Unless Amazon carefully gives Kindles owned by blind people special capabilities.
Probably tough to prevent cheats from ripping the feature and putting it in their Kindles, but it would probably work well enough to keep both the blind and the guild happy.
Depends on whether it had a systemic effect; the $100 billion (at this point, paper) loss may have had no effect on the economy, or it may have saved the status quo far more than that.
Whether preserving the status quo is what is best for everyone is a whole nother discussion, but, in general, the government programs have acted in that vein.
There is a blurb in a recent Scientific American that states there is tens of thousands of years of uranium in the ocean. There isn't currently technology that can obtain the uranium, but if it comes down to a choice between your sad-face distopia and some radiation, do you really think people are going to choose a distopia?
I would agree with you if no one were handicapped. Unfortunately, if you park in a handicapped spot unnecessarily you might be blocking someone who isn't an asshole, so justifying it with the assholes doesn't really work.
You are mistaken. The government received senior bonds in exchange for the money. Today, Citigroup asked the government to convert those bonds to equity, and the government now owns 36% of Citigroup (under the bond structure, Citi had to pay the government interest; apparently, that was a problem, so they converted them to equity; hopefully they got a reasonable price).
It may end up that the government investment disappears, or it may turn a profit (I would guess that the government will recoup a significant percentage of the money), but it didn't disappear down some rabbit hole, it was in exchange for financial instruments obligating the banks to pay the government back.
Starting a new bank with a clean balance sheet probably would have been more effective, but they choose to bail out people who had deposited funds at existing banks (that's almost everybody...).
I'd rather find out that some dillhole is worried about something I said 15 years ago straight away. Spending my time making sure I am hidden away from dillholes sounds horrible.
Sure, this may inconvenience me in a great many ways, but no amount of convenience is worth letting tiresome biddies run the world.
For all the shit they pull, and all the flack that Balmer gets for "Developers...", it isn't as if Microsoft has been entirely developer hostile in the past (given that they support a binary ecosystem, the backwards compatibility of windows over time has been pretty good; A source based ecosystem does it better, but that isn't what they support...).
I would think that would only apply if you take the stand in your own defense. If the prosecution calls you, I'm pretty sure you are free to tell them to rot in hell (or, that is, it isn't contempt in that case).
A forensic specialist isn't going to examine individual files. He is going to have tools that examine each file for him and list the files that are interesting.
Stenography is interesting, but it isn't going to protect you against a determined opponent.
I encrypt my financial documents, so that someone who stole my laptop would not be able to trivially access them.
In a legal proceeding, after discussing it with my lawyer, it is quite likely that I would go ahead and decrypt them (probably after reviewing the files with the lawyer, etc.).
Please explain how I benefit from using a system that creates doubt that I have revealed the full contents of the encrypted volume.
The problem with plausible deniability is that it creates doubt in contexts where your word is being considered and is irrelevant in other contexts (i.e., if someone is willing to physically threaten you to access something they think is on your computer, they aren't going to care if it is actually there).
I like the Kindle form factor better for reading (I think, I don't have a netbook or a Kindle). It supports unencumbered mobi books, so there isn't any need to play along with DRM books (well, except for availability). I suppose there is the whole "It's tainted because it makes DRM possible" argument, but I don't care about that.
I saw a Bezos interview where he said that they thought they had made pretty aggressive estimates about sales of the first Kindle (i.e., they thought they would have enough). I suppose they took that into account for the Kindle2 (hopefully they ramp up and cut prices...).
And usually, Amazon doesn't charge you until they ship, so if you wanted exactly a Kindle (and not just an ebook reader), I'm not sure what chance you would be taking.
Much of the logging that is done leads to tree farms, but not all of it (for instance, the majority of North America has been logged at least once). This is somewhat related to it being rather difficult to farm hardwoods (they die a lot, and grow funny, mitigating the benefits of nice neat rows).
Even if logging ceased, there are all sorts of more subtle things to worry about, like worms:
The comment that you first replied to was a response to a comment that was talking about the "save the children!" type of save, so the comment was probably mostly in response to that. I would guess that they are relatively neutral about the other savings (and thus it doesn't make any sense to try to hold them to a point on it).
One big difference is a lot a whole lot more people are less squeamish about the failure to implant.
I wonder how (most of the) people who feel that creating an unimplanted embryo is immoral feel about fertile women who abstain from sex. Choosing not to add sperm seems pretty close to choosing not to incubate, to me.
You can dump some methanol in and keep on going. A few ounces of liquid may be a lot easier to carry around than extra batteries, or the electric grid, depending on what you happen to be doing.
Slashdot Mirror
Unless Amazon carefully gives Kindles owned by blind people special capabilities.
Probably tough to prevent cheats from ripping the feature and putting it in their Kindles, but it would probably work well enough to keep both the blind and the guild happy.
"That's not a DRM break, it exploits the fact that DRM can't work."
Depends on whether it had a systemic effect; the $100 billion (at this point, paper) loss may have had no effect on the economy, or it may have saved the status quo far more than that.
Whether preserving the status quo is what is best for everyone is a whole nother discussion, but, in general, the government programs have acted in that vein.
I think viruses are generally crystalline.
How is the way you are framing different from "If people weren't people, communism would work"?
What I mean is, doesn't an 'ideal' system have to account for actual human nature?
I guess there is some value in contemplating societies composed of perfect beings, but it is a damn shame anyone tried to make use of them.
(Note that, long ago, I had a sig that read: "Capitalism -- A form of socialism that bothers to account for human nature.")
Wait, why won't nuclear work?
There is a blurb in a recent Scientific American that states there is tens of thousands of years of uranium in the ocean. There isn't currently technology that can obtain the uranium, but if it comes down to a choice between your sad-face distopia and some radiation, do you really think people are going to choose a distopia?
Here's the blurb:
http://www.sciam.com/article.cfm?id=how-long-will-global-uranium-deposits-last
I'm not real confident that publishers would have older books in digital format. And I mean 15 years old, not 50.
Look for a place with a garage.
I would agree with you if no one were handicapped. Unfortunately, if you park in a handicapped spot unnecessarily you might be blocking someone who isn't an asshole, so justifying it with the assholes doesn't really work.
You are mistaken. The government received senior bonds in exchange for the money. Today, Citigroup asked the government to convert those bonds to equity, and the government now owns 36% of Citigroup (under the bond structure, Citi had to pay the government interest; apparently, that was a problem, so they converted them to equity; hopefully they got a reasonable price).
It may end up that the government investment disappears, or it may turn a profit (I would guess that the government will recoup a significant percentage of the money), but it didn't disappear down some rabbit hole, it was in exchange for financial instruments obligating the banks to pay the government back.
Starting a new bank with a clean balance sheet probably would have been more effective, but they choose to bail out people who had deposited funds at existing banks (that's almost everybody...).
I'd rather find out that some dillhole is worried about something I said 15 years ago straight away. Spending my time making sure I am hidden away from dillholes sounds horrible.
Sure, this may inconvenience me in a great many ways, but no amount of convenience is worth letting tiresome biddies run the world.
For all the shit they pull, and all the flack that Balmer gets for "Developers...", it isn't as if Microsoft has been entirely developer hostile in the past (given that they support a binary ecosystem, the backwards compatibility of windows over time has been pretty good; A source based ecosystem does it better, but that isn't what they support...).
I would think that would only apply if you take the stand in your own defense. If the prosecution calls you, I'm pretty sure you are free to tell them to rot in hell (or, that is, it isn't contempt in that case).
A forensic specialist isn't going to examine individual files. He is going to have tools that examine each file for him and list the files that are interesting.
Stenography is interesting, but it isn't going to protect you against a determined opponent.
I encrypt my financial documents, so that someone who stole my laptop would not be able to trivially access them.
In a legal proceeding, after discussing it with my lawyer, it is quite likely that I would go ahead and decrypt them (probably after reviewing the files with the lawyer, etc.).
Please explain how I benefit from using a system that creates doubt that I have revealed the full contents of the encrypted volume.
The problem with plausible deniability is that it creates doubt in contexts where your word is being considered and is irrelevant in other contexts (i.e., if someone is willing to physically threaten you to access something they think is on your computer, they aren't going to care if it is actually there).
Except that the current generation is used to content being free and increasingly available (and increasingly so).
I like the Kindle form factor better for reading (I think, I don't have a netbook or a Kindle). It supports unencumbered mobi books, so there isn't any need to play along with DRM books (well, except for availability). I suppose there is the whole "It's tainted because it makes DRM possible" argument, but I don't care about that.
I saw a Bezos interview where he said that they thought they had made pretty aggressive estimates about sales of the first Kindle (i.e., they thought they would have enough). I suppose they took that into account for the Kindle2 (hopefully they ramp up and cut prices...).
Kindle2 is in stock now.
And usually, Amazon doesn't charge you until they ship, so if you wanted exactly a Kindle (and not just an ebook reader), I'm not sure what chance you would be taking.
Bezos laughs a lot in every interview he does. I guarantee he will yuck it up on Rose.
Much of the logging that is done leads to tree farms, but not all of it (for instance, the majority of North America has been logged at least once). This is somewhat related to it being rather difficult to farm hardwoods (they die a lot, and grow funny, mitigating the benefits of nice neat rows).
Even if logging ceased, there are all sorts of more subtle things to worry about, like worms:
http://www.sciam.com/article.cfm?id=invasive-earthworms-denude-forests
The comment that you first replied to was a response to a comment that was talking about the "save the children!" type of save, so the comment was probably mostly in response to that. I would guess that they are relatively neutral about the other savings (and thus it doesn't make any sense to try to hold them to a point on it).
One big difference is a lot a whole lot more people are less squeamish about the failure to implant.
I wonder how (most of the) people who feel that creating an unimplanted embryo is immoral feel about fertile women who abstain from sex. Choosing not to add sperm seems pretty close to choosing not to incubate, to me.
Doomed to be replaced by a new race of super humans!
I mean, pretty much regardless.
You can dump some methanol in and keep on going. A few ounces of liquid may be a lot easier to carry around than extra batteries, or the electric grid, depending on what you happen to be doing.