it is today.
Probably, otherwise there wouldn't be such a thing as amateur leagues.
/. to grasp...
I don't quite understand why having a passion for driving is such a difficult concept for a lot of people on
If the cars they are controlling at the console are actually real cars running in a real track, is the driver still playing a video game?
Yes. Unless they are in direct control of the vehicle, feeling every pebble on the road, the g-forces endured when cornering, accelerating, and braking, the rush of air over the cockpit (in the case of open-top racers such as F1), etc., they are not driving. Don't take my word for it, head to your local track and ask the pros there, they'll tell you pretty much the same thing.
Following the same logic of yours, the military personal controlling the real unmanned drones flying over Afghanistan and dropping real bombs there - are just "playing video games".
You don't seem to get it: the type of person who makes a lifetime career out of driving, does so because they love driving and all that comes with it. The strawman of military drones is non sequitur to the point, as killing people has nothing to do with why professional race car drivers choose driving race cars as their profession.
Snap a photo of someone with a smartphone, analyze an image against a database of social media or Flickr pics and, voila, you have a name. From there, it's easy to get someone's age, hometown, interests, news coverage, you name it.
Finally a solution for stalking pretty girls in bars ;-)
FTFY.
Wait... anyone else have a sudden feeling of deja vu ?
Nothing prevents the unmanned cars to still be driven by humans. If aircraft can already be driven remotely, why cars wouldn't?
Professional race car drivers do not become professional race car drivers so they can sit at a console playing a video game.
Today you can order a XPS13 off dell.com which will come with Microsoft pre-loaded. I hate Windows as much as the next guy, but if they're bundling a $250B company with each XPS laptop purchased, even *I* want to get in on this promotion!
... hadn't thought of it that way....
Truth in advertising, bitches! You owe me a software giant!
i should note, for on-topic's sake, that the dell laptop i'm writing this on -is- running ubuntu 12.04, but I put it on there, not them.
from the Project Sputnik FAQ:
You and everyone else, apparently.
I'm all for gadgets, but why not just take the Catan board from the shelf and play?
What about playing in a car? It seems to me that virtual pieces being displayed on a LCD screen would be less prone to jostling then the real board.
Fair enough, although I myself have always been a fan of 'road-trip bingo'
Or what about on a camping trip where compactness is a desired feature? A single tablet could hold alot more board games then you'd normally have room for in the car.
Board games (most of them, anyway) don't require constant power/charging. IMO, if you're in constant need of an electric source, you're not really camping.
TrollFail -
You forgot to mention MyCleanPC
Aside from rendering that police force obsolete? Not a thing except maybe killing a bunch of police officers. The military is the elephant in this room not the domestic police force. A pop gun can mess up a squad car pretty well. It's a bit less effective against a 62 metric ton tank or a supersonic fighter jet.
Fortunately, our troops swear an oath to uphold and defend the U.S. Constitution, not the government it authorizes (unlike the police, who swear no such oath).
Why do you think our military is spread thin across the globe, doing bullshit police work, while the local police become more and more militarized? It's all a part of the plan...
How the hell these guys still have customers???
"My favorite part is where you pay per-device and get nothing in return"
Surely you get connection to the network and unlimited calls/text for the $30-$45 per device (even if you assume you no extra data because you could have used it all on the first device).
Seems reasonable if an unlimited call/text plan is normally $70 for a single device.
$40/mo bill for services + $45/mo premium for phone ownership = $85/mo (for a single device)
This is to the exclusion of all the excise fees, taxes, and other miscellaneous bullshit telcos charge customers; I foresee a single device costing well over $100/mo on this new plan.
Every year, a new version will come out with less invasive surgery, better resolution, color... night mode... I hope they make these things somewhat easy to upgrade. Just imagining being able to switch visible spectrum has me wanting the future version for myself.
This.
Not knocking the achievement - a journey of 1000 miles begins with a single step, and all, however...
Wake me when we get to the enhancement phase; I always wanted to be able to switch between vision modes like in Predator.
The wrist blades and mini-nuke would be bitchin', too, although that might be asking a bit much...
There's nothing wrong with that mentality. People, generally, can be very intelligent about a great number of issues. However "The Public", as in the mass collection of people, is generally very stupid.
You do realize that you are part of "the Public," right?
Do you think yourself stupid? If so, nevermind. If not, what makes you different than me, or him, or her, or anyone else you don't know from Adam?
Yes, I know as group size increases, collective intellect drops exponentially, but we're not talking about some sort of National Convention here, we're talking about individuals.
Modded negatively because (a) you didn't read through and understand the motive for the assault on Steve Mann (thus you are spreading FUD), and (b) you are trying to justify your ignorance with hearsay. Provide facts or state your case as opinion or just STFU.
Sayeth the chickenshit AC.
Or it could be based on a nuanced study of capital flows to IP thugs, and the lack of investment in other human resources (people), which in turn harms the ROI on other human labor (farming, manufacturing). Thereby reinforcing a class system in which people are unable to escape.
Yea, no.
Look, it's perfectly reasonable to claim that the current iteration of IP/copyright/patent law is fucked, namely because it is. But that is by no means a blanket condemnation of the tools themselves; in fact, to claim the tools are the problem is to show an abject lack of critical thinking ability, as any child could tell you it's not the hammer which ultimately drives the nail, but the man holding the hammer. Yes, the system is oft abused by powerful groups, but that doesn't mean the system itself in inoperable - there are also instances, such as that brought forth by TFA, in which IP/copyright/patent law actually does work to protect the artist/inventor from whom the product originated.
Hardly as subjective as your subjective analysis of "he probably just wants free stuff".
Funny, I don't recall making that statement... *re-reads previous post* Nope, nothing even close to the assumption you've made here. In fact, you're the only one who has broached the idea of wanting something for nothing... perhaps you yourself are unaware of your actual agenda? One has to wonder why a person would be so adamantly opposed to the mere concept of IP, especially when discussing a rare instance in which IP law actually works out in the best interest of the creating artist...
What's your angle here? If you're not attempting to posit the idea that you should have access to other people's creative works without payment, then what are you trying to say?
Am I the only one who thinks this is completely reasonable and acceptable?
Well, to paraphrase pretty much every cop who's every wanted to search me...
If he's done nothing wrong, then he should have no problem with us going through his stuff, right?
I am confused. This is a case of IP law working very well. Are you suggesting that this person should receive no payment for their music?
I believe this to be a case of a person making a generalization based upon what they perceive to be popular opinion (Ugh think copyright/IP/patents BAD, Ugh no need know reason why), with zero regard for reality or logical thought processes. Common practice on the 'net these days, what with the apparent obsession with peer acceptance and approval as a means of self-realization.
Otherwise, one would assume they would have realized, prior to posting, that the concept of "not in the best interest of society" is a completely subjective opinion, not fact, and as such, is non sequitur at best and a blatant straw-man argument at worst.
One could posit the argument that the right to free speech is "not in the best interest of society," because bigots use that right as a platform for spreading hate, but you won't see any rational folks calling for its repeal.
The problem is the the Public is really stupid.
No - the problem is that mentality right there. The pervasiveness of the idea that "the Public is stupid" and therefore undeserving of honest, open government, is exactly why we have the dishonest, corrupt, secretive government you see today.
Try giving people credit for once, instead of just instantly assuming that everyone [who doesn't share your particular point of view] is an abject moron - they will surprise you with their intelligence, given the opportunity to express it.
I'm always amazed at how smart individual hillbillies can be, once you get them to actually think for themselves and stop parroting FOX News talking points. I assume the same can be said for coastal elites, save the substitution of "MSNBC" in place of "FOX News"
He's a career politician, what did you expect?
FTFY.
Only a blind fool would think there's any real difference between D and R, aside from their location in the seating chart.