The top bidder is now "mtgocards," with a whopping $20,100.00! The buyer seems to have some good feedback, and in fact just recently received praises of "Excellent customer!!!!!! In my top 10!! A+++++" after purchasing 50,000 pieces of cut leather for $17.50.
But then the issue becomes the fact that the same song can be ripped by multiple people and produce the *same* md5 - assuming they use the same encoding algorithm and parameters.
Slightly OT, but I was just wondering, has anybody ever suggested having a "click yes if you have the rights to this material" notice before downloading on P2P software, as a way for those sharing content to cover their butts? I doubt if it would hold up very well legally, but it seems to be the strategy of many dubious mp3 and rom hosting web sites.
The argument then becomes, "Yes, I was sharing that song - but only for those people who already own the CD. If somebody made an illegal copy, then it's not my fault. They should have known better."
These are definitely interesting ideas. Just to further discuss a couple of your points:
How's memory going to work, when accumulated experience overwhelms the brains ability to cross-reference it all?
and
OTOH, If the oldsters can stay biologically young, how will the "really" young (in years) compete with the infinitely smarter pseudoyoung competition?
These seem to be at odds with one another - can one acquire infinite knowledge if one lives for an infinitely long time? Obviously not, as the amount of information that can be stored in your head is limited by the structure of your brain, or - since the operation of the brain is still not very well understood - at least by the laws of physics.
So, the question becomes "how much knowledge can a person store in their brain, and how well can that person reference all of that information?" It's really a hard question to answer, but I think it's a moot point. Why? Because the younger humans will be genetically superior, possibly to the point of becoming post-human. Either that or they'll be non-biological machines.
Assuming that the old farts allow machines more adept than themselves to be created!
I agree that keeping our fancy biological bodies alive for extended periods of time is far beyond current medical science. We're just too damn complicated.
Perhaps in a few generations people will be able to live out extremely long lives within the body that they're born with, but certainly not us. It seems far more likely that, within the next 100 years, we'll be able to transfer our "brain state" into a machine, and then live on indefinitely either a) as a robot or b) within a simulation. Either way, your original body is probably going to deteriorate. Stick a sample in the freezer - maybe you can clone it someday.
Uh, basically all of the material in your body is constantly being replaced. You have a lot more carbon in your body now than you did when you were born, so where did it come from? You ate it.
The material that you are made of does not matter. This carbon atom or that one, it's all the same. Your structure - the way you arrange those atoms - is what counts. You are information.
Come and play my free role playing game. $1 US buys you 1 gold coin. Go find some treasure and you can redeem it for $.70 per coin!
Can't find any treasure? I guess not enough "in game money" has been created by other players yet. Eventually, enough people will be killed by monsters that the monsters will hoard their treasure in a cave somewhere and you can find it. In the meantime, buy some more money so you can trade it to the NPC shopkeepers for weapons to defend yourself from monsters.
Seriously, this might be a good business model for a game. As many others have pointed out, though, security would be very difficult.
"The mice will also have a feature that lets people switch between open applications by pressing down on the scroll wheel instead of using the keyboard."
It looks like you can still use it to click. Hopefully this just means that the mouse driver is mapping the middle button to alt+tab, and hopefully I can turn this "feature" off. I would die if I couldn't click my mouse wheel to upen links in new tabs in Mozilla.
So you're saying that if someone makes a machine that works the same way that your body does, that machine is not alive?
What does that make you?
Sorry to break this to you, since you obviously haven't realized it yet, but *you* are a machine. A very fancy machine, but a machine nonetheless. So is my cat.
Actually, this is kind of an interesting point - corporations can be described a virtual machines - a set of rules carried out by human processors (not that corporations are even close to being trans-human - they're probably closest to being expert systems, and nowhere near being self-aware). These machines indeed do have many of the same rights that individuals do, both legally and politically.
I disagree with the statement about ethics, though, as some corporations *can* follow an ethical set of "rules" - although it certainly isn't the norm. Not surprising, since the rules are optimized for making money, as making money is the feature that is selected for in a competive market.
Yes, it's absolutely true. The Democrats are just as bad as the Republicans - they all act like a bunch of damn politicians.
Of course, all politicians will always act like politicians, and the only way to keep them in line is to exert pressure. American citizens need to get off their asses and start harassing their representatives on a regular basis. These people work for us, you know!
Most importantly of all, we all need to start voting, dammit. VOTE! VOTE! I don't care what your opinion is - voice it by VOTING! Please!
First of all, they're going to have a list of the people who are the least likely to respond to telemarketing calls, which means every call is very likely to be a waste of money for the caller.
Secondly, most people who proactively sign up for the "do not call list" are going to be extremely pissed at *anyone* who calls them with a telephone solicitation. Exemptions be damned. Don't ever call me again - no, I don't care what kind of loophole you have. I'll never, ever do business with/make a contribution to your business/organization. Ever. You are now on *my* list.
[ranting] You want what? You want me to donate to your program/institution that should be funded by my government? You want me to take up the slack because schools/fire departments/whatever aren't getting enough funding? Yeah, like I'm going to perpetuate the problem. [/ranting]
I don't agree that having more technology makes us unable to "operate anything without help," but I absolutely agree that I would never own a car with this ridiculous feature.
Sure, there are a lot of technological advances in automobiles that I am happy to have - cruise control, for example. However, my cruise control must be under my command! When I say "go this speed," the car must go this speed until I tell it to stop. I'll make the decisions. I'm the one with a real brain, not just some sort of expert system with limited sensory powers. I don't know how the control logic is implemented, but my opinion is the same regardless of the technology. If it were smart enough to satisfy me, then I wouldn't be driving at all, because the car would be better a better driver than I am.
Now, to be fair, this might be useful if it were simply a buzzer (that could be disabled in certain situations). Sometimes the car in front of you decides to slam on its brakes just as you're fiddling with the radio, and it's nice to have someone else in the car say "holy shit, watch out!" On the other hand, I would not be able to stand driving around with someone who hits the brakes for me whenever they feel endangered. Especially if they're not intelligent enough to understand where we are and what we're doing and why.
Yeah, those crazy self-modification folks are definitely going to pave the way for this sort of thing. There'll be a lot of Lupus Yoderboys out there once the tech is developed and filters down to the general public.
I see this quickly becoming too complicated for our legal system to handle - look at the problems we have with tech regulation right now. Of course, this is all nothing compared to future debates over the rights of conscious machines...
I don't think the division is going to be between those who can afford it and those who can't - more likely it'll be between those who want to and those who don't. I don't see anything inherently ultra-expensive about making a GM human, other than perhaps the IP rights to the mapping of DNA sequences to physical traits. But hey, it's just software. You'll be able to get over a P2P network using your wristwatch.
I agree that the only real solution to cheating is a social solution, not a technological one.
Even in the solution that you suggested there are problems - you mentioned cheaters generating new IDs, but what if a cheater simply starts using *your* ID? Now you're screwed when the cheater gets banned. Even a randomly generated valid ID might happen to be yours, but a cheater could more easily just grab an ID that's not on the "shit list" when it's sent to his/her client.
I'm sorry, but Clinton was *not* a liberal president as far as I could tell.
Of course this war is getting a lot more attention than Kosovo - look at the huge international disagreement between all of the major world powers! FGB(Former Governor Bush) and his administration made a huge public deal about getting UN approval, and then disregarded everyone else and just did whatever they wanted.
Protesting is futile, however, since we're only getting what we asked for. I wonder how many American protesters voted in the last presidential election? If we're going to let 20% of our population choose our leader, then we deserve what we get.
I actually think that a tablet would be nice to use in some situations - e.g. as a "living room" pc on a wireless network. It has to get a lot cheaper, though, and it would be nice if the screen resolution improved.
I don't know what the specs are on other tablets, but the one that AnandTech looked at had a screen resolution of 1024x768x16. 1024x768 isn't terrible, but if you're simulating notebook paper it would be a lot better to double that in each dimension (not to mention if you're going to use it for artistic purposes). In addition to the resolution, the color depth needs to be bumped up to 24 bit.
How many years will it be before I can buy one of these for under $1k with at least 1600x1200x24 resolution?
Well, I hope something like this happens. I'd be willing to buy the whole set just to get the original trilogy on DVD.
I wouldn't shell out a single buckazoid for some silly rehash on its own. Maybe after I have the originals on DVD I would consider buying the special edition(s), but certainly not before.
In fact, I believe I will refrain from purchasing Episodes 1,2, and 3 until I can get the originals.
I'm thinking that I'm waiting in vain, and it's beginning to piss me off.
I just hope that the music in the Zelda trailer is representative of the music in the actual game - since the 'cube is disc based, I don't understand why all games don't have full orchestral soundtracks. No more synthesized junk (except where it's appropriate, of course).
Metroid for the GBA looks rad, too. I'm looking forward to Metroid Prime, but the effectiveness of the first person perspective is still up in the air. Metroid Fusion, on the other hand, looks like it will provide some classic Metroid goodness.
The biggest confusion amongst those who are afraid of "evolutionists" is what they think is the motivation of the "evolutionists." Religious people base their entire worldview on a system of beliefs, which are taken completely on faith.
These people exist in a reality that is not based on the input that they receive from the world, and they can't seem to get it through their heads that evolution, along with relativity, quantum mechanics, and every other scientific theory, is NOT based on beliefs, and is NOT taken as an absolute truth. It is a theory that seems to accurately describe the universe that we live in. If someone could come up with a better theory, then that theory would be used.
Thus, there is no "agenda" by which "evolutionists" hope to stomp out belief systems - science doesn't concern itself with beliefs to begin with. What these religious people get so upset about is the fact that they're effectively being snubbed. Belief systems are not useful for anything but controlling people, so they are (for the most part) ignored by science.
This isn't stopping people from believing what they want, but it makes them seem pretty crazy when they try to convince other people to believe in a bunch of supernatural stuff, which is why they're paranoid of "evolutionists" spreading scientific thought.
Slashdot Mirror
The top bidder is now "mtgocards," with a whopping $20,100.00! The buyer seems to have some good feedback, and in fact just recently received praises of "Excellent customer!!!!!! In my top 10!! A+++++" after purchasing 50,000 pieces of cut leather for $17.50.
Damn, that's a lot of cut leather.
But then the issue becomes the fact that the same song can be ripped by multiple people and produce the *same* md5 - assuming they use the same encoding algorithm and parameters.
Slightly OT, but I was just wondering, has anybody ever suggested having a "click yes if you have the rights to this material" notice before downloading on P2P software, as a way for those sharing content to cover their butts? I doubt if it would hold up very well legally, but it seems to be the strategy of many dubious mp3 and rom hosting web sites.
The argument then becomes, "Yes, I was sharing that song - but only for those people who already own the CD. If somebody made an illegal copy, then it's not my fault. They should have known better."
and
These seem to be at odds with one another - can one acquire infinite knowledge if one lives for an infinitely long time? Obviously not, as the amount of information that can be stored in your head is limited by the structure of your brain, or - since the operation of the brain is still not very well understood - at least by the laws of physics.
So, the question becomes "how much knowledge can a person store in their brain, and how well can that person reference all of that information?" It's really a hard question to answer, but I think it's a moot point. Why? Because the younger humans will be genetically superior, possibly to the point of becoming post-human. Either that or they'll be non-biological machines.
Assuming that the old farts allow machines more adept than themselves to be created!
I agree that keeping our fancy biological bodies alive for extended periods of time is far beyond current medical science. We're just too damn complicated.
Perhaps in a few generations people will be able to live out extremely long lives within the body that they're born with, but certainly not us. It seems far more likely that, within the next 100 years, we'll be able to transfer our "brain state" into a machine, and then live on indefinitely either a) as a robot or b) within a simulation. Either way, your original body is probably going to deteriorate. Stick a sample in the freezer - maybe you can clone it someday.
Uh, basically all of the material in your body is constantly being replaced. You have a lot more carbon in your body now than you did when you were born, so where did it come from? You ate it.
The material that you are made of does not matter. This carbon atom or that one, it's all the same. Your structure - the way you arrange those atoms - is what counts. You are information.
I refer you to this opinion...
from Penny Arcade
Seriously, people who bitch about the GC being for kids are just more concerned with being "cool" than with actually enjoying games.
It's good if you're running the casino.
Come and play my free role playing game. $1 US buys you 1 gold coin. Go find some treasure and you can redeem it for $.70 per coin!
Can't find any treasure? I guess not enough "in game money" has been created by other players yet. Eventually, enough people will be killed by monsters that the monsters will hoard their treasure in a cave somewhere and you can find it. In the meantime, buy some more money so you can trade it to the NPC shopkeepers for weapons to defend yourself from monsters.
Seriously, this might be a good business model for a game. As many others have pointed out, though, security would be very difficult.
From the article:
"The mice will also have a feature that lets people switch between open applications by pressing down on the scroll wheel instead of using the keyboard."
It looks like you can still use it to click. Hopefully this just means that the mouse driver is mapping the middle button to alt+tab, and hopefully I can turn this "feature" off. I would die if I couldn't click my mouse wheel to upen links in new tabs in Mozilla.
So you're saying that if someone makes a machine that works the same way that your body does, that machine is not alive?
What does that make you?
Sorry to break this to you, since you obviously haven't realized it yet, but *you* are a machine. A very fancy machine, but a machine nonetheless. So is my cat.
Actually, this is kind of an interesting point - corporations can be described a virtual machines - a set of rules carried out by human processors (not that corporations are even close to being trans-human - they're probably closest to being expert systems, and nowhere near being self-aware). These machines indeed do have many of the same rights that individuals do, both legally and politically.
I disagree with the statement about ethics, though, as some corporations *can* follow an ethical set of "rules" - although it certainly isn't the norm. Not surprising, since the rules are optimized for making money, as making money is the feature that is selected for in a competive market.
Yes, it's absolutely true. The Democrats are just as bad as the Republicans - they all act like a bunch of damn politicians.
Of course, all politicians will always act like politicians, and the only way to keep them in line is to exert pressure. American citizens need to get off their asses and start harassing their representatives on a regular basis. These people work for us, you know!
Most importantly of all, we all need to start voting, dammit. VOTE! VOTE! I don't care what your opinion is - voice it by VOTING! Please!
1440*9/16 != 900
or, if you prefer:
900*16/9 != 1440
1440x900 is actually an 8:5 ratio.
I don't know that they would want to do that.
First of all, they're going to have a list of the people who are the least likely to respond to telemarketing calls, which means every call is very likely to be a waste of money for the caller.
Secondly, most people who proactively sign up for the "do not call list" are going to be extremely pissed at *anyone* who calls them with a telephone solicitation. Exemptions be damned. Don't ever call me again - no, I don't care what kind of loophole you have. I'll never, ever do business with/make a contribution to your business/organization. Ever. You are now on *my* list.
[ranting]
You want what? You want me to donate to your program/institution that should be funded by my government? You want me to take up the slack because schools/fire departments/whatever aren't getting enough funding? Yeah, like I'm going to perpetuate the problem.
[/ranting]
Er, sorry about the ranting.
I don't agree that having more technology makes us unable to "operate anything without help," but I absolutely agree that I would never own a car with this ridiculous feature.
Sure, there are a lot of technological advances in automobiles that I am happy to have - cruise control, for example. However, my cruise control must be under my command! When I say "go this speed," the car must go this speed until I tell it to stop. I'll make the decisions. I'm the one with a real brain, not just some sort of expert system with limited sensory powers. I don't know how the control logic is implemented, but my opinion is the same regardless of the technology. If it were smart enough to satisfy me, then I wouldn't be driving at all, because the car would be better a better driver than I am.
Now, to be fair, this might be useful if it were simply a buzzer (that could be disabled in certain situations). Sometimes the car in front of you decides to slam on its brakes just as you're fiddling with the radio, and it's nice to have someone else in the car say "holy shit, watch out!" On the other hand, I would not be able to stand driving around with someone who hits the brakes for me whenever they feel endangered. Especially if they're not intelligent enough to understand where we are and what we're doing and why.
I see this quickly becoming too complicated for our legal system to handle - look at the problems we have with tech regulation right now. Of course, this is all nothing compared to future debates over the rights of conscious machines...
I agree that the only real solution to cheating is a social solution, not a technological one.
Even in the solution that you suggested there are problems - you mentioned cheaters generating new IDs, but what if a cheater simply starts using *your* ID? Now you're screwed when the cheater gets banned. Even a randomly generated valid ID might happen to be yours, but a cheater could more easily just grab an ID that's not on the "shit list" when it's sent to his/her client.
Perhaps an ID/IP combo...
I'm sorry, but Clinton was *not* a liberal president as far as I could tell.
Of course this war is getting a lot more attention than Kosovo - look at the huge international disagreement between all of the major world powers! FGB(Former Governor Bush) and his administration made a huge public deal about getting UN approval, and then disregarded everyone else and just did whatever they wanted.
Protesting is futile, however, since we're only getting what we asked for. I wonder how many American protesters voted in the last presidential election? If we're going to let 20% of our population choose our leader, then we deserve what we get.
I actually think that a tablet would be nice to use in some situations - e.g. as a "living room" pc on a wireless network. It has to get a lot cheaper, though, and it would be nice if the screen resolution improved.
I don't know what the specs are on other tablets, but the one that AnandTech looked at had a screen resolution of 1024x768x16.
1024x768 isn't terrible, but if you're simulating notebook paper it would be a lot better to double that in each dimension (not to mention if you're going to use it for artistic purposes). In addition to the resolution, the color depth needs to be bumped up to 24 bit.
How many years will it be before I can buy one of these for under $1k with at least 1600x1200x24 resolution?
Well, I hope something like this happens. I'd be willing to buy the whole set just to get the original trilogy on DVD.
I wouldn't shell out a single buckazoid for some silly rehash on its own. Maybe after I have the originals on DVD I would consider buying the special edition(s), but certainly not before.
In fact, I believe I will refrain from purchasing Episodes 1,2, and 3 until I can get the originals.
I'm thinking that I'm waiting in vain, and it's beginning to piss me off.
Hot Damn 100!
I just hope that the music in the Zelda trailer is representative of the music in the actual game - since the 'cube is disc based, I don't understand why all games don't have full orchestral soundtracks. No more synthesized junk (except where it's appropriate, of course).
Metroid for the GBA looks rad, too. I'm looking forward to Metroid Prime, but the effectiveness of the first person perspective is still up in the air. Metroid Fusion, on the other hand, looks like it will provide some classic Metroid goodness.
Happy.
Just from reading the comments on this topic, I would have to say that the survey is pretty accurate.
Looks like there are a lot of people out there (even among Slashdot readers) who take a lot of things on faith.
More brains,
more speed,
Oh boy!
I wanna be a nano-tech kid.
Gotta make way for the Homo-Superior, I guess.
The biggest confusion amongst those who are afraid of "evolutionists" is what they think is the motivation of the "evolutionists." Religious people base their entire worldview on a system of beliefs, which are taken completely on faith.
These people exist in a reality that is not based on the input that they receive from the world, and they can't seem to get it through their heads that evolution, along with relativity, quantum mechanics, and every other scientific theory, is NOT based on beliefs, and is NOT taken as an absolute truth. It is a theory that seems to accurately describe the universe that we live in. If someone could come up with a better theory, then that theory would be used.
Thus, there is no "agenda" by which "evolutionists" hope to stomp out belief systems - science doesn't concern itself with beliefs to begin with. What these religious people get so upset about is the fact that they're effectively being snubbed. Belief systems are not useful for anything but controlling people, so they are (for the most part) ignored by science.
This isn't stopping people from believing what they want, but it makes them seem pretty crazy when they try to convince other people to believe in a bunch of supernatural stuff, which is why they're paranoid of "evolutionists" spreading scientific thought.
I assume 'Ork' refers to the planet that Mork is from.
Of course, that's a noun too.
hmm.