Warranty service is also factored into the price of the item. So it is at least possible for the sensors to lower the cost (or perhaps increase the profit...).
This is why people have been talking about deactivators since about 5 minutes after Walmart made it clear that they were going to be using RFID.
I don't have a link handy, but somebody built an RFID privacy device that operated by being the loudest tag when scanned, maybe not such a bad thing to carry around (at least until they are made illegal).
Yeah, these things don't strike me as being a whole lot different than a difficult to remove, difficult to obtain, sticker (that makes it clear something has been opened).
We could easily be in a biological cul-de-sac, so it looks like the only way to find out if a bigger brain is better (or if a better system of organization is available) is to try it.
We've put computers in charge (sort of, I disagree with that characterization) of things that our current society depends on. Many humans still live entirely without machines for war, communication, transportation, production and banking (they often engage in several of those activities without utilizing machines though).
Anyway, the first chip smart enough to replicate itself is not very likely to be attached to a machine that makes it possible, and even then, it isn't real clear that the motivations of the intelligence on the chip will include 'bent on replication' the way the machines that our intelligence rides around in do.
Actually, we exterminated most of the megafauna on at least 3 continents (Australia and the Americas) and throughout the Pacific. Think things like Woolly Mammoths, and huge birds.
My point was more that biology provides a plenty hostile environment, thinking machines are going to have to cope with biology just as much as biology has to cope with them, and it isn't particularly likely that they will be orders of magnitude better at energy utilization than we are (you and I can swing a wrecking bar for quite some time given a few ounces of sugar, which means hostile machines better build themselves sturdy, which means they need to balance their resource investment, and so on).
Wolves have not succeeded in destroying human kind, and they meet both of your criteria.
Lots of diseases procreate and kill human beings without doing anything resembling what we call thinking, but few of them have even threatened the globe (lots of diseases have been catastrophes, but each time, we bounce back).
And yet wheels are vastly more efficient than we are (I guess only given suitable conditions, but we have done a pretty good job creating those conditions).
If there was only some other way that you could store information in a mechanical system for (perhaps automatic) retrieval and display at a later date.
My issue with it is that it is as if, upon seeing a spreadsheet and a keyboard, they attempted to patent using the keyboard for entering data into the spreadsheet.
Gluing the whatsit to the whosit should not be viewed as an innovation (or at least, the great majority of the time), especially when they both have 'apply glue here' written on them in large block lettering (the majority of software written for general purpose computers is written in a way that enables using it with other software).
The ad company could just run the server (if the files were truly static, they could do so at pretty low cost).
Still, users who wanted to block those ads could participate in a system that let them flag content that was an advertisement and subscribe to a list of content that had been flagged as advertising (there would be some issues to deal with as far as unreliable users, but I doubt it would be a significant problem).
Launch it (make sure to get the bookmarklet and open the shell while viewing the page you want to interact with) and run the following command:
$('#audio').remove()
That will only work for this particular demo though (well, any demo that uses 'audio' as an id for the audio element), and it isn't exactly convenient.
I looked through some of the code, there is a framerate limit set, but it is set at 60 frames per second, so lots and lots of machines are apparently maxing out without reaching it.
Sounds like it, I've apparently had FF 3.5 (on XP) open since July 19th. Peak private bytes are around 550 MB, and private bytes are currently around 340 MB. It has consumed 17 hours of CPU time (which is probably a more telling measure of 'use' than how long it has been open).
I have browser.sessionhistory.max_total_viewers set to 3, but I don't think that has a huge impact on memory use. I also have the safebrowsing features turned off.
The entire point of canvas is programmatic drawing.
If you don't like javascript, that's fine, but I'm not sure how you expect an interactive drawing canvas to work without some sort of 'instructions' written in some sort of 'language'.
The advantages are supposed to be that it is standards based, and faster than DOM/CSS tricks, not that it doesn't involve javascript.
Yes, the difference in interoperability is not the issue, the difference in attitude at the receiving end is the issue (and not worth my time to fight...).
Slashdot Mirror
Well, next time you see someone going on about how they don't really see any use for the cloud, you will have an answer for them.
My U.S. Passport, issued in 2002, has a barcode on the inside of the back cover. I'm not sure what the number it encodes is used for.
Why not use a sensible gun?
Warranty service is also factored into the price of the item. So it is at least possible for the sensors to lower the cost (or perhaps increase the profit...).
Well, you've identified the problem.
This is why people have been talking about deactivators since about 5 minutes after Walmart made it clear that they were going to be using RFID.
I don't have a link handy, but somebody built an RFID privacy device that operated by being the loudest tag when scanned, maybe not such a bad thing to carry around (at least until they are made illegal).
The drop in warranty costs might make up for it.
There is no way to know what will happen without information about the cost and effectiveness of the devices.
Yeah, these things don't strike me as being a whole lot different than a difficult to remove, difficult to obtain, sticker (that makes it clear something has been opened).
We could easily be in a biological cul-de-sac, so it looks like the only way to find out if a bigger brain is better (or if a better system of organization is available) is to try it.
We've put computers in charge (sort of, I disagree with that characterization) of things that our current society depends on. Many humans still live entirely without machines for war, communication, transportation, production and banking (they often engage in several of those activities without utilizing machines though).
Anyway, the first chip smart enough to replicate itself is not very likely to be attached to a machine that makes it possible, and even then, it isn't real clear that the motivations of the intelligence on the chip will include 'bent on replication' the way the machines that our intelligence rides around in do.
Actually, we exterminated most of the megafauna on at least 3 continents (Australia and the Americas) and throughout the Pacific. Think things like Woolly Mammoths, and huge birds.
My point was more that biology provides a plenty hostile environment, thinking machines are going to have to cope with biology just as much as biology has to cope with them, and it isn't particularly likely that they will be orders of magnitude better at energy utilization than we are (you and I can swing a wrecking bar for quite some time given a few ounces of sugar, which means hostile machines better build themselves sturdy, which means they need to balance their resource investment, and so on).
Any truly radical change will be disruptive enough to cause chaos.
Wolves have not succeeded in destroying human kind, and they meet both of your criteria.
Lots of diseases procreate and kill human beings without doing anything resembling what we call thinking, but few of them have even threatened the globe (lots of diseases have been catastrophes, but each time, we bounce back).
And yet wheels are vastly more efficient than we are (I guess only given suitable conditions, but we have done a pretty good job creating those conditions).
If there was only some other way that you could store information in a mechanical system for (perhaps automatic) retrieval and display at a later date.
My issue with it is that it is as if, upon seeing a spreadsheet and a keyboard, they attempted to patent using the keyboard for entering data into the spreadsheet.
Gluing the whatsit to the whosit should not be viewed as an innovation (or at least, the great majority of the time), especially when they both have 'apply glue here' written on them in large block lettering (the majority of software written for general purpose computers is written in a way that enables using it with other software).
The ad company could just run the server (if the files were truly static, they could do so at pretty low cost).
Still, users who wanted to block those ads could participate in a system that let them flag content that was an advertisement and subscribe to a list of content that had been flagged as advertising (there would be some issues to deal with as far as unreliable users, but I doubt it would be a significant problem).
So how much incremental revenue to you figure you make when you post one of these?
Cause they are usually pretty lame, and you sure don't hesitate to throw them up.
The connotation of that last bit there was a happy accident.
You could manually run the autorun trojan. Patches be damned.
Make sure to log in with administrator rights beforehand.
The tags are generally per item, not per SKU, so with just a little cooperation between manufacturers and stores, they can be globally unique.
There is a simple, baroque way to do it:
Get a javascript shell:
https://www.squarefree.com/bookmarklets/webdevel.html#shell
Launch it (make sure to get the bookmarklet and open the shell while viewing the page you want to interact with) and run the following command:
$('#audio').remove()
That will only work for this particular demo though (well, any demo that uses 'audio' as an id for the audio element), and it isn't exactly convenient.
I looked through some of the code, there is a framerate limit set, but it is set at 60 frames per second, so lots and lots of machines are apparently maxing out without reaching it.
Sounds like it, I've apparently had FF 3.5 (on XP) open since July 19th. Peak private bytes are around 550 MB, and private bytes are currently around 340 MB. It has consumed 17 hours of CPU time (which is probably a more telling measure of 'use' than how long it has been open).
I have browser.sessionhistory.max_total_viewers set to 3, but I don't think that has a huge impact on memory use. I also have the safebrowsing features turned off.
The entire point of canvas is programmatic drawing.
If you don't like javascript, that's fine, but I'm not sure how you expect an interactive drawing canvas to work without some sort of 'instructions' written in some sort of 'language'.
The advantages are supposed to be that it is standards based, and faster than DOM/CSS tricks, not that it doesn't involve javascript.
Yes, the difference in interoperability is not the issue, the difference in attitude at the receiving end is the issue (and not worth my time to fight...).