While I've yet to enter college, my thoughts on seeing this were of how their findings along the way actually could be used. They're doing everything they can to reduce weight in a small hpv aircraft, so they may make advances there. They're testing different kinds of rotor shapes, which is practical for this application, which provides the best lift etc. for two, and I'm sure there's quite a bit of aerodynamic testing and experimenting as well. If this project doesn't lead to at least one advance in technology, I'll be greatly surprised. That said, there may of course be a better place to exert themselves, but this project also has its merits.
Except that calibers have never been measured with imperial measurements, as far as I know. While I'm no gun junkie, I've never heard a 9mm called a 0.35in, nor a 12.7mm called a 0.5in. While neatness is appreciated, accepted/common syntax comes first.
After seeing so many brilliant ideas(all posted Anon of course) in this comment section, I began to wonder(I'm 17 and homeschooled, so I don't know); is it actually normal for people to consider their own mastery to be above that of the team placed in charge of such dismal situations? Is this level of arrogance not uncommon? I'm honestly asking this question, no trolling intended.
Not only that, but also think of the pride element. If someone said you had cheated them of X amount of money, most people's first reaction is to deny it and go all out to prove them wrong(whether or not they're telling the truth).
I don't really see how Wikileaks is an example against the US. Censoring the internet at the government's whim is a good long distance from attacking a website leaking government and/or military secrets and documents. And the torrent sites, the warez sites - there is once again a reason, even if it isn't the best. If you've used any of them before, you know full well they're distributing illegal copies of programs and media. While it's not the government's job to police the web par se, many of the claimed domains were in direct violation of the law. It's true that they needed to come down, but who's job it is to bring them down is a question that leaves many without answers(myself included - if anyone can elaborate or correct me further, please do).
That last part is always the most important. One of my siblings tried to download a game just earlier on a different computer, I'm still trying to dig out the trojan. Even if I've got NOD32 running properly and ports properly secured, that one click will break down any effort made. Wish me luck...
Fair enough. Though I'm decent at protecting Windows computers, I know very little beyond what I've already said in regards to Linux vs. virus'. Can anybody link to a place I can learn?
OS and setup notwithstanding, it's entirely possible for you(and yes, even the l33t3s7 of beings) to be tagged by a botnet. People speak the truth when they say that only an disconnected computer is completely safe.
Alright, badly formed and illogical sarcasm will now be dropped. I have a question to ask, and here it is - I used to design web templates, and have a friend still in the business. Say I and/or Titus(friend aforementioned) make a plain old html template, and start selling it to customers. Not long after beginning sales, we notice that it is no longer selling as well as it initially did. After doing some research, we find that someone has copied the template line for line, and is distributing it to the public for free. Have they stolen our work, and thereby profits, or have the pirated it?
In that case, he intended to distribute it by giving it to you free of charge. In the second case, you did not take it. Don't try to derail a conversation with false logic.
If someone puts an item up for sale, regardless of its form, and does not intend for it to be distributed any other way than by sale, and you take it without paying, it is theft. Taking something that isn't 'free' without paying for it is stealing whether it's a digital item or food at a restaurant.
The critical flaw in your line of thinking here is that you've taken a simplistic view, claiming that there's no "detectable" loss of profit, money or property. As far as that statement reaches, it is true. However, just imagine trying to calculate your losses. Can you know for sure how many have pirated that software, how many would have actually bought it had there been no pirating alternative? Of course not. So you're right, there's no detectable loss, in a sense. I normally wouldn't mind this sort of broken argument, but its supporting conclusions like this that give pirates and thieves some small amount of motivation. Which just means that those of us who pay for software have to jump through extra hoops to keep it activated.
Trespassing[to shorten your commute] does not gain extra time, it conserves the time you already have. You have stolen nothing. However, you have trespassed. Just because you find some similar aspects in two different things doesn't make them the same.
Hold the fuck on. What you've just said is that you're okay with more deaths and/or injuries, so long as it's a humans fault. If that is correct, that decision is a source of danger to others - but you're still okay with it, because it'll be your own fault. In other words, you're presenting the exact same illogical reasoning that this article is addressing. Is it better to have more accidents and a human at fault, or less accidents and robotics at fault? POV regardless, it is absurd to cling to the former option. Uncanny Valley indeed.
Would that still hold true if you copied a paragraph from his paper word-for-word? I'm asking, not being sarcastic, because I want to know what your feeling is on the subject. The newspaper, Long Island, copied his work directly in one paragraph, though altered it later when he called them out on it.
Slashdot Mirror
I'd say 90% of the time, it's an operator error that causes something to break. I doubt anyone here would contradict me.
While I've yet to enter college, my thoughts on seeing this were of how their findings along the way actually could be used. They're doing everything they can to reduce weight in a small hpv aircraft, so they may make advances there. They're testing different kinds of rotor shapes, which is practical for this application, which provides the best lift etc. for two, and I'm sure there's quite a bit of aerodynamic testing and experimenting as well. If this project doesn't lead to at least one advance in technology, I'll be greatly surprised. That said, there may of course be a better place to exert themselves, but this project also has its merits.
Except that calibers have never been measured with imperial measurements, as far as I know. While I'm no gun junkie, I've never heard a 9mm called a 0.35in, nor a 12.7mm called a 0.5in. While neatness is appreciated, accepted/common syntax comes first.
FTFY.
What's mine say?
After seeing so many brilliant ideas(all posted Anon of course) in this comment section, I began to wonder(I'm 17 and homeschooled, so I don't know); is it actually normal for people to consider their own mastery to be above that of the team placed in charge of such dismal situations? Is this level of arrogance not uncommon? I'm honestly asking this question, no trolling intended.
What about two Taekwondos and a kung fu?
Clearly, he doesn't have the experience of 1000 hackers.
Not only that, but also think of the pride element. If someone said you had cheated them of X amount of money, most people's first reaction is to deny it and go all out to prove them wrong(whether or not they're telling the truth).
I don't really see how Wikileaks is an example against the US. Censoring the internet at the government's whim is a good long distance from attacking a website leaking government and/or military secrets and documents. And the torrent sites, the warez sites - there is once again a reason, even if it isn't the best. If you've used any of them before, you know full well they're distributing illegal copies of programs and media. While it's not the government's job to police the web par se, many of the claimed domains were in direct violation of the law. It's true that they needed to come down, but who's job it is to bring them down is a question that leaves many without answers(myself included - if anyone can elaborate or correct me further, please do).
That last part is always the most important. One of my siblings tried to download a game just earlier on a different computer, I'm still trying to dig out the trojan. Even if I've got NOD32 running properly and ports properly secured, that one click will break down any effort made. Wish me luck...
Fair enough. Though I'm decent at protecting Windows computers, I know very little beyond what I've already said in regards to Linux vs. virus'. Can anybody link to a place I can learn?
OS and setup notwithstanding, it's entirely possible for you(and yes, even the l33t3s7 of beings) to be tagged by a botnet. People speak the truth when they say that only an disconnected computer is completely safe.
Alright, badly formed and illogical sarcasm will now be dropped. I have a question to ask, and here it is - I used to design web templates, and have a friend still in the business. Say I and/or Titus(friend aforementioned) make a plain old html template, and start selling it to customers. Not long after beginning sales, we notice that it is no longer selling as well as it initially did. After doing some research, we find that someone has copied the template line for line, and is distributing it to the public for free. Have they stolen our work, and thereby profits, or have the pirated it?
I'm saddened by the fact that this post employs better grammar and spelling than most constructive posts on this site.
So all I have to do is copy the credit card? Thanks for the tip!
In that case, he intended to distribute it by giving it to you free of charge. In the second case, you did not take it. Don't try to derail a conversation with false logic.
If someone puts an item up for sale, regardless of its form, and does not intend for it to be distributed any other way than by sale, and you take it without paying, it is theft. Taking something that isn't 'free' without paying for it is stealing whether it's a digital item or food at a restaurant.
The critical flaw in your line of thinking here is that you've taken a simplistic view, claiming that there's no "detectable" loss of profit, money or property. As far as that statement reaches, it is true. However, just imagine trying to calculate your losses. Can you know for sure how many have pirated that software, how many would have actually bought it had there been no pirating alternative? Of course not. So you're right, there's no detectable loss, in a sense. I normally wouldn't mind this sort of broken argument, but its supporting conclusions like this that give pirates and thieves some small amount of motivation. Which just means that those of us who pay for software have to jump through extra hoops to keep it activated.
Trespassing[to shorten your commute] does not gain extra time, it conserves the time you already have. You have stolen nothing. However, you have trespassed.
Just because you find some similar aspects in two different things doesn't make them the same.
I think I'm following suit. Your actions expressed a beautiful regard for all things proper.
Holy elegant English Batman. I never thought I'd see the day I learned something solid from Slashdot. Thanks Dtmos.
Agreed, but the immediate association in the mind of someone who holds the above AC's opinion is "machines/robots/computers".
Hold the fuck on. What you've just said is that you're okay with more deaths and/or injuries, so long as it's a humans fault. If that is correct, that decision is a source of danger to others - but you're still okay with it, because it'll be your own fault. In other words, you're presenting the exact same illogical reasoning that this article is addressing. Is it better to have more accidents and a human at fault, or less accidents and robotics at fault? POV regardless, it is absurd to cling to the former option. Uncanny Valley indeed.
Would that still hold true if you copied a paragraph from his paper word-for-word? I'm asking, not being sarcastic, because I want to know what your feeling is on the subject. The newspaper, Long Island, copied his work directly in one paragraph, though altered it later when he called them out on it.
Interestingly, the article says much the same. If you're going to get pissed off about an article, shouldn't you at least read it first?