You do realize that soldiers are still people, yes?
I'm not saying that an armed uprising would be automatically successful, but I assure you that there would be a) plenty of people in the army who agreed with it, and b) a vastly greater number that wouldn't want to go slaughtering countrymen wholesale.
Of course I'm referring to an uprising of any substantial clout here... a small militia wouldn't even give the militarized police forces a run for their money. There comes a point where the soldiers actually start to question the blood bath.
The US automotive industry certainly didn't discourage the continuation of low population density areas but it had absolutely nothing what-so-ever to do with their creation.
The low density started when farming/fishing and the fur trade was ubiquitous. Earlier than that it started when nomads travelled large distances to track fauna for subsistence living.
You might think that's being overly pedantic on that matter but it isn't. The US had a much different history than Europe did. The US didn't colonize "naturally", it did so very forcefully and quickly by foreign pressures. That history is reflected in the layout of it's population.
Oh I get that, I'm not entirely over the thats-not-me hurdle myself... but I'd pull the trigger anyways if it were available.
I think though that I should have cleared up my argument from the start; I was only going against your issue with resources. I really don't think (with a helping of hope) that there is a problem there.
As to the comment that you were originally replying to (not mine) saying that any right-minded person wanting immortality - I'm not one to force my opinions or beliefs on others. I'm not qualified to tell people they should choose immortality given the option and even if I was I still wouldn't.
My mother says she "wants to see what's next". Myself, I think that's a little wild because I like what I've got just fine... talk about risk/reward! I also recognize that my opinions are my own and are not something to be forced on others.
the brain tends to make associations even if none truly exist.
Bingo.
I see one of two possible scenarios:
1. A person is concentrating so hard on ignoring earth-based signals that they mistake anything that could possibly be there as one and any potential discovery is missed.
2 (far more likely). SETI suddenly gets reports of eight million new signals because as you say, we're far too good at seeing patterns in noise.
Well that's an interesting question: whether the stuck in their ways is due to having experienced years of life or being angry at young people because of what they've lost.
However, as far as physical age is concerned, all evidence points to any biological immortality coming with/from a lack of aging. Specifically lab tests with telomerase shows reversal of physical age in mice, and similar in jellyfish. Any digital form of immortality will probably come with a vast reduction in power requirements vs. a biological immortality and would also do away with any physical limitations as well as expanding the available neural network space (to an effectively limitless value)
Now I'm firmly of the belief that old people are pricks because they're angry at the world (who wouldn't be when you're reminded constantly of how useless you are). It follows that extending life indefinitely would not cause the same kind of attitude if the physical age did not come with it.
However, it's just as possible that it is a mental state that comes from weak minds believing they're more experienced than others after having lived so long. That wouldn't be helped by a lack of physical age and your concern would be most imperative.
I admit to being biased towards good immortality, because I fully hope to take advantage of it...
Either have extensive, mandatory driver's training and strict road tests to keep the morons out from behind the wheel
Yes, Please.
I'm all for backup cameras and such too, I like technology... But let's face it there's only one way to actually reduce the number of accidents on the road.
Apple doesn't give two shits about Siri competition. They bought Siri so that they would have something no one else did. It worked, people were interested.
The only thing apple ever cares about is selling more hardware. If Evi sells more hardware Apple will embrace it without hesitation.
What Apple won't do, is allow a shitty, broken and useless clone of Siri that looks way too similar continue to be sold on the app store. Someone that doesn't own an iPhone could witness someone using that piece of shit and confuse it with Siri, thereby getting the impression that Siri is as hopelessly useless as Evi.
However most here don't seem to grasp that having (seriously) unmatched legs would be a nightmare for a normal person, let alone one that is trying to rehab from complete amputation.
It's one thing for the leg to be slightly different length, but different muscle tone, length, bone structure (obviously not gross structure) would make rehab all but impossible.
I do however find it a little odd that they felt the need to do all four at the same time... surely the odds of success would have higher doing the legs and then the arms at a later date (with a different donor)
I've been doing exactly this for about a year now. I don't have cable and don't do physical media. Everything on my tv is streamed from my TV, the iPhone/Pad or for rentals we do grab it straight from the appleTV (though using the iPad as a remote for the keyboard)
So aside from the fact that you're trolling extremely poorly:
An iPad/year is a cost of $1.50 a day, you want to talk about expensive "status symbols" (seriously, if you think the iPad is a status symbol get a life) look no further than gourmet coffee.
Now since I actually do things for a living, my iPad is both paid for by my company and even if it wasn't a buck fifty a day to keep something I use several hours a day up to date is a fantastic deal... I use my car less than that and it costs a hell of a lot more.
No, you're talking about bitmap scaling which is not what is happening. When you create an iPhone 4 app you provide separate graphics at the new resolution. The same would be done here. UI elements are also native images for the resolution.
It is true that scaled apps from standard res would look less than stellar, but they already do.
As for them finding the specific LCD screen, you've clearly never paid attention to the lead-up to an apple product release.
The only thing that points to a 2x screen at all is the resources found in iOS5, but they've been there since before the 2 came out... didn't get a 2x screen then either.
It sounds very much like you bought the iPad because it was first, rather than because it was the iPad (which is perfectly reasonable).
If all you're really doing in media consumption, then the upgrades will mean little to nothing to you; you'd also be further ahead to buy a different tablet if you were in the market right now.
The iPad's strength is in all of the other stuff it can do, and everyone I know that owns one (myself included of course) will be buying the 3 if the display is better and the speed bump is 2x or better.
Since the iPad has replaced my laptop, I have no problem paying $500 a year to keep it up to date.
Anyone who has ever written iOS software knows that the UI scaling is done by float, and can easily take a value of 1.5.
That means that apple could very reasonably put in a display that was a rational density, still be considered retina by it's accepted definition, and not cost a bajillion dollars each.
Now, it's possible that apple has managed to leverage it's supply chains and reserves to push display tech forward so massively, but there is absolutely no reason to assume that they have.
No you're quite wrong there -- they can and ostensibly do hire some really great people (security included). They also hire absolute chaff a lot of the time, but neither of those have anything to do with why wallet and such suck.
They aren't ads, and they aren't search. Google only actually cares about the stuff that makes them money, or the stuff that could make them money. They've already botched wallet and checkout, just like gTalk the launch was awful in a crowded market and the product is a failure because of it. Since the chances of serious money making are gone so is any likelihood of getting anyone good on the project
but can we please leave the absolutely needless apple bashing out of completely unrelated article headlines?
They aren't suing over iTunes, they are suing over them being defrauded by their label. Apple nor iTunes has anything to do with the suit except as a delivery vector.
For fucks sake the actual reason for the suit (the label) doesn't even appear in the headline.
Well so just to be clear, I actually was referring to what you describe; a lot of young people take their work home with them (myself included) without being asked... In my case specifically told to enjoy our evenings and not take work home.
But my brain doesn't shut off when I walk out the door, and I'm not coming home to kids who need attention. So although in my case it certainly isn't 80 I wouldn't be shocked if I end up putting in 60 on a regular basis.
However, there is also the other side of the coin -- there are absolutely young guys that can be coerced into putting in way more time than they're paid for. I wasn't really referring to that though.
The real trick is, companies are starting to find out that old is not gold.
Firstly, they've convinced end users to put up with subpar products (not just buggy software, but stuff with 2 year expected life instead of 20).
Second, they've discovered that old guys tend not to be willing to work 80 hours a week and call it 40 (there are many exceptions I'm sure, but they typically have families and shy away from that stuff)
Third, with the rate at which things are advancing the old guys need to have been very proactive in keeping up, or they may have experience but lack the knowledge. Again, lots do -- but not all.
As an AC you won't see the reply, but in fact it's working quite well against the TSA. Not only are there senators and congress members talking about going after them whole-sale, there are also individual airports that are actively refusing any involvement in some or all of their bullshit.
The FBI is what it is because it outwardly appears to operate effectively. If you can demonstrate well enough that it is not effective it will be dismantled either through staffing changes or actual full-on dismantling.
You don't try to tie up the FBI's time, because it will just cost the tax payer more money. You throw egg in it's face as often as you possibly can until it's a laughing stock and must be replaced/removed in order to save face.
Slashdot Mirror
You do realize that soldiers are still people, yes?
I'm not saying that an armed uprising would be automatically successful, but I assure you that there would be a) plenty of people in the army who agreed with it, and b) a vastly greater number that wouldn't want to go slaughtering countrymen wholesale.
Of course I'm referring to an uprising of any substantial clout here... a small militia wouldn't even give the militarized police forces a run for their money. There comes a point where the soldiers actually start to question the blood bath.
Well that's just not true.
The US automotive industry certainly didn't discourage the continuation of low population density areas but it had absolutely nothing what-so-ever to do with their creation.
The low density started when farming/fishing and the fur trade was ubiquitous. Earlier than that it started when nomads travelled large distances to track fauna for subsistence living.
You might think that's being overly pedantic on that matter but it isn't. The US had a much different history than Europe did. The US didn't colonize "naturally", it did so very forcefully and quickly by foreign pressures. That history is reflected in the layout of it's population.
Oh I get that, I'm not entirely over the thats-not-me hurdle myself... but I'd pull the trigger anyways if it were available.
I think though that I should have cleared up my argument from the start; I was only going against your issue with resources. I really don't think (with a helping of hope) that there is a problem there.
As to the comment that you were originally replying to (not mine) saying that any right-minded person wanting immortality - I'm not one to force my opinions or beliefs on others. I'm not qualified to tell people they should choose immortality given the option and even if I was I still wouldn't.
My mother says she "wants to see what's next". Myself, I think that's a little wild because I like what I've got just fine... talk about risk/reward! I also recognize that my opinions are my own and are not something to be forced on others.
the brain tends to make associations even if none truly exist.
Bingo.
I see one of two possible scenarios:
1. A person is concentrating so hard on ignoring earth-based signals that they mistake anything that could possibly be there as one and any potential discovery is missed.
2 (far more likely). SETI suddenly gets reports of eight million new signals because as you say, we're far too good at seeing patterns in noise.
Well that's an interesting question: whether the stuck in their ways is due to having experienced years of life or being angry at young people because of what they've lost.
However, as far as physical age is concerned, all evidence points to any biological immortality coming with/from a lack of aging. Specifically lab tests with telomerase shows reversal of physical age in mice, and similar in jellyfish. Any digital form of immortality will probably come with a vast reduction in power requirements vs. a biological immortality and would also do away with any physical limitations as well as expanding the available neural network space (to an effectively limitless value)
Now I'm firmly of the belief that old people are pricks because they're angry at the world (who wouldn't be when you're reminded constantly of how useless you are). It follows that extending life indefinitely would not cause the same kind of attitude if the physical age did not come with it.
However, it's just as possible that it is a mental state that comes from weak minds believing they're more experienced than others after having lived so long. That wouldn't be helped by a lack of physical age and your concern would be most imperative.
I admit to being biased towards good immortality, because I fully hope to take advantage of it...
There are enough resources in the universe to support an effectively limitless expansion of the human race.
Either have extensive, mandatory driver's training and strict road tests to keep the morons out from behind the wheel
Yes, Please.
I'm all for backup cameras and such too, I like technology... But let's face it there's only one way to actually reduce the number of accidents on the road.
Wrong, wrong and more wrong.
Apple doesn't give two shits about Siri competition. They bought Siri so that they would have something no one else did. It worked, people were interested.
The only thing apple ever cares about is selling more hardware. If Evi sells more hardware Apple will embrace it without hesitation.
What Apple won't do, is allow a shitty, broken and useless clone of Siri that looks way too similar continue to be sold on the app store. Someone that doesn't own an iPhone could witness someone using that piece of shit and confuse it with Siri, thereby getting the impression that Siri is as hopelessly useless as Evi.
Agreed, legs then arms would indeed be pretty foolish
However most here don't seem to grasp that having (seriously) unmatched legs would be a nightmare for a normal person, let alone one that is trying to rehab from complete amputation.
It's one thing for the leg to be slightly different length, but different muscle tone, length, bone structure (obviously not gross structure) would make rehab all but impossible.
I do however find it a little odd that they felt the need to do all four at the same time... surely the odds of success would have higher doing the legs and then the arms at a later date (with a different donor)
I've been doing exactly this for about a year now. I don't have cable and don't do physical media. Everything on my tv is streamed from my TV, the iPhone/Pad or for rentals we do grab it straight from the appleTV (though using the iPad as a remote for the keyboard)
Sold being the key word.
You are so stupid it hurts.
That is all.
So aside from the fact that you're trolling extremely poorly:
An iPad/year is a cost of $1.50 a day, you want to talk about expensive "status symbols" (seriously, if you think the iPad is a status symbol get a life) look no further than gourmet coffee.
Now since I actually do things for a living, my iPad is both paid for by my company and even if it wasn't a buck fifty a day to keep something I use several hours a day up to date is a fantastic deal... I use my car less than that and it costs a hell of a lot more.
No, you're talking about bitmap scaling which is not what is happening. When you create an iPhone 4 app you provide separate graphics at the new resolution. The same would be done here. UI elements are also native images for the resolution.
It is true that scaled apps from standard res would look less than stellar, but they already do.
As for them finding the specific LCD screen, you've clearly never paid attention to the lead-up to an apple product release.
The only thing that points to a 2x screen at all is the resources found in iOS5, but they've been there since before the 2 came out... didn't get a 2x screen then either.
It sounds very much like you bought the iPad because it was first, rather than because it was the iPad (which is perfectly reasonable).
If all you're really doing in media consumption, then the upgrades will mean little to nothing to you; you'd also be further ahead to buy a different tablet if you were in the market right now.
The iPad's strength is in all of the other stuff it can do, and everyone I know that owns one (myself included of course) will be buying the 3 if the display is better and the speed bump is 2x or better.
Since the iPad has replaced my laptop, I have no problem paying $500 a year to keep it up to date.
Anyone who has ever written iOS software knows that the UI scaling is done by float, and can easily take a value of 1.5.
That means that apple could very reasonably put in a display that was a rational density, still be considered retina by it's accepted definition, and not cost a bajillion dollars each.
Now, it's possible that apple has managed to leverage it's supply chains and reserves to push display tech forward so massively, but there is absolutely no reason to assume that they have.
No you're quite wrong there -- they can and ostensibly do hire some really great people (security included). They also hire absolute chaff a lot of the time, but neither of those have anything to do with why wallet and such suck.
They aren't ads, and they aren't search. Google only actually cares about the stuff that makes them money, or the stuff that could make them money. They've already botched wallet and checkout, just like gTalk the launch was awful in a crowded market and the product is a failure because of it. Since the chances of serious money making are gone so is any likelihood of getting anyone good on the project
but can we please leave the absolutely needless apple bashing out of completely unrelated article headlines?
They aren't suing over iTunes, they are suing over them being defrauded by their label. Apple nor iTunes has anything to do with the suit except as a delivery vector.
For fucks sake the actual reason for the suit (the label) doesn't even appear in the headline.
Well so just to be clear, I actually was referring to what you describe; a lot of young people take their work home with them (myself included) without being asked... In my case specifically told to enjoy our evenings and not take work home.
But my brain doesn't shut off when I walk out the door, and I'm not coming home to kids who need attention. So although in my case it certainly isn't 80 I wouldn't be shocked if I end up putting in 60 on a regular basis.
However, there is also the other side of the coin -- there are absolutely young guys that can be coerced into putting in way more time than they're paid for. I wasn't really referring to that though.
The real trick is, companies are starting to find out that old is not gold.
Firstly, they've convinced end users to put up with subpar products (not just buggy software, but stuff with 2 year expected life instead of 20).
Second, they've discovered that old guys tend not to be willing to work 80 hours a week and call it 40 (there are many exceptions I'm sure, but they typically have families and shy away from that stuff)
Third, with the rate at which things are advancing the old guys need to have been very proactive in keeping up, or they may have experience but lack the knowledge. Again, lots do -- but not all.
As an AC you won't see the reply, but in fact it's working quite well against the TSA. Not only are there senators and congress members talking about going after them whole-sale, there are also individual airports that are actively refusing any involvement in some or all of their bullshit.
You've gone straight into moron territory.
One last time I never mentioned other licenses ready for this...
AT ALL
The fact that you truly believe that you believe everyone is so horribly weak minded and powerless as you is amusing.
Thank god we aren't all so submissive.
They're apparently much smarter than you are.
The FBI is what it is because it outwardly appears to operate effectively. If you can demonstrate well enough that it is not effective it will be dismantled either through staffing changes or actual full-on dismantling.
You don't try to tie up the FBI's time, because it will just cost the tax payer more money. You throw egg in it's face as often as you possibly can until it's a laughing stock and must be replaced/removed in order to save face.
Again, clearly much smarter than you