It's called "Startin' Up A Posse" or something like that, and the guy missed one:
It's actually Shitfucksatandeathsexdrugsrape
these seven words they are trying to take.
It was on Attack of the Killer "B"s and most of the stuff on that little album was absolutely hillarious. But you kind of had to follow Antrax history to get some of it.
As long as you don't post an opinion that the moderators disagree with, then you are free to post any opinion you want without getting modded into the ground. However, I once had the +1 posting bonus as well, I quickly lost it when my +2 comments began to get perused by more "politically correct" moderators. If you post an unpopular opinion, you will be moderated down, whether you have a point or not.
In this conversation we are lucky. None of the moderators particularly seem to care about this conversation either way, so if they read it at all, it is probably with the same interest you pay to an insect crawling along the sidewalk that isn't bothering you. Not worth stepping on, it's just going about its business, but not really worth more than a few seconds of perusal either.
And to your other point, individuals don't matter in society unless you (as an individual) are considered "important". In this society, that means you've got huge amounts of cash. The very thought of "society" started making me retch by the time I was fifteen. It's not about guidelines or getting along or anything like that. It's about staying "in your place" and making sure that you worship the proper gods (today that would be the richest most uppity snooty s-o-b you can think of). If you disagree with the "acceptable" than you are quickly dismissed as irrelevant. That is the part of "society" or any sort of social system that makes me sick. Even slashdot is susceptible to this sort of "group-think" mentality.
And no, I don't feel I have to obey every law. As a married man, if I were to visit Maryland with my wife I would garauntee you that I would make love with her on the floor in the motel room (that is illegal there you no). Some laws are just ridiculously stupid. And the DMCA is definitely one of them. It seems to be made primarily as a way for software houses to remove any responsibility they have in producing a quality product, and is made entirely to garauntee that consumers are kept "in their place" in the grand scheme of things. Don't question the software companies, they are god! That is the completely stupid part of DMCA. Not to mention how many times reverse engineering has been approved in court cases. Why would we want to throw out reverse engineering in the case of software, but not in the case of everything else? If someone invents something new, no-one should ever have the right to create something similar! If that is truly the way of things for the software world, then we just as well make it the case for everything else. Watch the lawyers stagnate us into oblivious stupidity! After all, that's the end goal of any "society" isn't it? To make sure that the masses are kept "in their place" and the "upper crust" doesn't have to work too hard to keep the "poor masses" happy.
Ah, don't mind me, my rich ass boss just gave me another, "If you had as much money as me, then I might consider your opinion on your job important" speech. Makes me think up all kinds of evil things.
THe person that modded this as insightful might need to um, how should we say, "get some" before the rest of his brain rots away. Pardon the political incorrectnous, but seein the above comment modded as insightful was just too funny not to comment on.
Hey Taco, why not write your Space Opera (although it sounds more like pulp sci-fi to me, but heh), and then submit it to Bookzilla. Or, there are other alternatives. Some of them even promise distrobution to Barnes & Nobel if you pay a small fee (and no, it isn't that large). I realize you were joking, but it is an alternative that I have considered extensively for my personal diatribe like philosophical ramblings (that I know wouldn't get past the first "money first" editor in any publishing house).
On-topic: I will definitely check out Linus's autobiography. I'll bet it will make one hell of a good story, especially if it is as self-defacing as some of his interviews.
Never ask the politician a question when you are seeking a technical answer. So sayeth the Great Cornholio. Go forth, and spread the word.
Seriously, this guy had a major, MAJOR case of the political propaganda bug. It would have been nice to get a straight answer, but you don't "save face" by being technically correct now do you?
AHHHHH! Overload. I'm reading this first thing in the morning so maybe I'm underthinking it, but I think I just split a couple of brain cells.
Seriously, is this sort of stuff discussed in some of the more recent books? Perhaps Stephen Hawking's? I love this type of discussion, but I don't have the background on the scientific side of it (however, once I get fully woke up I do have a lot of background on the philosophy/deep thoughts side of things).
I've always hated the word "society". Reading your responses in this thread reminds me why. "Society" is a concept grounded in the idea that individuals do not matter. The more convinced we become that this thinking is correct, the more ready we are to forfiet our rights when "the big guys" come knocking.
Sorry, but I disagree that the law is the ultimate determinant of right and wrong. Those laws (at least today) are created by the man with the most money, and I dare you to say that he with the most money is the most "morally correct".
And not to be argumentative, but expressing opinions of any kind on slashdot is not adhereing to the "code". I guess that means you and I are just one step removed from the trolls. Take a look at the lower rated posts sometime. You'd be suprised how many posts get marked troll or flamebait just because they are based on opinion instead of linking in ten-thousand unnecissary "back-up" pieces. Sure, there are real trolls, but apparently most of them are busy moderatin.;-)
I like that idea, and it is entirely possible. Perhaps black holes are really transferring mass to "another" place in the universe (have we ever detected anything that just seems to spew out massive quantities of matter without ever seeming to run out? Maybe it's into another universe within our "multiverse", yeah I know I'm reaching). Anyway, isn't it possible that the "worm hole" theories are based on the same sort of idea? Over the sphere you can travel in any direction, but you can only reach the center of the sphere through either a "worm hole" or a "black hole". Perhaps worm holes actually just go between two points on the sphere and black holes all meet in the center so that, if it were possible to create a faster than light ship that could penetrate a black hole without disintegrating, you could "navigate" to any other black hole from the "center". Damn, you got my mind playing all kinds of games with me now! I love these type of ideas.
You do realize that the lawyers (and thier brainchilds, some of which you've listed) are placed here by the aliens to slow down the growth of our society so that we don't "interfere" before they are ready to deal with us;-). Here, I have a tin-foil hat ready for you friend.
I've always felt that there are many, many other "intelligent" species around the Earth, perhaps even inhabiting it. These "others" can see us, hear us, understand us on one of thier "planes" of existance, and when they try to communicate with us using their "standard" method of communication, they do not understand why we don't respond.
We are insignifigant, yet massively signifigant all at the same time. These "others" I referred to may or may not be present, but I like the idea of it. They see us, the hear us, they "know" us in ways we do not know ourselves. Yet they cannot help us, even though some of our struggles may help them (as they see what helps, or what makes things worse in our actions). Crazy talk, I know, but such is the poet's curse. Always to question, always to wonder, never to answer.
Science is about finding those answers that the poet cannot find. And each scientific answer simply leaves the poet asking more questions. Combine the two things, science and poetry, and you would see a wonderful individual. In a way, this is my view of someone as rich in spirit and mind as Steven Hawking. Stuck in a wheelchair, yet intelligent, questioning, always wondering, and answering as many questions as he can before his time is up. If only we could all be so bold, and so accepting of our isignifigance. If we stopped fighting how "small" we were, we could get on with things that would make us "less small".
Ah well, I've wandered too far off course, sorry....
Does everything have to be an "issue" now? Fuck the PC (politically correct) garbage. Just tell him his fucked in the head and be done with it!
Personally, I always thought science was about enhancing the overall knowledge of society. That's not demeaning our signifigance in the universe. It is in fact trying to show that we are important enough to realize how vast and immense this thing we call "reality" really is, and that we are intelligent enough to realize that no matter how important we think we are, we are just a part of the whole. If you simplify that into "we are insignifigant", well then mores the pity for you. Ignore science all you want, people are still going to question things. And good scientists will keep trying to answer those questions.
I've thought long and hard about this one many, many times. If the Universe is really "curved", then perhaps by travelling far enough around the "curve" in one direction you would find yourself in the same physical "place" just in a different time (forward or backward). And perhaps, by learning to travel perpendicular to the curve, we could learn to enter "alternative" versions of the reality we inhabit. Of course, this is all just philosphical mumbling, but how much do we really know about stars and galaxies that are so far away that by the time we see their light they could have been burned out for a couple of billion years? Even that "fact" is just guesswork on our part. How much do we "know"?
Wow, and I thought my Monday was sucking. If only I could pass you a BAWLS over the Internet;-). The only thing that gets me through those tough Mondays.
Are you saying it's a waste of time to try to oppose something as stupid as the DMCA?
If that's not what you are saying than you can ignore the rest of this post;-).
Personally, I'm sick to death of the people that say, "The legal system has handed its verdict over and we should just accept it!" I'm sorry, but the current legal system is just doing what the man with the most money says. If us "commoners" don't occassionally stand up and say, "Um, shouldn't we think about this a little first?" we can just forget having even a semblance of individual rights. I could care less of some big business loses one or two sales out of every four or five hundred, but I do care (very, very much in fact) if the assumption is made that every person in America is going to be guilty of a crime and must be prevented from even contemplating that crime by having the "temptation" removed.
Let's face it, if the big business types that want to run the country actually get us to just sit there and shut up (the way some people seem to suggest we should), we won't have any individual rights anymore. Forget about "fair use" laws, forget about chosing your own life. You will be born into a "corporate environment" where you either figure out a way to "purchase" rights, or your rights simply don't matter.
Sorry to get flamebaitish, but the ho-hum life of corporate sponsored blissful ignorance has got to stop. And the only way it will is if we question things. We can't just sit back and say, "Well, the law was passed, so it must be good." We need to look at it seriously and figure out whether it is right or not.
Morality isn't a moot point. Laws are supposed to be morally just in some capacity. And if some group says that a law is morally trampling their rights, the law should be questioned, studied, analyzed, and perhaps changed, or even revoked. Saying, "The law is there, accept it or else" is simply blind religious fervor, and something I had hoped we had grown out of after the "church equals the state" period of rennaisance Europe.
If morality doesn't matter, and only the "legal" system matters, well then, we've all already given up our rights. Time to pack it in and say goodnight.
However, don't ever let someone con you into believing that morality is set in stone. That is something that has not, and as far as I can tell never will, happen.
Isn't it funny how all the freaky freakies end up in Sri Lanka? Bad business deal, but hundreds of millions in blood money in the bank? Move to Sri Lanka!
Got a fetish for underage prostitutes? Move to Sri Lanka! (Just remember not to let them know you're rich when you doink 'em.)
Like having your own personal slaves? Move to Sri Lanka!
God, I gotta start making money so I can move to Sri Lanka!
Uninformed Sci-fi trolls suck. Skynet isn't a beowulf cluster. The closest thing to the beowulf cluster in modern sci-fi is probably the cruciform wearing "christians" being used by the AIs in Dan Simmons' Hyperion/Endymion books. Sorry, I know I sound like a broken record, but it just doesn't get any cooler than a cluster of humans controlled by the AI machines of the future. Symbiote colonies of computing madness. Rock on dude. Just remember that death is when the mind is at its peak effeciency, that is why they perfected reincarnation for us.
Why are we so enthusiastic about it? Because some of us truly hope that there is something better than this. Maybe the machines won't "wipe us out" like everyone of the great technophobes try and say. Maybe they won't keep us a slaves. Maybe they won't be in perfect harmony with us like the techno-pushers always say either. But my bet is we could end up with something along the lines of what Dan Simmons saw in his Hyperion/Endymion novels.
The machine AIs (for Autonomous Intelligences not Artificial) developed their own government and worked in a cooperative way with the human government. Now, as with any intelligent race (at least any that we have seen/dreamt up/hoped for) there were factions among the AIs. Some factions worshipped humans as the creators, some factions wanted humans wiped out as they were "holding back progress" and some simply wanted to cooperate with humans as equals.
Quite honestly, this seems like the most reasonable possibility. As it is really not probable that any reasonably diverse group of intelligent beings would ever agree on anything, even "super AIs" as were developed in Simmons' books. It's only natural that there would be factions. And, if I'm wrong on that, at least the machines would be able to do something. It seems at the end of the twentieth century/beginning of the twenty-first, we as a race have slowly begun to stagnate our forward progress. In the effort to remain "politically correct" and pretend to "feel the pain" of everyone "less fortunate", we have decided that the best way to "help our fellow man" is to find a way to move more money into big business's pockets and out of the pockets of individuals, while still somehow ensuring that "progress" is synonymous with "stagnation" when it comes to imaginative endeavors. Sorry, got a little sidetracked there.
Anyway, I think we have a few more years to debate about the possibility of computers killing us all. And even if it happens in the next few years, would it really be that tough to pull the plugs out of the wall? I don't think there are too many computers today that can't be unplugged fairly easily, are there any that are directly wired into some sort of power source? And would these really be the first candidates for AI type programs? Just questions, but I think the fear mongering is probably just completely based on fear of technology in all its forms more than fear of AI. But, I live in South Dakota, so god knows I see technophobes every day.
This reminds me of the people I've run into on Usenet that think morals and ethics are mathematical in nature. In other words, there should be a code book for morals and ethics and a "final equation" so that in any situation you could simply plug the idea into the equation and get "the right thing" to solve the problem. I'm sorry, but no matter how easy it is to say "this is wrong, this is right" you will always have debates about degrees of rightness or wrongness. There is no way that anyone can say flat out that one form of "evil" is justified if it prevents another form of evil or that some form of "just" action is not justifiable if it allows another form of evil to happen. Sorry, I'm rambling again. It just frustrates me that people think morals and ethics are as precise and exact as math. It isn't, if it was philosophy, psychology, and "free will" in any form would be a thing of the past. All our decisions would be predestined because the "final equation" would have already been figured out.
God I hate Mondays, especially after a long holiday weekend. It makes my head get all these weird ideas....
While that is what "fair use" is supposed to mean, the Recording Industry is trying very very hard to have things changed so that you have to purchase a "license" for each "place" you wish to listen to something (much like you need a seperate license for each computer you run a program on). For instance, say you have a car stereo, a home stereo, a walkman for jogging, and a clock radio/MP3/tape machine next to your bed. Fair use says that you should be able to purchase one legal copy of any piece of music and copy it as many times as you like and use those copies in each place. But the Recording Industry says that you should purchase a "legal" copy for your home stereo, another legal copy for your car stereo, another legal copy for your walkman, and another legal copy for your clock radio. I just hope they don't actually pull this off. It's scary how quickly our rights are being reigned in, all in the name of "freedom" (well, at least "freedom" for big business to make more money, forget individual rights. They no longer matter).
Slashdot Mirror
It's called "Startin' Up A Posse" or something like that, and the guy missed one:
It's actually Shitfucksatandeathsexdrugsrape
these seven words they are trying to take.
It was on Attack of the Killer "B"s and most of the stuff on that little album was absolutely hillarious. But you kind of had to follow Antrax history to get some of it.
As long as you don't post an opinion that the moderators disagree with, then you are free to post any opinion you want without getting modded into the ground. However, I once had the +1 posting bonus as well, I quickly lost it when my +2 comments began to get perused by more "politically correct" moderators. If you post an unpopular opinion, you will be moderated down, whether you have a point or not.
In this conversation we are lucky. None of the moderators particularly seem to care about this conversation either way, so if they read it at all, it is probably with the same interest you pay to an insect crawling along the sidewalk that isn't bothering you. Not worth stepping on, it's just going about its business, but not really worth more than a few seconds of perusal either.
And to your other point, individuals don't matter in society unless you (as an individual) are considered "important". In this society, that means you've got huge amounts of cash. The very thought of "society" started making me retch by the time I was fifteen. It's not about guidelines or getting along or anything like that. It's about staying "in your place" and making sure that you worship the proper gods (today that would be the richest most uppity snooty s-o-b you can think of). If you disagree with the "acceptable" than you are quickly dismissed as irrelevant. That is the part of "society" or any sort of social system that makes me sick. Even slashdot is susceptible to this sort of "group-think" mentality.
And no, I don't feel I have to obey every law. As a married man, if I were to visit Maryland with my wife I would garauntee you that I would make love with her on the floor in the motel room (that is illegal there you no). Some laws are just ridiculously stupid. And the DMCA is definitely one of them. It seems to be made primarily as a way for software houses to remove any responsibility they have in producing a quality product, and is made entirely to garauntee that consumers are kept "in their place" in the grand scheme of things. Don't question the software companies, they are god! That is the completely stupid part of DMCA. Not to mention how many times reverse engineering has been approved in court cases. Why would we want to throw out reverse engineering in the case of software, but not in the case of everything else? If someone invents something new, no-one should ever have the right to create something similar! If that is truly the way of things for the software world, then we just as well make it the case for everything else. Watch the lawyers stagnate us into oblivious stupidity! After all, that's the end goal of any "society" isn't it? To make sure that the masses are kept "in their place" and the "upper crust" doesn't have to work too hard to keep the "poor masses" happy.
Ah, don't mind me, my rich ass boss just gave me another, "If you had as much money as me, then I might consider your opinion on your job important" speech. Makes me think up all kinds of evil things.
Yeah, that's what I meant. Sorry about that, I posted too early in the morning to be coherent (it's not noon yet!;-).
THe person that modded this as insightful might need to um, how should we say, "get some" before the rest of his brain rots away. Pardon the political incorrectnous, but seein the above comment modded as insightful was just too funny not to comment on.
Hey Taco, why not write your Space Opera (although it sounds more like pulp sci-fi to me, but heh), and then submit it to Bookzilla. Or, there are other alternatives. Some of them even promise distrobution to Barnes & Nobel if you pay a small fee (and no, it isn't that large). I realize you were joking, but it is an alternative that I have considered extensively for my personal diatribe like philosophical ramblings (that I know wouldn't get past the first "money first" editor in any publishing house).
On-topic: I will definitely check out Linus's autobiography. I'll bet it will make one hell of a good story, especially if it is as self-defacing as some of his interviews.
Never ask the politician a question when you are seeking a technical answer. So sayeth the Great Cornholio. Go forth, and spread the word.
Seriously, this guy had a major, MAJOR case of the political propaganda bug. It would have been nice to get a straight answer, but you don't "save face" by being technically correct now do you?
AHHHHH! Overload. I'm reading this first thing in the morning so maybe I'm underthinking it, but I think I just split a couple of brain cells.
Seriously, is this sort of stuff discussed in some of the more recent books? Perhaps Stephen Hawking's? I love this type of discussion, but I don't have the background on the scientific side of it (however, once I get fully woke up I do have a lot of background on the philosophy/deep thoughts side of things).
I've always hated the word "society". Reading your responses in this thread reminds me why. "Society" is a concept grounded in the idea that individuals do not matter. The more convinced we become that this thinking is correct, the more ready we are to forfiet our rights when "the big guys" come knocking.
Sorry, but I disagree that the law is the ultimate determinant of right and wrong. Those laws (at least today) are created by the man with the most money, and I dare you to say that he with the most money is the most "morally correct".
And not to be argumentative, but expressing opinions of any kind on slashdot is not adhereing to the "code". I guess that means you and I are just one step removed from the trolls. Take a look at the lower rated posts sometime. You'd be suprised how many posts get marked troll or flamebait just because they are based on opinion instead of linking in ten-thousand unnecissary "back-up" pieces. Sure, there are real trolls, but apparently most of them are busy moderatin.;-)
I like that idea, and it is entirely possible. Perhaps black holes are really transferring mass to "another" place in the universe (have we ever detected anything that just seems to spew out massive quantities of matter without ever seeming to run out? Maybe it's into another universe within our "multiverse", yeah I know I'm reaching). Anyway, isn't it possible that the "worm hole" theories are based on the same sort of idea? Over the sphere you can travel in any direction, but you can only reach the center of the sphere through either a "worm hole" or a "black hole". Perhaps worm holes actually just go between two points on the sphere and black holes all meet in the center so that, if it were possible to create a faster than light ship that could penetrate a black hole without disintegrating, you could "navigate" to any other black hole from the "center". Damn, you got my mind playing all kinds of games with me now! I love these type of ideas.
You do realize that the lawyers (and thier brainchilds, some of which you've listed) are placed here by the aliens to slow down the growth of our society so that we don't "interfere" before they are ready to deal with us;-). Here, I have a tin-foil hat ready for you friend.
I've always felt that there are many, many other "intelligent" species around the Earth, perhaps even inhabiting it. These "others" can see us, hear us, understand us on one of thier "planes" of existance, and when they try to communicate with us using their "standard" method of communication, they do not understand why we don't respond.
We are insignifigant, yet massively signifigant all at the same time. These "others" I referred to may or may not be present, but I like the idea of it. They see us, the hear us, they "know" us in ways we do not know ourselves. Yet they cannot help us, even though some of our struggles may help them (as they see what helps, or what makes things worse in our actions). Crazy talk, I know, but such is the poet's curse. Always to question, always to wonder, never to answer.
Science is about finding those answers that the poet cannot find. And each scientific answer simply leaves the poet asking more questions. Combine the two things, science and poetry, and you would see a wonderful individual. In a way, this is my view of someone as rich in spirit and mind as Steven Hawking. Stuck in a wheelchair, yet intelligent, questioning, always wondering, and answering as many questions as he can before his time is up. If only we could all be so bold, and so accepting of our isignifigance. If we stopped fighting how "small" we were, we could get on with things that would make us "less small".
Ah well, I've wandered too far off course, sorry....
Does everything have to be an "issue" now? Fuck the PC (politically correct) garbage. Just tell him his fucked in the head and be done with it!
Personally, I always thought science was about enhancing the overall knowledge of society. That's not demeaning our signifigance in the universe. It is in fact trying to show that we are important enough to realize how vast and immense this thing we call "reality" really is, and that we are intelligent enough to realize that no matter how important we think we are, we are just a part of the whole. If you simplify that into "we are insignifigant", well then mores the pity for you. Ignore science all you want, people are still going to question things. And good scientists will keep trying to answer those questions.
I've thought long and hard about this one many, many times. If the Universe is really "curved", then perhaps by travelling far enough around the "curve" in one direction you would find yourself in the same physical "place" just in a different time (forward or backward). And perhaps, by learning to travel perpendicular to the curve, we could learn to enter "alternative" versions of the reality we inhabit. Of course, this is all just philosphical mumbling, but how much do we really know about stars and galaxies that are so far away that by the time we see their light they could have been burned out for a couple of billion years? Even that "fact" is just guesswork on our part. How much do we "know"?
Wow, and I thought my Monday was sucking. If only I could pass you a BAWLS over the Internet;-). The only thing that gets me through those tough Mondays.
Are you saying it's a waste of time to try to oppose something as stupid as the DMCA?
;-).
If that's not what you are saying than you can ignore the rest of this post
Personally, I'm sick to death of the people that say, "The legal system has handed its verdict over and we should just accept it!" I'm sorry, but the current legal system is just doing what the man with the most money says. If us "commoners" don't occassionally stand up and say, "Um, shouldn't we think about this a little first?" we can just forget having even a semblance of individual rights. I could care less of some big business loses one or two sales out of every four or five hundred, but I do care (very, very much in fact) if the assumption is made that every person in America is going to be guilty of a crime and must be prevented from even contemplating that crime by having the "temptation" removed.
Let's face it, if the big business types that want to run the country actually get us to just sit there and shut up (the way some people seem to suggest we should), we won't have any individual rights anymore. Forget about "fair use" laws, forget about chosing your own life. You will be born into a "corporate environment" where you either figure out a way to "purchase" rights, or your rights simply don't matter.
Sorry to get flamebaitish, but the ho-hum life of corporate sponsored blissful ignorance has got to stop. And the only way it will is if we question things. We can't just sit back and say, "Well, the law was passed, so it must be good." We need to look at it seriously and figure out whether it is right or not.
Morality isn't a moot point. Laws are supposed to be morally just in some capacity. And if some group says that a law is morally trampling their rights, the law should be questioned, studied, analyzed, and perhaps changed, or even revoked. Saying, "The law is there, accept it or else" is simply blind religious fervor, and something I had hoped we had grown out of after the "church equals the state" period of rennaisance Europe.
If morality doesn't matter, and only the "legal" system matters, well then, we've all already given up our rights. Time to pack it in and say goodnight.
However, don't ever let someone con you into believing that morality is set in stone. That is something that has not, and as far as I can tell never will, happen.
The best excuse for things like that (and it's actually true today) is:
It's a Monday!
Add to that that it is a Monday after a long holiday weekend and you got an excuse for not doing anything right today! Works for me anyway.
Careful dude, someone might be listening;-).
Isn't it funny how all the freaky freakies end up in Sri Lanka? Bad business deal, but hundreds of millions in blood money in the bank? Move to Sri Lanka!
Got a fetish for underage prostitutes? Move to Sri Lanka! (Just remember not to let them know you're rich when you doink 'em.)
Like having your own personal slaves? Move to Sri Lanka!
God, I gotta start making money so I can move to Sri Lanka!
\end commercial
Uninformed Sci-fi trolls suck. Skynet isn't a beowulf cluster. The closest thing to the beowulf cluster in modern sci-fi is probably the cruciform wearing "christians" being used by the AIs in Dan Simmons' Hyperion/Endymion books. Sorry, I know I sound like a broken record, but it just doesn't get any cooler than a cluster of humans controlled by the AI machines of the future. Symbiote colonies of computing madness. Rock on dude. Just remember that death is when the mind is at its peak effeciency, that is why they perfected reincarnation for us.
Why are we so enthusiastic about it? Because some of us truly hope that there is something better than this. Maybe the machines won't "wipe us out" like everyone of the great technophobes try and say. Maybe they won't keep us a slaves. Maybe they won't be in perfect harmony with us like the techno-pushers always say either. But my bet is we could end up with something along the lines of what Dan Simmons saw in his Hyperion/Endymion novels.
The machine AIs (for Autonomous Intelligences not Artificial) developed their own government and worked in a cooperative way with the human government. Now, as with any intelligent race (at least any that we have seen/dreamt up/hoped for) there were factions among the AIs. Some factions worshipped humans as the creators, some factions wanted humans wiped out as they were "holding back progress" and some simply wanted to cooperate with humans as equals.
Quite honestly, this seems like the most reasonable possibility. As it is really not probable that any reasonably diverse group of intelligent beings would ever agree on anything, even "super AIs" as were developed in Simmons' books. It's only natural that there would be factions. And, if I'm wrong on that, at least the machines would be able to do something. It seems at the end of the twentieth century/beginning of the twenty-first, we as a race have slowly begun to stagnate our forward progress. In the effort to remain "politically correct" and pretend to "feel the pain" of everyone "less fortunate", we have decided that the best way to "help our fellow man" is to find a way to move more money into big business's pockets and out of the pockets of individuals, while still somehow ensuring that "progress" is synonymous with "stagnation" when it comes to imaginative endeavors. Sorry, got a little sidetracked there.
Anyway, I think we have a few more years to debate about the possibility of computers killing us all. And even if it happens in the next few years, would it really be that tough to pull the plugs out of the wall? I don't think there are too many computers today that can't be unplugged fairly easily, are there any that are directly wired into some sort of power source? And would these really be the first candidates for AI type programs? Just questions, but I think the fear mongering is probably just completely based on fear of technology in all its forms more than fear of AI. But, I live in South Dakota, so god knows I see technophobes every day.
This reminds me of the people I've run into on Usenet that think morals and ethics are mathematical in nature. In other words, there should be a code book for morals and ethics and a "final equation" so that in any situation you could simply plug the idea into the equation and get "the right thing" to solve the problem. I'm sorry, but no matter how easy it is to say "this is wrong, this is right" you will always have debates about degrees of rightness or wrongness. There is no way that anyone can say flat out that one form of "evil" is justified if it prevents another form of evil or that some form of "just" action is not justifiable if it allows another form of evil to happen. Sorry, I'm rambling again. It just frustrates me that people think morals and ethics are as precise and exact as math. It isn't, if it was philosophy, psychology, and "free will" in any form would be a thing of the past. All our decisions would be predestined because the "final equation" would have already been figured out.
God I hate Mondays, especially after a long holiday weekend. It makes my head get all these weird ideas....
While that is what "fair use" is supposed to mean, the Recording Industry is trying very very hard to have things changed so that you have to purchase a "license" for each "place" you wish to listen to something (much like you need a seperate license for each computer you run a program on). For instance, say you have a car stereo, a home stereo, a walkman for jogging, and a clock radio/MP3/tape machine next to your bed. Fair use says that you should be able to purchase one legal copy of any piece of music and copy it as many times as you like and use those copies in each place. But the Recording Industry says that you should purchase a "legal" copy for your home stereo, another legal copy for your car stereo, another legal copy for your walkman, and another legal copy for your clock radio. I just hope they don't actually pull this off. It's scary how quickly our rights are being reigned in, all in the name of "freedom" (well, at least "freedom" for big business to make more money, forget individual rights. They no longer matter).
Bwaaaaaaaahaaaaahahahaaaaahaaaah!!!!!
Oh shit dude, now I have to clean the pop off of my monitor again!
Fucking moderators. If it follows logically it is not off fucking topic. Jesus christ you idiots are thick headed sons-a-bitches.
Oh, I didn't realize it was "Keep your fucking opinion to yourself" day. Sorry moderators, I won't let it happen again.