No doubt by "making babies" he was refering to teenage pregnancy. The babies made via teenage pregnancy tend to be a burden on society, even moreso than thieving. Since "thieving" was on the list, I would argue that "making babies" should be as well.
Does Australia have a Libertarian party? I'm thinking that one would come in handy right about now--it would give the aussies a chance to vote into office someone who actually cares about their freedoms.
"'Even the best code still has bugs in it' I've never been able to crash helloworld.c."
Uh, I wouldn't refer to helloworld.c as "best"... I think the grandparent was refering to the fact that larger (that is, more complex) programs are more likely to have more bugs in them.
"What crime is that then?" Hello? Where have you been for the past few years? (Obviously not reading/. given your uid.) The grandparent is almost certainly refering to the DMCA, and even though it doesn't quite cover the simple breaking of encryption, it can almost certainly be "reinterpreted" to cover that.
Won't these things be kept at room temperature most of the time? (I grant that the marketroid's logic was flawed, but I don't think temperature variations will pose much of a threat.)
I think what we need is a "Volunteer Hackers" site where users could post their requests for help, and programmers willing to help could see what is needed.
I may be wrong, but wasn't this the exact idea behind SourceForge (or perhaps Mozilla's bug tracking system)?
Hopefully, if someone is smart enough to come up with "very subtle" bug that can be hidden in a modification "that's too good for the Apache project to pass up" that allows one to root a box, then that person is smart enough to see that such an action has very little effect on the universe as a whole. Someone that smart is literally a genius, and no genius wants to be swept away by time without leaving some sort of mark in history. Rooted boxes do not qualify as such a mark, but are rather a small wound which would heal without a trace.
Of course, if such a person is both intelligent and evil, then your scenario is just one particular battle in the ongoing war against good and evil. There is no way to "prevent" this scenario from occuring except through rigorous testing of patches and public denunciation of evil.
For those interested in the Singularity
on
True Names
·
· Score: 5, Interesting
I should note that the Singularity refers not just to the creation of greater-than-human intelligence, but to what happens when such intelligence is let loose in the world and begins to enhance its own mind. From http://sysopmind.com/singularity.html:
((begin quote)) If computing speeds double every two years,
what happens when computer-based AIs are doing the research?
Computing speed doubles every two years.
Computing speed doubles every two years of work.
Computing speed doubles every two subjective years of work.
Two years after Artificial Intelligences reach human equivalence, their speed doubles. One year later, their speed doubles again.
Six months - three months - 1.5 months... Singularity.
((end quote; emphasis in original))
We all realize, of course, how bad an idea it is to base important decisions (such as the allocation of millions of dollars) on statistics such as internet polls. My question is this: does a company that bases important decisions on such skewed information, deserve to survive?
(Yes, I realize that we heavily rely upon companies that use such biased statistics. I think it would be a good idea, then, to find alternatives to companies whose future is doomed by stupidity.)
Do you believe that it is even possible for any kind of government--be it theocratic, totalitarian, or democratic--to coexist on peaceful terms with the existence of individual and corporate privacy and secure communications?
It seems to me as if Katz's ranting is misplaced. He argues about the evils of collected information, showing why the collection is a bad thing by showing what is done with the information. Can't information be used in good ways?
My point is that information isn't necessarily bad; what's bad is how it's put to use. Katz complaines about how the information is used; instead of ranting against the information itself, why not criticize those who misuse information?
Can you say "skyscraper support beams"? We may not have this before nanotech, but once we have the ability to place carbon atoms exactly where we want to (on a large scale), expect to see 500-story towers that many of its inhabitants would never need leave. I just hope they outlaw dropping things from the roof...
If copy protection ever became a nonoptional part of hard drives, would you support potentially illegal efforts to circumvent the copy protection? That is, to what extent will you defend the principle of truly free information, vis-a-vis the copy protection of the MPAA et al?
In Chapter 9 of Drexler's Engines of Creation, the author states, "It is a common myth that freezing bursts cells; in fact, freezing damage is more subtle than this - so subtle that it often does no lasting harm. Frozen
sperm regularly produces healthy babies. Some human beings now alive have survived being frozen solid at liquid nitrogen temperatures - when they were early embryos."
I personally recommend a read of the entire book (it's all online), but this chapter seems to have the most to do with the discussion.
Don't forget that we can only bring back those species that we have a DNA sample for. For example, the dodo bird was long extinct before we even knew about DNA.
Also, while we may be able to bring back a species, it will be very difficult to recreate the natural habitat of the species, if that has been destroyed as well. It is one thing to see an animal in a zoo; it is quite another to watch it in the wild.
If nothing else, this will give Joe Ordinary a way to use a tool that's becoming incresingly necessary in a world incresingly dominated by groups like the MPAA. I've used PGP, and the learning curve is a bit too steep for many of the people who truly need it. To have an important tool is one thing; to make it readily usable by the masses is quite another, and I believe encrytion tools have suffered from this for far too long. After long last, widespread encryption is becoming more of a reality.
Slashdot Mirror
No doubt by "making babies" he was refering to teenage pregnancy. The babies made via teenage pregnancy tend to be a burden on society, even moreso than thieving. Since "thieving" was on the list, I would argue that "making babies" should be as well.
Does Australia have a Libertarian party? I'm thinking that one would come in handy right about now--it would give the aussies a chance to vote into office someone who actually cares about their freedoms.
"Actually, it makes senses"
Shouldn't that be sense?
Am I the only one who noticed the eye of Sauron in the background of those pictures?
"'Even the best code still has bugs in it' I've never been able to crash helloworld.c."
Uh, I wouldn't refer to helloworld.c as "best"... I think the grandparent was refering to the fact that larger (that is, more complex) programs are more likely to have more bugs in them.
If "micro" is a million times bigger than "pico", does that mean that you needed a million floppies to hold MicroBSD? *rimshot*
"What crime is that then?" Hello? Where have you been for the past few years? (Obviously not reading /. given your uid.) The grandparent is almost certainly refering to the DMCA, and even though it doesn't quite cover the simple breaking of encryption, it can almost certainly be "reinterpreted" to cover that.
"A hypothetical consumer application might be to control the temperature that a bread product is grilled at..."
:-)
How fitting that you should mention that, given your nick.
You make it sound as if geeks and suits have something to gain from each other. Oh, the horrors!
Won't these things be kept at room temperature most of the time? (I grant that the marketroid's logic was flawed, but I don't think temperature variations will pose much of a threat.)
Your comment reminded me of John Perry Barlow's "A Declaration of the Independence of Cyberspace".
I think what we need is a "Volunteer Hackers" site where users could post their requests for help, and programmers willing to help could see what is needed.
I may be wrong, but wasn't this the exact idea behind SourceForge (or perhaps Mozilla's bug tracking system)?
Hopefully, if someone is smart enough to come up with "very subtle" bug that can be hidden in a modification "that's too good for the Apache project to pass up" that allows one to root a box, then that person is smart enough to see that such an action has very little effect on the universe as a whole. Someone that smart is literally a genius, and no genius wants to be swept away by time without leaving some sort of mark in history. Rooted boxes do not qualify as such a mark, but are rather a small wound which would heal without a trace.
Of course, if such a person is both intelligent and evil, then your scenario is just one particular battle in the ongoing war against good and evil. There is no way to "prevent" this scenario from occuring except through rigorous testing of patches and public denunciation of evil.
I should note that the Singularity refers not just to the creation of greater-than-human intelligence, but to what happens when such intelligence is let loose in the world and begins to enhance its own mind. From http://sysopmind.com/singularity.html:
... Singularity.
((begin quote))
If computing speeds double every two years, what happens when computer-based AIs are doing the research?
Computing speed doubles every two years.
Computing speed doubles every two years of work.
Computing speed doubles every two subjective years of work.
Two years after Artificial Intelligences reach human equivalence, their speed doubles. One year later, their speed doubles again.
Six months - three months - 1.5 months
((end quote; emphasis in original))
If you're still interested, check out http://www.singinst.org.
We all realize, of course, how bad an idea it is to base important decisions (such as the allocation of millions of dollars) on statistics such as internet polls. My question is this: does a company that bases important decisions on such skewed information, deserve to survive?
(Yes, I realize that we heavily rely upon companies that use such biased statistics. I think it would be a good idea, then, to find alternatives to companies whose future is doomed by stupidity.)
Do you believe that it is even possible for any kind of government--be it theocratic, totalitarian, or democratic--to coexist on peaceful terms with the existence of individual and corporate privacy and secure communications?
It seems to me as if Katz's ranting is misplaced. He argues about the evils of collected information, showing why the collection is a bad thing by showing what is done with the information. Can't information be used in good ways?
My point is that information isn't necessarily bad; what's bad is how it's put to use. Katz complaines about how the information is used; instead of ranting against the information itself, why not criticize those who misuse information?
Can you say "skyscraper support beams"? We may not have this before nanotech, but once we have the ability to place carbon atoms exactly where we want to (on a large scale), expect to see 500-story towers that many of its inhabitants would never need leave. I just hope they outlaw dropping things from the roof...
If copy protection ever became a nonoptional part of hard drives, would you support potentially illegal efforts to circumvent the copy protection? That is, to what extent will you defend the principle of truly free information, vis-a-vis the copy protection of the MPAA et al?
In Chapter 9 of Drexler's Engines of Creation, the author states, "It is a common myth that freezing bursts cells; in fact, freezing damage is more subtle than this - so subtle that it often does no lasting harm. Frozen sperm regularly produces healthy babies. Some human beings now alive have survived being frozen solid at liquid nitrogen temperatures - when they were early embryos."
I personally recommend a read of the entire book (it's all online), but this chapter seems to have the most to do with the discussion.
It seems like the government is actually starting to care about human rights. Imagine that.
Don't forget that we can only bring back those species that we have a DNA sample for. For example, the dodo bird was long extinct before we even knew about DNA.
Also, while we may be able to bring back a species, it will be very difficult to recreate the natural habitat of the species, if that has been destroyed as well. It is one thing to see an animal in a zoo; it is quite another to watch it in the wild.
Methinks there were planning to sell the chip at a price identical to that of an AMD chip twice as fast. :-)
If nothing else, this will give Joe Ordinary a way to use a tool that's becoming incresingly necessary in a world incresingly dominated by groups like the MPAA. I've used PGP, and the learning curve is a bit too steep for many of the people who truly need it. To have an important tool is one thing; to make it readily usable by the masses is quite another, and I believe encrytion tools have suffered from this for far too long. After long last, widespread encryption is becoming more of a reality.