Or people who make a living writing programs, with some understanding of markets, have a decent understanding that the various processors and memory loaded into these tablets are, how do I put it, limited? Which means the applications that run on them are limited. You can play Angry Birds on them, but you aren't playing Skyrim; you can record some limited video with them, but try splicing 5 TB of digital video into a final product; you can write some quick notes / answer emails on them, but tapping out a research paper or novel would quickly damage those fingers. Basically, for anything that would have you pushed into the 'creator' category instead of the 'consumer' category will quickly have you pining for a real computer.
And yes, one day, the tablet PC will catch up to where the desktop PC is right now. It will be able to run Half-Life 2 with all the bling, and merge a few thousand layers in Photoshop without choking to death, and hell, might even have a sizable SSD. But by then, people will be shooting Gigapixel video, running Half-Life 4, and probably still tapping out novels in Latex / Word / whatever.
I believe the most number of ARM cores, with a number of these tablets are using, is around four. My desktop is cranking at around eight. Those ARM processors are good for overclocking to 2 Ghz, while my desktop overclocks to at least 3.9 Ghz (possibly higher, but I haven't had the need to yet).
The same could be said for human beings, from a much higher plane of existence or as a life-form of greater complexity. What have you done that could not be argued was more than the result of a series of calculations brought on by interfacing with your environment? Dreams are weird, aren't they? So is reality.
Hmm. It's an interesting idea...freedom of speech for computers. I think I like it.
The argument being made in the article is that (assuming a non-sentient machine), freedom of speech for computers is simply an extension of those who are using it. And in the case of an AI (sentient machine), or several AIs, I would think we would want to extend that right to them as well.
Nonsense. The RIAA has often stated that it represents the copyright interests of signed artists to its group member; now, many people have pointed out that this is false, but from a quasi-political / legal aspect, we prefer the guillotine's blade to be nice and sharp before offing a tyrant.
The RIAA has, for a time, had a semi-legitimate case, but has seen to not 'get with the times,' preferring an outdated business model that promotes the very problem it seeks to resolve through legislation. What more, it's continued advances into other, protected sectors is angering a great many people (both at the top, and closer to the middle). Now, the people who have count themselves as friends of the RIAA will remain as such, provided they continue to be furnished with the appropriate bribes; but there will come a time when this will end, as all things must, and the populace will be left with nothing but a devastated legal landscape. At its heart, the RIAA is a paranoid baker, who bids his customers to eat their bread in his kitchen, where he can ensure not a crumb escapes to the outside world; customers are required to sign a lengthy legal document, entreating them not to share their bread with anyone else; special precautions, such as searching his customer's persons to prevent them sneaking off with a loaf, and a search of all nearby bakeries, whose bread is confiscated if it is deemed too similar to his own; finally, for fear of his customers and non-customers alike, enjoying their grainy treats in the quiet of their homes, he proposes to search them on demand as well.
Cooks have long dealt with issues of recipes (copyright) for centuries.
Oh, please. I have a new laptop, and despite the SSD and extra memory I shoved into it, it still can't hold a candle to my desktop.
The people crying that the end of the desktop is nigh are those people who never needed a desktop to begin with, and would be happy with an iPhone for all their 'computing' needs.
Precisely. If the average computer user understood what repeatedly streaming (especially without caching) did to their bandwidth, they'd run away in horror. If you explained to them that they could watch a movie in pristine quality by waiting 5 minutes, rather than an instant start with degraded quality, it would probably blow their minds.
But poor impulse control is considered the typical vice of the younger generation.
Nonsense. It's part of the grander conspiracy theory to get human test subjects for unsafe chemicals. Outlaw the tested drugs, throw in some untested drugs (yet strangely freely available, so it's 'voluntary'), collect the results, wash, rinse, repeat. This entire society is a bomb on stilts.
Ah, the power of the 'Dare' program -> it's kind of like your favorite party's or country's propaganda: you live in the best country in the world, why would you ever want to vacation elsewhere? you're already in the right party, with the right beliefs, why question those beliefs? etc.
Knowledge not gained first-hand is worth its weight in sand.
Well, it's that, or they have to talk about the state of the economy. And since that's not much of a winning issue for the Party of Purple, they're going to focus on making mountains out of molehills instead.
I know, right? You'd think the government would extensively test a new substance before outlawing it, but hey, they've been losing the war on drugs, and this new test is certain to turn things around.
True, but to employ a programmer of that quality would be cost prohibitive; you'd be wanting a programmer among programmers here. Hence the anger / revenge here, as it overcomes the inability of said employees to afford such talent (the market doesn't know how to deal with revenge-oriented people, since money means nothing to them, and they can't be bought off; it's the equivalent of hitting a singularity).
Yes, but in the case of the hijacked airplane, you'd probably have a >75% chance of attacking the right people (the hijackers), whereas with a 'cyber'attack,' the number is drastically lower.
Well, theoretically, if one were so obsessively inclined, it is possible to spelunk your way upstream, router by router, to track down the offending computers, even when the attacker is using forged IP addresses. Although, I imagine that even the cozy relationship that the various law / intelligence agencies and the various network providers normally enjoy would immediately become rather frosty if they found you doing that.
Once you have one member of the offending botnet, you find out how it has been compromised. A quick port scan can be telling here, but compromising the machine by other methods can be done, if necessary. Then you'd probably copy the botnet software to a VM for some dissection. Then you'd probably create some software of your own, to silently log any future connections to that machine, while trying to figure out how the botnet is being controlled. Eventually, you'll be able to track down the original (command) computer (even if they're using an IRC channel, or website, or relaying a command from one machine to the next ala Whisper Down the Alley style), and then the fun starts...botnet operators HATE IT when you compromise their command machines, and use the built-in webcam to take a picture of them. They really hate it when you record video. They're even more surprised when they're running Ubuntu, and think Linux would somehow prevent them from being hacked...
But yes, the obvious answer to an attacker on your network is to run to the comms room, and physically remove the network cables. As for the above, well, it's hard to find a programmer that's been angered deeply enough to engage in that kind of investigating.
Slashdot Mirror
Or people who make a living writing programs, with some understanding of markets, have a decent understanding that the various processors and memory loaded into these tablets are, how do I put it, limited? Which means the applications that run on them are limited. You can play Angry Birds on them, but you aren't playing Skyrim; you can record some limited video with them, but try splicing 5 TB of digital video into a final product; you can write some quick notes / answer emails on them, but tapping out a research paper or novel would quickly damage those fingers. Basically, for anything that would have you pushed into the 'creator' category instead of the 'consumer' category will quickly have you pining for a real computer.
And yes, one day, the tablet PC will catch up to where the desktop PC is right now. It will be able to run Half-Life 2 with all the bling, and merge a few thousand layers in Photoshop without choking to death, and hell, might even have a sizable SSD. But by then, people will be shooting Gigapixel video, running Half-Life 4, and probably still tapping out novels in Latex / Word / whatever.
I believe the most number of ARM cores, with a number of these tablets are using, is around four. My desktop is cranking at around eight. Those ARM processors are good for overclocking to 2 Ghz, while my desktop overclocks to at least 3.9 Ghz (possibly higher, but I haven't had the need to yet).
Why do we water-board human beings? How much longer will humanity make the tired argument that the ends justify the means?
The same could be said for human beings, from a much higher plane of existence or as a life-form of greater complexity. What have you done that could not be argued was more than the result of a series of calculations brought on by interfacing with your environment? Dreams are weird, aren't they? So is reality.
Hmm. It's an interesting idea...freedom of speech for computers. I think I like it.
The argument being made in the article is that (assuming a non-sentient machine), freedom of speech for computers is simply an extension of those who are using it. And in the case of an AI (sentient machine), or several AIs, I would think we would want to extend that right to them as well.
I believe only the dead have seen the end of this nonsense.
Not many of them are aware of the composition of the air they breathe, but change it too much, and they will express a sudden interest in such things.
Nonsense. The RIAA has often stated that it represents the copyright interests of signed artists to its group member; now, many people have pointed out that this is false, but from a quasi-political / legal aspect, we prefer the guillotine's blade to be nice and sharp before offing a tyrant.
The RIAA has, for a time, had a semi-legitimate case, but has seen to not 'get with the times,' preferring an outdated business model that promotes the very problem it seeks to resolve through legislation. What more, it's continued advances into other, protected sectors is angering a great many people (both at the top, and closer to the middle). Now, the people who have count themselves as friends of the RIAA will remain as such, provided they continue to be furnished with the appropriate bribes; but there will come a time when this will end, as all things must, and the populace will be left with nothing but a devastated legal landscape. At its heart, the RIAA is a paranoid baker, who bids his customers to eat their bread in his kitchen, where he can ensure not a crumb escapes to the outside world; customers are required to sign a lengthy legal document, entreating them not to share their bread with anyone else; special precautions, such as searching his customer's persons to prevent them sneaking off with a loaf, and a search of all nearby bakeries, whose bread is confiscated if it is deemed too similar to his own; finally, for fear of his customers and non-customers alike, enjoying their grainy treats in the quiet of their homes, he proposes to search them on demand as well.
Cooks have long dealt with issues of recipes (copyright) for centuries.
Bingo. They've overstepped their jurisdiction, and need to be placed back in their box.
i7, with 16 GB of RAM, 240 GB SSD, 750 GB HD.
What's yours?
Nonsense. Nothing destroys a person's belief in a benevolent creator like the persistent evil some people do in his / her / its name.
Oh, please. I have a new laptop, and despite the SSD and extra memory I shoved into it, it still can't hold a candle to my desktop.
The people crying that the end of the desktop is nigh are those people who never needed a desktop to begin with, and would be happy with an iPhone for all their 'computing' needs.
Countries have no friends, only temporary positive relations.
Is this before or after we attack China? Never under-estimate the evil a politician will commit to be elected / remain in power.
Precisely. If the average computer user understood what repeatedly streaming (especially without caching) did to their bandwidth, they'd run away in horror. If you explained to them that they could watch a movie in pristine quality by waiting 5 minutes, rather than an instant start with degraded quality, it would probably blow their minds.
But poor impulse control is considered the typical vice of the younger generation.
Nonsense. It's part of the grander conspiracy theory to get human test subjects for unsafe chemicals. Outlaw the tested drugs, throw in some untested drugs (yet strangely freely available, so it's 'voluntary'), collect the results, wash, rinse, repeat. This entire society is a bomb on stilts.
37-year old virgin singing 'I'm an Oscar Meyer Wiener.'
Ah, the power of the 'Dare' program -> it's kind of like your favorite party's or country's propaganda: you live in the best country in the world, why would you ever want to vacation elsewhere? you're already in the right party, with the right beliefs, why question those beliefs? etc.
Knowledge not gained first-hand is worth its weight in sand.
Well, it's that, or they have to talk about the state of the economy. And since that's not much of a winning issue for the Party of Purple, they're going to focus on making mountains out of molehills instead.
I know, right? You'd think the government would extensively test a new substance before outlawing it, but hey, they've been losing the war on drugs, and this new test is certain to turn things around.
Indeed. It's frightening to think that the legal system has been hijacked to create a form of legal slavery.
Yes, but that doesn't jive with the current policy of being way too intrusive on people's private lives and being extra creepy.
True, but to employ a programmer of that quality would be cost prohibitive; you'd be wanting a programmer among programmers here. Hence the anger / revenge here, as it overcomes the inability of said employees to afford such talent (the market doesn't know how to deal with revenge-oriented people, since money means nothing to them, and they can't be bought off; it's the equivalent of hitting a singularity).
Yes, but in the case of the hijacked airplane, you'd probably have a >75% chance of attacking the right people (the hijackers), whereas with a 'cyber'attack,' the number is drastically lower.
And yet sadly, those machines suffer from 0-day exploits that even the botnet owners are unaware of.
Well, theoretically, if one were so obsessively inclined, it is possible to spelunk your way upstream, router by router, to track down the offending computers, even when the attacker is using forged IP addresses. Although, I imagine that even the cozy relationship that the various law / intelligence agencies and the various network providers normally enjoy would immediately become rather frosty if they found you doing that.
Once you have one member of the offending botnet, you find out how it has been compromised. A quick port scan can be telling here, but compromising the machine by other methods can be done, if necessary. Then you'd probably copy the botnet software to a VM for some dissection. Then you'd probably create some software of your own, to silently log any future connections to that machine, while trying to figure out how the botnet is being controlled. Eventually, you'll be able to track down the original (command) computer (even if they're using an IRC channel, or website, or relaying a command from one machine to the next ala Whisper Down the Alley style), and then the fun starts...botnet operators HATE IT when you compromise their command machines, and use the built-in webcam to take a picture of them. They really hate it when you record video. They're even more surprised when they're running Ubuntu, and think Linux would somehow prevent them from being hacked...
But yes, the obvious answer to an attacker on your network is to run to the comms room, and physically remove the network cables. As for the above, well, it's hard to find a programmer that's been angered deeply enough to engage in that kind of investigating.