Hmmm. Ok, how about trademark? Either way, the bottom line question is, do we not have the right to own ourselves? This would include everything that makes us unique? And if we are not allowed to own ourselves, then who owns us? And if nobody can own us, does that mean we are all in the public domain? These are all interesting questions, that I have never thought to ask before.
My personal feeling, is we do own ourselves, and that means we should be allowed the protections that comes along with such ownership. Much of what makes us us, is our unique information. Quite frankly such a perspective is as valid, if not more valid than all of the other bs that passes for intellectual property these days. If someone can own an "idea", then it would seem even more logical that they can own themselves.
Since copy and intellectual property rights (now reaching oxymoronic levels) have been given the stamp of iron-clad permanence and near holy sancity, I thought this might be the perfect protection for individual identity and privacy:
Starting today, I hearby copyright my own unique creation - myself. My face, body, personal stats, biometric identifiers, speech, writing, and movement through space is hereby protected copyright to the fullest extent of the law. Anyone who copies my information in a database, shares my personal information with others, is guilty of piracy. My identity is mine, and mine alone, and falls under the purview of copyright protection. Anyone who has a copy of any of my unique identifying information, including fingerprints, iris scans, walking gates, and DNA, and possesses that information without permission is now elgible to be sued.
On the one hand I admit this idea is silly, but I didn't write the rules of the game, the IP cartels, the congress, WIPO, and now the US Supreme court did. On the other hand, perhaps this is a way to use their laws to protect ourselves from invasions of privacy and unwanted intrusiveness of surveillance, which in this context is "stealing" our copyrights, and then pirating that information by copying and sharing it across countless goverment and corporate databases.
Anyone who sees a flaw in this argument is welcome to contact me. If there are any lawyers who think something like this can be pulled off, then also please contact me.
Since copy and intellectual property rights (now reaching oxymoronic levels) have been given the stamp of iron-clad permanence and near holy sancity, I thought this might be the perfect protection for individual identity and privacy:
Starting today, I hearby copyright my own unique creation - myself. My face, body, personal stats, biometric identifiers, speech, writing, and movement through space is hereby protected copyright to the fullest extent of the law. Anyone who copies my information in a database, shares my personal information with others, is guilty of piracy. My identity is mine, and mine alone, and falls under the purview of copyright protection. Anyone who has a copy of any of my unique identifying information, including fingerprints, iris scans, walking gates, and DNA, and possesses that information without permission is now elgible to be sued.
On the one hand I admit this idea is silly, but I didn't write the rules of the game, the IP cartels, the congress, WIPO, and now the US Supreme court did. On the other hand, perhaps this is a way to use their laws to protect ourselves from invasions of privacy and unwanted intrusiveness of surveillance, which in this context is "stealing" our copyrights, and then pirating that information by copying and sharing it across countless goverment and corporate databases.
Anyone who sees a flaw in this argument is welcome to contact me. If there are any lawyers who think something like this can be pulled off, then also please contact me.
Yes, if we rely on existing technologies and their efficiencies there will be a windfall. I can see two things that will necessary to make a Solar-Hydrogen Economy work:
1) Greater Efficiencies - if we can achieve even an efficiency approaching 70%, the amount of power generated on roof-tops alone would supply most of the needs of the home and even the hydrogen fuel for the family vehical(s).
2) Solar Power Satellites. The energy demand over the coming years is going to increase substantially. There will come a point, that the economic incentives of SPS and cheap access to space will play on each other and make SPS a viable source of energy. This will have the added benefit of substantially reducing the cost to get into space, finally opening up the space frontier for everyone who wants to go.
I agree, it really is a solar economy, but in the energy field, everyone refers to it as the Hydrogren Economy, because Hydrogen will act as the primary fuel source that replaces oil.
I don't get a shift feelign at all. We are already direly close to Hubbert Peak, when oil demand starts to outstrip production. In fact Hubbert, himself an oil man, said that Hubbert Peak, even considering undiscoverd reserves (which is fairly predictable with satellite reconaissance) will come sometime between 2002-2009.
You can read about here on my website for more info. Some in the oil industry are thinking that peak will be hit within the next two years. This might explain our rush to invade Iraq.
Either way, as oil reserve dwindle and demand goes up, it will create a highly destabilized politic - and if you think the repression we've all been feeling lately is bad, it will only get worse... UNLESS:
We wean ourselves (QUICKLY!) off of Oil. The Hydrogen economy is just waiting in the wings. All of the technology is essentially there. The cost factors will become not only competitive, but cheaper and cleaner than oil, once we start migrating our energy infrastructure over to Hydrogen. Lets hope this happens before we end up in some kind of nigthmarish Oil Fedual/Fascist Global New World Order.
I have know about this company for years. Lumeloid Solutions claims their technology is theoretically capable of efficiencies of up to 80%.
Also there was a story about 2 weeks ago, mentioning solar energy breakthrough using full-spectrum layering. Does anyone know anymore about this. I was unable to find it in Google News.
Nanotech material, once they arrive, will of course make 90% efficient material practical.
I can see why you went with being an AG. Name calling is unneccessary. But in answer to your post:
This technology is not still-to-be developed, it is developed. And regardless of the economy, this technology is so superior to existing digital cameras, that a bad economony would only further motivate a camera company to integrate this technology into their product line, as it would make them more competitive in a harsh market.
The X3 announcement came out almost a year ago, and still their is only one, ONE camera that has this technology. If its so superior (which is it by the way!) then why the hell hasn't this thing been flooding the market? It defies description.
In fact, earlier this year the announcment was that we should see several cameras with X3 technology on the store shelves in time for Christmas. What happened?
The only place that I might be enticed to micropay for anything is compelling content, especially knowing that money is going into the hand of the aritst/writer/creator that provides it, and the payment is reasobable.
But paying for the amount of bandwith I use? Perposterous! We already pay way to much for broadband access as it is, and most of us have had our bandwitdth seriously capped in the last year. And in large part this expensive capped service exists because we lacks serious competition in broadband.
Compare our prices to Asia and it will make you weep:
Japan: $11/month gets you 11 megabits/sec
Korea: $25/month gets you 100 megabits/sec!
And these are flat rates!
**The capacity and growth of actual bandwith has far exceeded the exponential of processor speed. The current pricing structure in the US is Greed, pure and simple from Dinosaurs trying to hold onto power by enforcing artificial scarcity.
Reminds me of that Star Trek episode The Chase, in which Dr. Galen, Captain Picards old Archaeology professor, found genetic data-blocks from various species around the galaxy stored in the junk portion of each species DNA, including our own. When a sufficient number of these data blocks were put together it completed a stellar map, identifying the precise location of the original origin of life on out planet and countless others. The jury is still out on the Panspermia Theory, but my own hunch is that there is lots of intelligence out there vastly older and greater than we are.
I'm afraid you are mistaken my/. friend. You are forgetting one very important thing:
Nanotech will bring in the next 10 years - mass produced carbon nanotubes.
This advance alone will revolution industrial design more than anything in the last 200 years. Among the wonder made feasible and affordable by carbon nanotubes are very cheap access to space with not only very lightweight (read cheap $/lb to orbit), but novel structures like Space Elevators.
As far as morphing into any shape - disputing this means you also dispute that molecular assemblers are also impossible or at best very difficult in the next century. Do not forget Moores law, and that we can expect computers on the desktop running at Petaflops within 20 years. That kind of computer power will allow us to make incredible strides in protien folding and subsequently molecular manufacturing.
Your are right, the brain is not a digital device, but that does not mean that we can take all of its analog-mechanical/neuro-molecular/neurotransmitter functioning and improve on it. In fact, much of the functional at the axonic/dendritic level is a horrible waste of space, so the same processes can be carried out (analog of course) in a much more compact space (at least a 1000 fold decrease in size) - meaning that we can either have an equivalent brain 1000th the size or a brain with 1000 times more capacity (volume) that takes up the same space now. And did I forget to mention that those neurotransmitter processes are complex information pathways - and they can be digitized. This means that along with our 1000x capacity brains, we can have a 10^6 improvement in speed.
I think the real question is what will we look like in 100 years? Assuming we are able to ride the accelerating technological curve into utopia instead of oblivion, in less than 100 years we are likely going to gain the ability to morph into almost any imaginable shape and/or becoming uploads traversing the universe.
Ok, I've been annoyed for years at the disparity between corporations and customers in who knows what about who. I think its time someone came up with a P2p, open source, reputation system in which we can turn the lens of datamining back on them. Technologies like Cuejack combined with the efforts of groups like Transparency International, can help bring about Participitory Capitalism.
I know this sounds totally crazy, but I have vivid memories of being born, and the first few days in the hospital before they let me go home. According to my mom, I have always had an unusually sharp memory of my early childhood. I have lots and lots of memories of events that took place in the first two years of my life.
If are considering text only, then the Library of Congress is aproximately 100 Terabytes. We can call this unit measurement 1 LCT (Library of Congress Text)
If we add images that are in these books, as well as their map collection, then we are up past a Petabyte (1000 Terabytes). We can call this unit 1 LC (Library of Congress - ALL).
Question: The trend unit is "how many equivalents of library of congress" does it hold?
Answer: Each of these new discs has a storage capactiy of 0.015 LCT, or 0.0015 LC.
Again your are wrong. Did you ever Play the Blade Runner Game that came out in late 97? It was a fantastic game, and it had hundreds of possible scenarios and plot twists.
The design of my game was similar, the goal of my game was to get to the center of the galaxy, so ultimately there are only a few ways you could achieve that, say a dozen or so. So my games possibilities continued to narrow and the large number of alternate story lines and game play trajectories continued to merge as you played. This game could have easily been created in 1997 and even more so now. And despite the fact that this game can be done right now, it hasn't. My chief complaint is that compelling games are just not made anymore in the wake of Doom, Quake, etc. Its not what the kiddies want, and its not what makes money (at least in the eyes of the game makers).
You have to admit games have gotten increasingly mindless over the years, since Ultima 7, etc. We either have boring/slow strategy games on one extreme, or mindless fast fps games on the other.
To repeat my main point: Where are the adventure games?!
If we could do Ulitima 7, years ago, imagine what we could do today, if only the legion of programmers at a Game Development company were to be paid to make it. Imagine.
Huh? If you read my original post, you will see that this n-variable artifical life algrothim has already been implemented in the long line of SIMS Games since 1989. My only complaint is that these same algorithms have not been applied to adventure games. When I say nearly unlimted I am referring specifically to the number of outcomes, just like chess. You can buy a computerized chess game for $19.95 and it has 10^81 possible outcomes. The same goes for most of the SIMS games. And there is no single compelling reason why this cannot be applied to adventure games. Its no longer the technical challenge to make this game - only a temporal and financial one.
Please read my original post and complains about why computer games suck, before critisizing any of my comments. I appreciate your criticism, but I'd like all the more if it were more informed.
hmmmm, now you have me thinking. So between your alternative and mine, which is worse? I suppose we could say since we are dealing with so many variables that all of the above is true. It is hard to argue though that people like Ridge, Ashcroft, Poindexter, Rumsfeld, Horowitz, and Cheney are not conspiring. Everything they do suggest that is exactly what they are doing - they want total global world domination. Even their Policy of the New American Century clearly outlines this agenda. And every move they make has been an agressive higly co-ordinated attack on our civil liberties.
If I were to systematically conspire to create a slave orwellian state, I can see no better way than what they are doing now. Their plan for total domination and control could not have been more brilliantly executed. Ask the average American from 3 year ago and they would be shocked at how far we have slid into facism.
There is a third and more likely explanation. They are using this fake "war on terror" as an excuse to create a surveillance state for the sole purpose of controlling everyone, and destroying anyone who gets in their way. Period. It has nothing to do with stopping terrorism or crime, quite the opposite - it is designed so that they have the monopoloy on both.
Yes, I have read this book. And one of the most important points it made, is transparency only works if it is both ways. What we are seeing instead is an increasing consolidation and centralization of one-way transparency. Where they get to watch more and more of us, while they themselves remain cloaked in secrecy for so-called national security reasons.
Slashdot Mirror
Banks isn't entirely new, but he remains largely and undeservedly undiscovered. You can read all about him on my Iain Banks website.
I would also say that if you have not already read Greg Egan, especially his book, Diaspora, do so. This is first-rank hard sf at its best!
Planet P Blog - Liberty with Technology
Hmmm. Ok, how about trademark? Either way, the bottom line question is, do we not have the right to own ourselves? This would include everything that makes us unique? And if we are not allowed to own ourselves, then who owns us? And if nobody can own us, does that mean we are all in the public domain? These are all interesting questions, that I have never thought to ask before.
My personal feeling, is we do own ourselves, and that means we should be allowed the protections that comes along with such ownership. Much of what makes us us, is our unique information. Quite frankly such a perspective is as valid, if not more valid than all of the other bs that passes for intellectual property these days. If someone can own an "idea", then it would seem even more logical that they can own themselves.
Planet P Blog - Liberty with Technology.
On the one hand I admit this idea is silly, but I didn't write the rules of the game, the IP cartels, the congress, WIPO, and now the US Supreme court did. On the other hand, perhaps this is a way to use their laws to protect ourselves from invasions of privacy and unwanted intrusiveness of surveillance, which in this context is "stealing" our copyrights, and then pirating that information by copying and sharing it across countless goverment and corporate databases.
Anyone who sees a flaw in this argument is welcome to contact me. If there are any lawyers who think something like this can be pulled off, then also please contact me.
On the one hand I admit this idea is silly, but I didn't write the rules of the game, the IP cartels, the congress, WIPO, and now the US Supreme court did. On the other hand, perhaps this is a way to use their laws to protect ourselves from invasions of privacy and unwanted intrusiveness of surveillance, which in this context is "stealing" our copyrights, and then pirating that information by copying and sharing it across countless goverment and corporate databases.
Anyone who sees a flaw in this argument is welcome to contact me. If there are any lawyers who think something like this can be pulled off, then also please contact me.
Yes, if we rely on existing technologies and their efficiencies there will be a windfall. I can see two things that will necessary to make a Solar-Hydrogen Economy work:
1) Greater Efficiencies - if we can achieve even an efficiency approaching 70%, the amount of power generated on roof-tops alone would supply most of the needs of the home and even the hydrogen fuel for the family vehical(s).
2) Solar Power Satellites. The energy demand over the coming years is going to increase substantially. There will come a point, that the economic incentives of SPS and cheap access to space will play on each other and make SPS a viable source of energy. This will have the added benefit of substantially reducing the cost to get into space, finally opening up the space frontier for everyone who wants to go.
Planet P Blog - Liberty with Technology.
I agree, it really is a solar economy, but in the energy field, everyone refers to it as the Hydrogren Economy, because Hydrogen will act as the primary fuel source that replaces oil.
I don't get a shift feelign at all. We are already direly close to Hubbert Peak, when oil demand starts to outstrip production. In fact Hubbert, himself an oil man, said that Hubbert Peak, even considering undiscoverd reserves (which is fairly predictable with satellite reconaissance) will come sometime between 2002-2009.
You can read about here on my website for more info. Some in the oil industry are thinking that peak will be hit within the next two years. This might explain our rush to invade Iraq.
Either way, as oil reserve dwindle and demand goes up, it will create a highly destabilized politic - and if you think the repression we've all been feeling lately is bad, it will only get worse... UNLESS:
We wean ourselves (QUICKLY!) off of Oil. The Hydrogen economy is just waiting in the wings. All of the technology is essentially there. The cost factors will become not only competitive, but cheaper and cleaner than oil, once we start migrating our energy infrastructure over to Hydrogen.
Lets hope this happens before we end up in some kind of nigthmarish Oil Fedual/Fascist Global New World Order.
Planet P Blog - Liberty with Technology.
I have know about this company for years. Lumeloid Solutions claims their technology is theoretically capable of efficiencies of up to 80%.
Also there was a story about 2 weeks ago, mentioning solar energy breakthrough using full-spectrum layering. Does anyone know anymore about this. I was unable to find it in Google News.
Nanotech material, once they arrive, will of course make 90% efficient material practical.
Planet P Blog - Liberty with Technology.
I can see why you went with being an AG. Name calling is unneccessary. But in answer to your post:
This technology is not still-to-be developed, it is developed. And regardless of the economy, this technology is so superior to existing digital cameras, that a bad economony would only further motivate a camera company to integrate this technology into their product line, as it would make them more competitive in a harsh market.
Planet P Blog - Liberty with Technology.
The X3 announcement came out almost a year ago, and still their is only one, ONE camera that has this technology. If its so superior (which is it by the way!) then why the hell hasn't this thing been flooding the market? It defies description.
In fact, earlier this year the announcment was that we should see several cameras with X3 technology on the store shelves in time for Christmas. What happened?
Planet P Blog - Liberty with Technology.
The only place that I might be enticed to micropay for anything is compelling content, especially knowing that money is going into the hand of the aritst/writer/creator that provides it, and the payment is reasobable.
But paying for the amount of bandwith I use? Perposterous! We already pay way to much for broadband access as it is, and most of us have had our bandwitdth seriously capped in the last year. And in large part this expensive capped service exists because we lacks serious competition in broadband.
Compare our prices to Asia and it will make you weep:
Japan: $11/month gets you 11 megabits/sec
Korea: $25/month gets you 100 megabits/sec!
And these are flat rates!
**The capacity and growth of actual bandwith has far exceeded the exponential of processor speed. The current pricing structure in the US is Greed, pure and simple from Dinosaurs trying to hold onto power by enforcing artificial scarcity.
I highly recomment everyone read Support Telcoms Fast Failure
Planet P Blog - Liberty with Technology.
Reminds me of that Star Trek episode The Chase, in which Dr. Galen, Captain Picards old Archaeology professor, found genetic data-blocks from various species around the galaxy stored in the junk portion of each species DNA, including our own. When a sufficient number of these data blocks were put together it completed a stellar map, identifying the precise location of the original origin of life on out planet and countless others. The jury is still out on the Panspermia Theory, but my own hunch is that there is lots of intelligence out there vastly older and greater than we are.
Planet P Blog - Liberty with Technology.
I'm afraid you are mistaken my /. friend. You are forgetting one very important thing:
Nanotech will bring in the next 10 years - mass produced carbon nanotubes.
This advance alone will revolution industrial design more than anything in the last 200 years. Among the wonder made feasible and affordable by carbon nanotubes are very cheap access to space with not only very lightweight (read cheap $/lb to orbit), but novel structures like Space Elevators.
As far as morphing into any shape - disputing this means you also dispute that molecular assemblers are also impossible or at best very difficult in the next century. Do not forget Moores law, and that we can expect computers on the desktop running at Petaflops within 20 years. That kind of computer power will allow us to make incredible strides in protien folding and subsequently molecular manufacturing.
Planet P Blog - Liberty with Technology.
Your are right, the brain is not a digital device, but that does not mean that we can take all of its analog-mechanical/neuro-molecular/neurotransmitter functioning and improve on it. In fact, much of the functional at the axonic/dendritic level is a horrible waste of space, so the same processes can be carried out (analog of course) in a much more compact space (at least a 1000 fold decrease in size) - meaning that we can either have an equivalent brain 1000th the size or a brain with 1000 times more capacity (volume) that takes up the same space now. And did I forget to mention that those neurotransmitter processes are complex information pathways - and they can be digitized. This means that along with our 1000x capacity brains, we can have a 10^6 improvement in speed.
Planet P Blog - Liberty with Technology.
I think the real question is what will we look like in 100 years? Assuming we are able to ride the accelerating technological curve into utopia instead of oblivion, in less than 100 years we are likely going to gain the ability to morph into almost any imaginable shape and/or becoming uploads traversing the universe.
Planet P Blog - Liberty with Technology.
Ok, I've been annoyed for years at the disparity between corporations and customers in who knows what about who. I think its time someone came up with a P2p, open source, reputation system in which we can turn the lens of datamining back on them. Technologies like Cuejack combined with the efforts of groups like Transparency International, can help bring about Participitory Capitalism.
Power to the people!
Planet P Blog - Liberty with Technology.
I know this sounds totally crazy, but I have vivid memories of being born, and the first few days in the hospital before they let me go home. According to my mom, I have always had an unusually sharp memory of my early childhood. I have lots and lots of memories of events that took place in the first two years of my life.
Planet P Blog - Liberty with Technology.
I'll take a serioud crack at your question.
If are considering text only, then the Library of Congress is aproximately 100 Terabytes. We can call this unit measurement 1 LCT (Library of Congress Text)
If we add images that are in these books, as well as their map collection, then we are up past a Petabyte (1000 Terabytes). We can call this unit 1 LC (Library of Congress - ALL).
Question: The trend unit is "how many equivalents of library of congress" does it hold?
Answer: Each of these new discs has a storage capactiy of 0.015 LCT, or 0.0015 LC.
Planet P Blog - Liberty with Technology.
Hi,
Actually, prime numbers just got easier to find, making practical very strong cryptography that much more practical.
BTW, I liked your other post, especially about the disruptive technologies and the showdown between them and TIA, Big Brother, etc.
Planet P Blog - Liberty with Technology.
Again your are wrong. Did you ever Play the Blade Runner Game that came out in late 97? It was a fantastic game, and it had hundreds of possible scenarios and plot twists.
The design of my game was similar, the goal of my game was to get to the center of the galaxy, so ultimately there are only a few ways you could achieve that, say a dozen or so. So my games possibilities continued to narrow and the large number of alternate story lines and game play trajectories continued to merge as you played. This game could have easily been created in 1997 and even more so now. And despite the fact that this game can be done right now, it hasn't. My chief complaint is that compelling games are just not made anymore in the wake of Doom, Quake, etc. Its not what the kiddies want, and its not what makes money (at least in the eyes of the game makers).
You have to admit games have gotten increasingly mindless over the years, since Ultima 7, etc. We either have boring/slow strategy games on one extreme, or mindless fast fps games on the other.
To repeat my main point: Where are the adventure games?!
If we could do Ulitima 7, years ago, imagine what we could do today, if only the legion of programmers at a Game Development company were to be paid to make it. Imagine.
Huh? If you read my original post, you will see that this n-variable artifical life algrothim has already been implemented in the long line of SIMS Games since 1989. My only complaint is that these same algorithms have not been applied to adventure games. When I say nearly unlimted I am referring specifically to the number of outcomes, just like chess. You can buy a computerized chess game for $19.95 and it has 10^81 possible outcomes. The same goes for most of the SIMS games. And there is no single compelling reason why this cannot be applied to adventure games. Its no longer the technical challenge to make this game - only a temporal and financial one.
Please read my original post and complains about why computer games suck, before critisizing any of my comments. I appreciate your criticism, but I'd like all the more if it were more informed.
Planet P Blog - Liberty with Technology.
hmmmm, now you have me thinking. So between your alternative and mine, which is worse? I suppose we could say since we are dealing with so many variables that all of the above is true. It is hard to argue though that people like Ridge, Ashcroft, Poindexter, Rumsfeld, Horowitz, and Cheney are not conspiring. Everything they do suggest that is exactly what they are doing - they want total global world domination. Even their Policy of the New American Century clearly outlines this agenda. And every move they make has been an agressive higly co-ordinated attack on our civil liberties.
If I were to systematically conspire to create a slave orwellian state, I can see no better way than what they are doing now. Their plan for total domination and control could not have been more brilliantly executed. Ask the average American from 3 year ago and they would be shocked at how far we have slid into facism.
They are feasible, just not economically lucrative.
There is a third and more likely explanation. They are using this fake "war on terror" as an excuse to create a surveillance state for the sole purpose of controlling everyone, and destroying anyone who gets in their way. Period. It has nothing to do with stopping terrorism or crime, quite the opposite - it is designed so that they have the monopoloy on both.
Planet P Blog - Liberty with Technology.
Yes, I have read this book. And one of the most important points it made, is transparency only works if it is both ways. What we are seeing instead is an increasing consolidation and centralization of one-way transparency. Where they get to watch more and more of us, while they themselves remain cloaked in secrecy for so-called national security reasons.
There is hope though, some brave souls have set up this - Poindexter Awareness Office.
Planet P Blog - Liberty with Technology.