systems can think, and we are a system. while the person may or may not be 'thinking', a person is taking place in the thinking process of a higher order. behold! the hivemind!
obviously a person wouldn't be dehydrated if there was water available, and dehydration can and does lead to death. so in a sense, yes, there is a proverbial gun held to my head in this case.
the thoughts are not unnecessary, in fact they are very necessary. we need more of them. Winter clothes are expensive, and so is shelter. yet you can't live without either of them. food is expensive, you can't live without food. sooner or later it will make more sense to just destroy the screwball trying to force you to work longer than your lifespan is just to stay alive, then to deal with him.
Why don't we just start letting robots* compete in the Olympics? It would make the Olympics back into the frothing Nationalist and Racist entertainment they were to begin with, before the media corporations got their hands on it. Although to do so with a different bent - instead of nazi aryans vs. the world(1936 Berlin) or whatever, it would be Humanity vs it's creations: the machines.
I think when you can have a robot that not only can run the triathalon, but can navigate a random trail without someone on remote control, and do so in timed trials against humans, then and only then will this be significant.
*Obviously there must be some restriction on what a "robot" should be. how about, independant, and intelligent in some way? how about the robot has to be designed by machines(evolution processes, etc)?
this should make very clear which sports are trivial and which are not, (ie, Pole Vault will be difficult, whereas Javelin throw will not be.) when I see a humanoid robot run and throw himself 3000 feet into the air so they can just happen to fall over a bar, and then not destroy themselves upon landing...I'll start watching the olympics, at least until the commercialism involved drives me away again.
How about wrestling? A machine that can within the rules of wrestling pin a human being(perhaps with restriction that it must be humanoid,2 arms 2 legs and a head)? Or perhaps there will be entirely new sports gained from this! When robots begin to play soccer, then some sort of magnet-supported free-fall soccer might be more interesting, etc.
And hell, we could use that to get the companies out in the forefront as far as sponsorship goes. It's about time we had the Timex Ironman Triathalon team and the GM Wrestling team. We could have the following as a potential outcome:
GOLD: USA
SILVER: WALMART ROBOTICS
BRONZE: CANADA
etc
As a person who is currently working for a third of minnimum wage, I am going hopefully within the week to the local Circuit City to apply for a new job. And for some reason the above post puts a chill in my spine.
most people are also consumer sheep, taking whatever they are fed.
occasionally you get someone who is awake, and aware of the scam you are pulling, and the effect of this scam on you. just as you'd expect violent response if you were to try to rob someone, taking obscene amounts of money for something necessarry to life is just evil, and the person doing it should be destoyed.
the tap water local here isn't healthy either, and i've drank water out of a creek that is known to be untreated, not that this adds to anything.
Ambulance chasers only come about with the advance of capitalism and greed. We all take part in the big western hate machine. Point the finger at yourself, before anyone else, sir. We are all guilty here.
obviously you are too ugly/geeky/annoying for said girls, and if you force them to give you their phone numbers they are just going to ignore you anyways. leave these women alone, no matter how much you need to get laid.
that's so frightening that it to me sounds like the worst case scenario almost. and that, tied with Murphey's Law (or one of it's perversions), it should be closer to the truth then anything we've heard as of yet.
unfortunately, you cannot "eliminate" the rest of the world. that would be genocide on a level far beyond what has ever transpire, and for the attempt you would be every bit deserving of the resistance and "espionage games" your government and your people get.
"increase my bottom line by boosting upload at interconnects"
all the ISPs in my province(except the one i'm on...and even they are queasy about it) are afraid of giving customers any upload bandwidth, 1MByte down/8Kbyte up is pretty much the standard(DSL) and mabye a little better for cable... because we are considerred as consumer/cattle. they completely miss the point of the entire world-of-ends nature that builds the very fabric of the internet.
please explain to me how i can convince my isp and others that having poeple on their networks who upload (non-spam/crap)content to other isps in virtue of interconnect uploads.
you are correct in your implications, except in one thing...it's not *us*...
this puts *you* at square one becuase *i* did not rely on a god to define my 'good' for me, apting instead to follow the non-arbitrary path.
while *you* will be unable to pass judgements, due to absolute uncertianty of your gods intentions, *i* will be frontal-lobe thick into the child-abuser with a shovel( and justifiably so to all children left(And also, to the child abuser, for life itself is not worth living;) ) )
there we have it folks, god implies relativistic moral confusion, while atheists should maim child abusers. i didn't think i'd ever see that come out of a thread.
beyond getting dumped by the most wonderful girlfreind i'll ever have i think today may yet turn to be a good day
Re:Here's some solutions to help lower the bill:
on
DIY HVAC
·
· Score: 1, Offtopic
the computational potency of the earth is not infinite. do not turn of your computers, and make sure they are doing something at all time so long as it is reasonable to do so. i have 3 computers on right now, although one is being used to look at porn and browse slashdot(two relatively useless activities). contriubte to folding@home, or even seti@home if you must... help distributed computing projects with your cycles if you have nothing better to do with them. only leave your cycles empty when you are using your computer actively, and when you 'might need them' (ie, my main system(p-166 with 32mb ram) thrashes when i'm using either 100% of my ram+swap or 100% of my cpu... and this wastes human-time.) instead of looking for YOUR best interest as a capitalist, look for the SPECIES best interest by helping us increase the computational fortitude of the whole.
thedark.moonside.org total Mhz: 351
don't like the cost? then join us in the revolution - there's no reason for electricity to cost anything beyond simple greed, and the initial costs.
and what makes you think god would place the 'right' right and wrong in each of us, instead of placing arbitrary 'right and wrong' sets in each of us so that the whole would function, or some other jazz? just because god put something in you does not make it logically sound.
there should be a prompt you can go to in 'system information' or some jazz which will actually tell you your version of windows. i don't currently ever plan on touching another windows box so long as i live so i'll have to just suggest for someone else to. but there is a version number for the windows kernel itself somewhere reachable. at least as far as win98se anywho
you completely missed the important part, that is, it's an optimisation.
we can only be good people so far as we have propper understanding of our environment. whether our understanding is a current, modernized and aware of many things level understanding, or a pre-agarian thousands-of-years-ago level-of-understanding is the difference. and frankly, i think there's an ability to know much of our current environment that we could not thousands of years ago.
'who' it's best for is everybody. because it tries to do the best for everybody, and if it fails, it tries to do the best for people other than ones self, and if that fails, it tries to do the best for one's self. at which point if it fails, there's really no 'good case' and yes, f is acceptable.
whether i or some person thousands of years ago made said code makes no difference whether it's a codified set of behaviors.
as for the last bit, the reason that we don't know how we know is that in 95% of all situations the awnser is obvious. sure, there's that other 5% and that's what we are talking about.
no it's not as arbitrary because it gives the best outcome, given propper understanding of your environment. the potential to acheive 'the best outcome' outweighs any other system, until shown otherwise, no? this isn't randomness, this is optimisation. this hardly seems to me as arbitrary as just doing what you are told at all times.
and why not add e)? so long as you follow precedence a->e it shouldn't harm anyone. or if necessarry, add e) harm no one* f) do what you want. a system that harms no one(As opposed to harming innocent people for stupid reasons). and furthermore why *not* have a system like this? without it, there's a chance everyone will be just trying to do things for their own self interest(arbitrary), and will. hell don't forget g) "if you don't know what to do in any situation, consider the ecconomics. cash is not the only thing in life, but it's really, really important." as the catch-all, and you have a complete code.(this of course isn't really a standard one in atheism, but is rather from kult. but its only one example of such optimisation, and may not be the best case. but it's a pretty good case, and far from arbitrary.
*actually it would make more sense to harm only those who harm others maliciously, or something to that extent. however i think that would open some cans of worms, and while it may be beneficial, may not be necessarry. i personally, beyond being busy with school, would have tried to kill one or two people whether i was an atheist, or whatever i am now. and they would deserve it. all the people that i've harmed in any way had it coming(ie if you pull a knife on someone and attack them, don't expect them to not say, hurt you in self defense, etc.)
isn't it obvious, between helping an old lady across the street or pushing her in front of a car, which is the 'right thing' to do? unlike christians, atheists know the difference, and when told to go against
if anything would be a benchmark would be either
a) best case over all
b) best case for the other person
c) best case for you.
d) makes sense in some other way(ie it's blatantly obvious)
neither of the above fits 'push old lady in front of car' very well, although i can see helping her cross the street fit a and b very nicely. and who knows, mabye she's got a cute daughter for c. of course, i'd chose d. any atheist with a descent upbringing would probably chose d as well, but a and b and c serve as rough guidelines in case this is not the case
"Hm. I'm not sure. How would an atheist arrive at a moral standard? And when he arrived at one, wouldn't it be a bit arbitrary?
"
as opposed to believing what you are told without question? that sounds like a more arbitrary way to chose personal value-sets. now applying your own personal logic and power of deduction/induction to the best extent one can, and trying at all times to 'do the right thing' and to look for the 'truth' in all things on the other hand...that looks more like the 'best solution' granted i have transcended atheism, but when i was an atheist, this is what i would have countered you with.
"do not kill. do not rape. these are laws that every man can abide by."-boondock saints?
Slashdot Mirror
systems can think, and we are a system. while the person may or may not be 'thinking', a person is taking place in the thinking process of a higher order. behold! the hivemind!
obviously a person wouldn't be dehydrated if there was water available, and dehydration can and does lead to death. so in a sense, yes, there is a proverbial gun held to my head in this case. the thoughts are not unnecessary, in fact they are very necessary. we need more of them. Winter clothes are expensive, and so is shelter. yet you can't live without either of them. food is expensive, you can't live without food. sooner or later it will make more sense to just destroy the screwball trying to force you to work longer than your lifespan is just to stay alive, then to deal with him.
Why don't we just start letting robots* compete in the Olympics? It would make the Olympics back into the frothing Nationalist and Racist entertainment they were to begin with, before the media corporations got their hands on it. Although to do so with a different bent - instead of nazi aryans vs. the world(1936 Berlin) or whatever, it would be Humanity vs it's creations: the machines.
I think when you can have a robot that not only can run the triathalon, but can navigate a random trail without someone on remote control, and do so in timed trials against humans, then and only then will this be significant.
*Obviously there must be some restriction on what a "robot" should be. how about, independant, and intelligent in some way? how about the robot has to be designed by machines(evolution processes, etc)?
this should make very clear which sports are trivial and which are not, (ie, Pole Vault will be difficult, whereas Javelin throw will not be.) when I see a humanoid robot run and throw himself 3000 feet into the air so they can just happen to fall over a bar, and then not destroy themselves upon landing...I'll start watching the olympics, at least until the commercialism involved drives me away again.
How about wrestling? A machine that can within the rules of wrestling pin a human being(perhaps with restriction that it must be humanoid,2 arms 2 legs and a head)? Or perhaps there will be entirely new sports gained from this! When robots begin to play soccer, then some sort of magnet-supported free-fall soccer might be more interesting, etc.
And hell, we could use that to get the companies out in the forefront as far as sponsorship goes. It's about time we had the Timex Ironman Triathalon team and the GM Wrestling team. We could have the following as a potential outcome:
GOLD: USA
SILVER: WALMART ROBOTICS
BRONZE: CANADA
etc
As a person who is currently working for a third of minnimum wage, I am going hopefully within the week to the local Circuit City to apply for a new job. And for some reason the above post puts a chill in my spine.
most people are also consumer sheep, taking whatever they are fed.
occasionally you get someone who is awake, and aware of the scam you are pulling, and the effect of this scam on you. just as you'd expect violent response if you were to try to rob someone, taking obscene amounts of money for something necessarry to life is just evil, and the person doing it should be destoyed.
the tap water local here isn't healthy either, and i've drank water out of a creek that is known to be untreated, not that this adds to anything.
if you try to sell me water for 1000$ a glass i will punch you in the throat, and then take your water.
there is NO excuse to sell water, and definitely even less than no excuse to sell water to a DEHYDRATED person for 1000$ per glass.
you give me three billion well fed minds that are not killing eachother for stupid reasons and i'll give you some anti-asteroid technae.
[nt]
Ambulance chasers only come about with the advance of capitalism and greed. We all take part in the big western hate machine. Point the finger at yourself, before anyone else, sir. We are all guilty here.
obviously you are too ugly/geeky/annoying for said girls, and if you force them to give you their phone numbers they are just going to ignore you anyways. leave these women alone, no matter how much you need to get laid.
"Hey, why don't I give you a paper cut and pour lemon juice in there while I'm at it?"
that's the nicest thing anyone's said to me in a long time.
that's so frightening that it to me sounds like the worst case scenario almost. and that, tied with Murphey's Law (or one of it's perversions), it should be closer to the truth then anything we've heard as of yet.
well i did just get dumped. i wonder if i'm hostile to everyone else lately, too.
no i have nothing really relevant to say
unfortunately, you cannot "eliminate" the rest of the world. that would be genocide on a level far beyond what has ever transpire, and for the attempt you would be every bit deserving of the resistance and "espionage games" your government and your people get.
"increase my bottom line by boosting upload at interconnects"
all the ISPs in my province(except the one i'm on...and even they are queasy about it) are afraid of giving customers any upload bandwidth, 1MByte down/8Kbyte up is pretty much the standard(DSL) and mabye a little better for cable... because we are considerred as consumer/cattle. they completely miss the point of the entire world-of-ends nature that builds the very fabric of the internet.
please explain to me how i can convince my isp and others that having poeple on their networks who upload (non-spam/crap)content to other isps in virtue of interconnect uploads.
you are correct in your implications, except in one thing...it's not *us*...
;) ) )
this puts *you* at square one becuase *i* did not rely on a god to define my 'good' for me, apting instead to follow the non-arbitrary path.
while *you* will be unable to pass judgements, due to absolute uncertianty of your gods intentions, *i* will be frontal-lobe thick into the child-abuser with a shovel( and justifiably so to all children left(And also, to the child abuser, for life itself is not worth living
there we have it folks, god implies relativistic moral confusion, while atheists should maim child abusers. i didn't think i'd ever see that come out of a thread.
beyond getting dumped by the most wonderful girlfreind i'll ever have i think today may yet turn to be a good day
the computational potency of the earth is not infinite. do not turn of your computers, and make sure they are doing something at all time so long as it is reasonable to do so. i have 3 computers on right now, although one is being used to look at porn and browse slashdot(two relatively useless activities). contriubte to folding@home, or even seti@home if you must... help distributed computing projects with your cycles if you have nothing better to do with them. only leave your cycles empty when you are using your computer actively, and when you 'might need them' (ie, my main system(p-166 with 32mb ram) thrashes when i'm using either 100% of my ram+swap or 100% of my cpu... and this wastes human-time.) instead of looking for YOUR best interest as a capitalist, look for the SPECIES best interest by helping us increase the computational fortitude of the whole.
thedark.moonside.org total Mhz: 351
don't like the cost? then join us in the revolution - there's no reason for electricity to cost anything beyond simple greed, and the initial costs.
and what makes you think god would place the 'right' right and wrong in each of us, instead of placing arbitrary 'right and wrong' sets in each of us so that the whole would function, or some other jazz? just because god put something in you does not make it logically sound.
tobacco anyone?
there should be a prompt you can go to in 'system information' or some jazz which will actually tell you your version of windows. i don't currently ever plan on touching another windows box so long as i live so i'll have to just suggest for someone else to. but there is a version number for the windows kernel itself somewhere reachable. at least as far as win98se anywho
small linux uses 2.0.x still...and it's one of the prime options available for really not powerful computing solutions
you completely missed the important part, that is, it's an optimisation.
we can only be good people so far as we have propper understanding of our environment. whether our understanding is a current, modernized and aware of many things level understanding, or a pre-agarian thousands-of-years-ago level-of-understanding is the difference. and frankly, i think there's an ability to know much of our current environment that we could not thousands of years ago.
'who' it's best for is everybody. because it tries to do the best for everybody, and if it fails, it tries to do the best for people other than ones self, and if that fails, it tries to do the best for one's self. at which point if it fails, there's really no 'good case' and yes, f is acceptable.
whether i or some person thousands of years ago made said code makes no difference whether it's a codified set of behaviors.
as for the last bit, the reason that we don't know how we know is that in 95% of all situations the awnser is obvious. sure, there's that other 5% and that's what we are talking about.
no it's not as arbitrary because it gives the best outcome, given propper understanding of your environment. the potential to acheive 'the best outcome' outweighs any other system, until shown otherwise, no? this isn't randomness, this is optimisation. this hardly seems to me as arbitrary as just doing what you are told at all times.
and why not add e)? so long as you follow precedence a->e it shouldn't harm anyone. or if necessarry, add
e) harm no one*
f) do what you want.
a system that harms no one(As opposed to harming innocent people for stupid reasons). and furthermore why *not* have a system like this? without it, there's a chance everyone will be just trying to do things for their own self interest(arbitrary), and will. hell don't forget g) "if you don't know what to do in any situation, consider the ecconomics. cash is not the only thing in life, but it's really, really important." as the catch-all, and you have a complete code.(this of course isn't really a standard one in atheism, but is rather from ku lt. but its only one example of such optimisation, and may not be the best case. but it's a pretty good case, and far from arbitrary.
*actually it would make more sense to harm only those who harm others maliciously, or something to that extent. however i think that would open some cans of worms, and while it may be beneficial, may not be necessarry. i personally, beyond being busy with school, would have tried to kill one or two people whether i was an atheist, or whatever i am now. and they would deserve it. all the people that i've harmed in any way had it coming(ie if you pull a knife on someone and attack them, don't expect them to not say, hurt you in self defense, etc.)
isn't it obvious, between helping an old lady across the street or pushing her in front of a car, which is the 'right thing' to do? unlike christians, atheists know the difference, and when told to go against
if anything would be a benchmark would be either
a) best case over all
b) best case for the other person
c) best case for you.
d) makes sense in some other way(ie it's blatantly obvious)
neither of the above fits 'push old lady in front of car' very well, although i can see helping her cross the street fit a and b very nicely. and who knows, mabye she's got a cute daughter for c. of course, i'd chose d. any atheist with a descent upbringing would probably chose d as well, but a and b and c serve as rough guidelines in case this is not the case
"Hm. I'm not sure. How would an atheist arrive at a moral standard? And when he arrived at one, wouldn't it be a bit arbitrary? " as opposed to believing what you are told without question? that sounds like a more arbitrary way to chose personal value-sets. now applying your own personal logic and power of deduction/induction to the best extent one can, and trying at all times to 'do the right thing' and to look for the 'truth' in all things on the other hand...that looks more like the 'best solution' granted i have transcended atheism, but when i was an atheist, this is what i would have countered you with.
"do not kill. do not rape. these are laws that every man can abide by."-boondock saints?