Honestly, this call for papers and award is along the lines of asking for more on top of what we already have, proof that going against nature will bring you harm. i.e. step off the empire state building...you will fall and die. Drive a car into a solid wall @ 500 mph, you will die.
Make software patentable and you will suffer the consequence of contradicting nature just the same.
People are born everyday with a blank slate of knowledge, but do all these new people do things that kill themselves, so to find out it will kill them? NO!
So how much do we need to harm ourselves with software patents before those making it possible to patent software and contradict nature, learn?
see:Abstraction Physics as the subject matter is fundamentally NOT about politics or economics, as organized crime has both a good economy and politics, but it doesn't make it honest and genuinely in touch with physical reality such that you can drive a car into a wall @ 500mph and live.
This software patent matter is really getting to be stupid on stupid. Software classification is not a human choice, but a human mental characteristic, and even stupid proves it.
Has anyone shown proof that driving a car into a wall @ 500mph will kill you, to those allowing software patents? If not, then why are they not finding out for themselves? If so then someone should point out that they should try 499mph to find out if it makes a difference. (re: all the abstract possibilities of proof for or against software patents)....use this as an analogy to those wanting proof of software patent damage (uh, err maybe it won't be damaging this way.....)
Its really amazing how much money is being spent on such distorted efforts rather than producing the proof that software is not of patentable qualities.
...its citizens is not about identifying potential terrorists but rather to determine what the general public mindset is so to know what to promote in order to manipulate it.
Why such spying has resumed, or hasn't stopped, is because its an election year.
And that should be obvious.
Is this against the constitution of the united states? Absolutely, as it is an intent to invade privacy in order to deceive.
This is nothing new as even the "Declaration of Independence" identifies government abuse of its citizens, even being specific.
....lose touch with the way of living without all the advances such that should a disaster happen that destroys our advances, would we know enough about how to live without that we could survive it with minimal loses due to just plain ignorance of living without the advances?
Where would wikileaks be, even though they could perhaps transmit, who would have the receivers? Say a nuclear event happen, but not one of man but rather nature, ie asteroid, record breaking sun flares, etc. that disabled/destroyed our computer technology and satellite system.
Imagine the mindset change that would be required to just survive without computers.
So the idea of wikileaks being in some nuclear bunker... its just a location that may no longer be secret.
The idea of a utopian society is not a realistic idea, as we all seem to have different ideas as to what that would be, meaning someone will be unhappy and consider resistance to the utopia and as such voiding it.
The idea that we can create something better than us is an illusion, though we may be able to take the best of us and incorporate it into a machine intelligence there is no proof that summing what is known to be imperfect will result in the perfect. And this is the problem. Though we may be able to create something that seems perfect this way, the reality is that its flaw is likely of such a high level that we won't see it until it to late.
There is also a matter of war mentality where the proof is the insulting amount of money budgeted for military defense worldwide in speculation of needing protection vs. the amount of money needed to genuinely address real world issues which removes war and terrorism motives. See: What the World Wants noting that of the 6 plus billion people on this planet its a fraction of 1% that cause such "maybe needed" spending while ignoring the more certain direction of removing motive of warfare.
Waring mindsets get first crack at any advances in technology to see how it can be used for war and defense against.
To know the motives of 9/11 read Trillion dollar bet and understand the probability of those who will be inconsiderate of the needs of others in their goal of being better than others, financially.
As someone once wrote "Artificial Intelligence - nothing is naturally that stupid."
But on another note, what is Artificial Intelligence anyway, but the by-product illusion of Automating Information (static, active and dynamic) enough to create the illusion? What all is involved in Automating Information but simply applying what we already do in creating and dealing with abstractions, but through a hard mineral based computer instead of living biological tissue known as the brain.
Then there is another perspective, with the amount of artificially intelligent people we have running around, do we really need or want machines to emulate them?
"But an intelligence official, who spoke on condition of anonymity because surveillance operations are classified, said: "It's inevitable that these things will happen. It's not weekly, but it's common."
This falls into the area of cheating in a manner that an excuse can be used to "get away with it". This sort of cheating had been labeled "Neo-cheating" and is a form of dishonesty that is easy to apply and safe from proof.. "Oh it was just an honest mistake." Technology should not be an escape goat for such obvious deceptions.
To give a simple example of a verification loop, when you sign up for a mailing list, messages boards, etc., in order to prevent spamming email accounts etc, there is a feedlack verification loop used. The point is, there are ways to prevent such spying "mistakes" from happening. And there should have already been such methods being applied as standard practice.
The "it's not weekly but its common" is nothing but evidence of intent to cheat and to continue it.
This "allowing deception" is similar electronic voting security failure vs. ATM financial security practices.
Computer technology is not an excuse, but a way for dishonest human intent to hide behind technology excuses.
Considering MS was tied to the case in a manner of giving some sort of support, perhaps it a who knows who line of financial support that traces back to MS?
Don't know but isn't it interesting that it seems SCO lawsuits may continue beyond bankruptcy of failed attempts?
Users trying to be productive at their workstation really don't need additional slowdowns happening because someone elsewhere is accessing their hard-drive.
Not so long ago MS did an upgrade that brought my system to a halt in my usability of the system as it was using all additional drive space to cache my system, on my system.
When it stopped even teh cache didn't show this usage but I was able to determine it was all in the cache and had to learn about clearing teh cache, not by delete but by ctrl-del to reinitialze the cach and of course rebooting.
I was not a unfortunate as many others in the amount of drive space this took up as I only have around 34gigs total on that partition. Others, I have learned, have lost as much as over 100gig.
The point is that on windows, disk access can slow a system down quite a bit.
If you really need additional drive space to figure out what to productively do with it, terabyte drives are rather inexpensive today. But trying to make use of available drive space on user systems on a network is very anti-productive, not to mention how it will slow the network down too.
There should be no problem so long as it is treated as a different language in regard to installations of the Python interpreter and code it recognizes.
In other words the only change that needs to happen is the ability of the interpreter to recognize a header element that tells it whether or not in can run the program.
# !Python
or
# !python3
And I'm sure someoen can com up with a simple preprocessor to direct code execution to the right interpreter.
Slashdot Mirror
.... software.
....use this as an analogy to those wanting proof of software patent damage (uh, err maybe it won't be damaging this way.....)
A similar slashdot story was just the day before see: http://yro.slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=08/02/29/0344258
Honestly, this call for papers and award is along the lines of asking for more on top of what we already have, proof that going against nature will bring you harm.
i.e. step off the empire state building...you will fall and die. Drive a car into a solid wall @ 500 mph, you will die.
Make software patentable and you will suffer the consequence of contradicting nature just the same.
People are born everyday with a blank slate of knowledge, but do all these new people do things that kill themselves, so to find out it will kill them? NO!
So how much do we need to harm ourselves with software patents before those making it possible to patent software and contradict nature, learn?
see:Abstraction Physics as the subject matter is fundamentally NOT about politics or economics, as organized crime has both a good economy and politics, but it doesn't make it honest and genuinely in touch with physical reality such that you can drive a car into a wall @ 500mph and live.
This software patent matter is really getting to be stupid on stupid. Software classification is not a human choice, but a human mental characteristic, and even stupid proves it.
Has anyone shown proof that driving a car into a wall @ 500mph will kill you, to those allowing software patents?
If not, then why are they not finding out for themselves?
If so then someone should point out that they should try 499mph to find out if it makes a difference. (re: all the abstract possibilities of proof for or against software patents)
Its really amazing how much money is being spent on such distorted efforts rather than producing the proof that software is not of patentable qualities.
...patent-able.
which makes this effort something of a public deception.
Instead what is needed is a proper genuine and honest perspective, rather than a political/economic argument
http://threeseas.net/abstraction_physics.html
My wikipedia like page (with links and more) is currently down.
...in a light bulb?
Hmmmm, I don't think they know how to do that, no matter how many.
They seems to persist with in the darkness of believing software and business methods are of patent-able subject matter.
....software patents and business methods. Which neither are of such qualities required of patents.
they are probably underestimating the backlog
...its citizens is not about identifying potential terrorists but rather to determine what the general public mindset is so to know what to promote in order to manipulate it.
Why such spying has resumed, or hasn't stopped, is because its an election year.
And that should be obvious.
Is this against the constitution of the united states? Absolutely, as it is an intent to invade privacy in order to deceive.
This is nothing new as even the "Declaration of Independence" identifies government abuse of its citizens, even being specific.
To All: When was the last time you read it?
So there is an issue of information distortion for personal gain of such information, is what you are saying?
....lose touch with the way of living without all the advances such that should a disaster happen that destroys our advances, would we know enough about how to live without that we could survive it with minimal loses due to just plain ignorance of living without the advances?
Where would wikileaks be, even though they could perhaps transmit, who would have the receivers?
Say a nuclear event happen, but not one of man but rather nature, ie asteroid, record breaking sun flares, etc. that disabled/destroyed our computer technology and satellite system.
Imagine the mindset change that would be required to just survive without computers.
So the idea of wikileaks being in some nuclear bunker... its just a location that may no longer be secret.
Software simply doesn't fall into the realm of being of qualities supporting patent-ability, nor do business methods.
Abstraction Physics No Kidding.
....oh well, so much for mathematical art on the web...
... when you don't do anything that needs to be secure, over it.
IS that what this is saying?
...you when the trusted authorities provide mass appeal?
Analog TV is set to be turned off, rendering many TVs useless next year, unless a convert is purchased.
So instead of turning off Analog and going all digital, leave analog on until the patent expires.
I'm sure a lot or Analog TV owners will be happy.
Traditional news media which is based on popularity draw and teh use of reporter dirty tricks to bias and make an ant hill sound like a mountain....
vs.
user reporting that even slashdot has proven to be closer to the truth.
Entertainment value or information value?
The idea of a utopian society is not a realistic idea, as we all seem to have different ideas as to what that would be, meaning someone will be unhappy and consider resistance to the utopia and as such voiding it.
The idea that we can create something better than us is an illusion, though we may be able to take the best of us and incorporate it into a machine intelligence there is no proof that summing what is known to be imperfect will result in the perfect. And this is the problem. Though we may be able to create something that seems perfect this way, the reality is that its flaw is likely of such a high level that we won't see it until it to late.
There is also a matter of war mentality where the proof is the insulting amount of money budgeted for military defense worldwide in speculation of needing protection vs. the amount of money needed to genuinely address real world issues which removes war and terrorism motives. See: What the World Wants noting that of the 6 plus billion people on this planet its a fraction of 1% that cause such "maybe needed" spending while ignoring the more certain direction of removing motive of warfare.
Waring mindsets get first crack at any advances in technology to see how it can be used for war and defense against.
To know the motives of 9/11 read Trillion dollar bet and understand the probability of those who will be inconsiderate of the needs of others in their goal of being better than others, financially.
As someone once wrote "Artificial Intelligence - nothing is naturally that stupid."
But on another note, what is Artificial Intelligence anyway, but the by-product illusion of Automating Information (static, active and dynamic) enough to create the illusion?
What all is involved in Automating Information but simply applying what we already do in creating and dealing with abstractions, but through a hard mineral based computer instead of living biological tissue known as the brain.
Then there is another perspective, with the amount of artificially intelligent people we have running around, do we really need or want machines to emulate them?
... when you let it continue to happen.
"But an intelligence official, who spoke on condition of anonymity because surveillance operations are classified, said: "It's inevitable that these things will happen. It's not weekly, but it's common."
This falls into the area of cheating in a manner that an excuse can be used to "get away with it". This sort of cheating had been labeled "Neo-cheating" and is a form of dishonesty that is easy to apply and safe from proof.. "Oh it was just an honest mistake." Technology should not be an escape goat for such obvious deceptions.
To give a simple example of a verification loop, when you sign up for a mailing list, messages boards, etc., in order to prevent spamming email accounts etc, there is a feedlack verification loop used. The point is, there are ways to prevent such spying "mistakes" from happening. And there should have already been such methods being applied as standard practice.
The "it's not weekly but its common" is nothing but evidence of intent to cheat and to continue it.
This "allowing deception" is similar electronic voting security failure vs. ATM financial security practices.
Computer technology is not an excuse, but a way for dishonest human intent to hide behind technology excuses.
Considering MS was tied to the case in a manner of giving some sort of support, perhaps it a who knows who line of financial support that traces back to MS?
Don't know but isn't it interesting that it seems SCO lawsuits may continue beyond bankruptcy of failed attempts?
....thinking.
Don't virus writers have better thens to do?
Unless they are vested in anti-virus software, whats teh point other than just causing countless people problems.
internet pedophile experts
he is going to let the motor accelerate ....... until it explodes....
Then everyone will be convinced...he's done something unusual.
Computer technology.... just like everyone else is doing....
From the RIAA to my hemorrhoids from sitting down all day.
technology in the computer industry is supposed to make things easier, cheaper and overall better.
So complain about it!
And while you are at it, complain how there is no more horse manure in the streets for the manure sweeps to earn a living by, because of cars.
Users trying to be productive at their workstation really don't need additional slowdowns happening because someone elsewhere is accessing their hard-drive.
Not so long ago MS did an upgrade that brought my system to a halt in my usability of the system as it was using all additional drive space to cache my system, on my system.
When it stopped even teh cache didn't show this usage but I was able to determine it was all in the cache and had to learn about clearing teh cache, not by delete but by ctrl-del to reinitialze the cach and of course rebooting.
I was not a unfortunate as many others in the amount of drive space this took up as I only have around 34gigs total on that partition. Others, I have learned, have lost as much as over 100gig.
The point is that on windows, disk access can slow a system down quite a bit.
If you really need additional drive space to figure out what to productively do with it, terabyte drives are rather inexpensive today. But trying to make use of available drive space on user systems on a network is very anti-productive, not to mention how it will slow the network down too.
There should be no problem so long as it is treated as a different language in regard to installations of the Python interpreter and code it recognizes.
In other words the only change that needs to happen is the ability of the interpreter to recognize a header element that tells it whether or not in can run the program.
# !Python
or
# !python3
And I'm sure someoen can com up with a simple preprocessor to direct code execution to the right interpreter.
Just consider those who still follow Amiga Inc.
But on the other hand Women are better at multi-tasking than men because of the need for them to deal with multiple children at the same time.
... intelligent design, science will be safe from religious ridicule.