cultural implications of bellicose robots
on
Robots Go To War
·
· Score: 2
The terrifying thing is that robots can replace many of the tasks of ground troops, more and more. This means that there will be troops, but those troops may not be in the contexts where they can observe for themselves what they are doing and form their own conclusions about it.
More and more, troops fall into technical roles, controlling machines on great aircraft carriers and evaluating machine gathered data.
This contrasts with the role of the "grunt" in Vietnam. The infantrymen returning from that battlefield came back and relayed their stories to civilians, who used this information to form their (generally negative) opinion on the war.
Robots are under the control of commanders, who are indoctrinated differently than are ground troops and may be less inclined to feel sympathy or mercy when they push the button of destruction.
An enemy soldier, or a civilian, cannot plead mercy or beg for life to a robot; the commander controlling the 'bot may not even know a person is surrendering or begging for mercy.
I oppose anything that would distance us from the blood on our hands, including roboticization of war. You can read many science fiction novels that address these issues.
I want Linux used in business and science applications, but not when a firm is likely to restrict the most media-genic and lucrative uses, such as this robot, to a closed Linux.
This will popularize Linux, but the visibility, and the profits, will go to a particular group of Linux developers who tend to stand apart from the rest of the community.
In other words, the nerds who fall in love with this robot will also drift further away from the open Linux cultures; any use RTLinux gets is an attack on the open Linux culture.
Whether the data goes to Fry's or elsewhere, most data generated by virtual processes, and all other electronic transactions, will be used in ensuring security. This is especially likely due to Tuesday's tragedy.
Information's nature will change soon.
On NPR today, someone was explaining the use of electronic information as a possible alternative to ethnic, cultural, or social profiling of airplane passengers and other people who frequent public places.
The security officials would use credit-card data, bill and purchase data, phone records, and bank data in order to verify that you have an established address, haven't moved around too much or done anything that provokes suspicion.
In effect, we will all have different "clearance levels" in regular civilian society, which will decide for us whether we are stopped, interviewed, strip searched; what our freedom of movement and consumer activity will be; and what kinds of security-vital private sector training, such as computer or pilot skills, that we can enjoy.
windows users don't think about their operating system.
linux users do.
most linux users have a windows box or access to one when they want to do something with the great mass of consumers which use the internet, like playing video games, watching movies or multimedia, etc.
linux users use the linux box for many of the un-sexy things like operating a database or serving web pages, something which your average windows user, who is looking for Minesweeper or a DVD player, would consider "nothing to do."
It will be interesting to see a linux system meant to appeal to the Windows user. Perhaps it will be a bargain basement version of what Windows already provides, without the powerful, world-changing tools that make Linux already useful in its own niche.
I remember all the knockoff Gameboys that come out of import shops and Dollar stores after they failed in the mainstream consumer market, and I hope these will serve as a word of warning to Xandros.
these attorneys general are on a political jag, folks. they all use windows in their offices and they don't care really, personally or legally, what happens.
if they did they would break with the ashcroft office and call for a split of microsoft.
the bottom line: microsoft will not obey any conduct remedy. to do so they would have to open source code (to verify functionality of windows without IE bundling) and operation practices to outside observers.
they won't.
you think they will? i want some of your crack.
they will do anything and everything to keep this monopoly going, because the economy is crashing and linux/bsd IS gaining on them where it matters, in enterprise applications.
the attorneys general of the states are calling for a strong conduct remedy; this reminds me of someone saying, "OH, you slap that man on the wrist HARD, you hear?"
This makes me sick.
This calls for direct action.
Don't use windows, and coordinate with your friends in other technology companies to make things hard for people who do.
this also involves seriously making Linux usable so there is a clear alternative for the mass of sheep^H^H^Hconsumers when they get too frustrated and jump ship.
One kind splices genes from other species into a species. This has problems with inaccurate gene-snips and potential allergies to foreign genetic matter.
Another kind of GE is simply eugenics, which many farmers have used for centuries; selecting the best representatives of a species to breed together, or hybridization. Eugenics presents political problems in humans.
Another kind of GE is the turning on of inoperative genes through hormonal treatments or other chemicals. Cancer genes (oncogenes) are turned on through sun damage and other carcinogenic interactions, for instance. This type of GE may be dangerous but it is noninvasive and can be done through conventional current gene therapy methods. I support this kind of work.
Now onto the spurious ethical questions.
There is no a-priori model of the human. Humans have been evolving for thousands of years, and our lifestyles and diets have a big part to play in that. The conscious manipulation of this process has the opportunity, actually, to be more ethical than the unconscious genetic engineering we have done.
The americans imported people from Africa in the slave trade and created "hybrid races" of humans, for instance. This has led to changes in frequency of various positive and negative genetic traits in the US population. Although slavery itself is reprehensible, I don't think anybody would consider treatments for sickle-cell anemia (which occurs primarily in Africans and African-Americans) immoral genetic engineering, for instance.
Conscious manipulation of human intelligence is a scientific technology question and is morally neutral. Methods and political superstructures surrounding the issue are not.
"Although we have many sanders throughout the shop, most of them are continuously used. I didn't have to make the decision to pull a sander away from a less-critical production line. I was able to keep right on going. If we would have had to wait for a new part, that production line would have been down for a few days. It's been a month now, and the belt sander is still going strong.
"Now if anyone asks me about the durability of the rapid prototype parts that come off the Titan, I take them over to the sanding station and tell them the story. You can see the sparks flying off the sander and hear it grinding away - it really opens some eyes. I have an aluminum replacement pulley now, but I'm in no hurry to install it. With the way this one has performed, I want to see how long it lasts!"
This is a bit of a hype situation for several reasons.
First of all, a production situation is rife with bureacracy and regulation. A polycarbonate part cannot always replace a metal or ceramic part, and to alter the machines in a way that would impart agility and flexibility -- the very purpose of the "3-d printer" - would take a mountain of paperwork.
This leads into a second critique. Globalization confers both interdependence and indepdendence.
Right now, production facilities are dependent on parts from distant places.
If facilities can design and fabricate new parts, and put them into use, at various backwaters all over the place, this will place many office workers -- and, perhaps, the entire concept of a centralized "headquarters" -- into obsolescence.
The Security Systems Standards and Certification Act (SSSCA), scheduled to be introduced by Hollings, backs up this requirement with teeth: It would be a civil offense to create or sell any kind of computer equipment that "does not include and utilize certified security technologies" approved by the federal government.
It also creates new federal felonies, punishable by five years in prison and fines of up to $500,000. Anyone who distributes copyrighted material with "security measures" disabled or has a network-attached computer that disables copy protection is covered.
Hollings' draft bill, which Wired News obtained on Friday, represents the next round of the ongoing legal tussle between content holders and their opponents, including librarians, programmers and open-source advocates.
I guess that the time has come where the computer world will divide into above ground and an underground groupings.
If you can't sell a computer that's not security equipped, we who want to control our own technology will be like the people in a cyberpunk novel or in the Matrix, who have to cobble together their own technology apart from the mainstream.
Open Source and Free Spftware communities may come together on this too; I can't see a small group of developers providing the same glossy presentations to Congress describing their security that Windows and its associated companies would.
It's not a law yet, but it shows the way the law is going.
And if the law is going this way we have to consider the question reform or revolution; are we going to allow the vrey concept of computing to be taken over by a small corporate elite if it will allow computing and the Internet to extend to places where it hasn't reached before?
Or, do we have to act as free people do under repression - keeping our very names and acts truly secret, building computers and writing in basements instead of at bright stores?
Actually, the fascism comment comes from my thoughts on things that are not necessarily related to the music biz.
However, the mentality that permits more and more of this sort of thing does lead to fascism in my opinion.
This is a deeply held belief and that's why I jumped out at the AC. More politely phrased disagreement I tend to reply to..
The demand that the user identify himself or herself is a little checkpoint, especially when computers are connected to the Internet and the cd can't be played on a cd player.
If this propagates, a known criminal on the run can't listen to his own music collection if it might tip off the police. Or a pirate might get fined off his or her credit card or debit account, like the speeders in the rental car.
The more checkpoints we accept in our daily lives, whether they exist on a computer or at a "sobriety checkpoint," the more fascism we are tolerating in our lives. People who go along with this unthinkingly are at least collaborating with the fascists, because they are a security risk to people who think outside the increasingly tiny legal box.
It's a long conceptual jump from typing your name in to listen to music, to going along with a national ID card/chip. But it's a jump that can happen overnight.
i am a musician and i give away all of it. i dont sell it.
this is the only way to keep out controls like this.
this shit is just going to get worse, and it makes me very quiet, i feel like everyone around me is a little fascist now. i won't take an opportunity in music although it's not likely i'd get one anyway since i don't look like britney spears.
i guess that i am willing to get sick and die and not go to a hospital, or to have my own teeth fall out because i don't have benefits, so a corporate system doesn't own me.
in a few months my honeymoon will be over.. if i don't post anymore it means i am gone for good.
The herd instinct played a large part in the defection of so many students to cyberbusinesses. Before the bubble burst, everybody seemed to be getting in on the action, and no one wanted to be left behind.
....
Then, in August, Bluedog.com went under, and Mr. Douglas was suddenly just another unemployed dot-commer. "There was a great deal of grieving," he said. "It was really comforting to come back to school and throw myself into something more stable -- write papers, study for tests, earn my degree. No one can take those things from me." After graduation, he chose one of the oldest professions around: acting.
Among the first machines loaded with Pocket PC 2000 will be Hewlett-Packard Co.'s (NYSE:HWP - news) HP Jornada 565 and 568 devices, with suggested retail prices of $599 and $649, respectively, less a $50 rebate good through the end of 2001.
The new Jornadas will be previewed tomorrow at the DemoMobile conference in La Jolla, California and are expected to ship in October.
Like most other Pocket PC devices, the Jornadas occupy the high end of the market, as devices loaded with the Palm OS can be had for as little as $100.
The higher-priced devices offer so many functions, according to Giga's Enderle, that they constitute viable stand-alone computers.
``The thing that impressed me the most is that it's a full Outlook client,'' he said, meaning the computer can have receive e-mail without relying on a desktop or laptop computer. ``These changes move the Pocket PC into what will likely be the sustaining generation of devices: they're always on, always connected and function as a stand-alone platform.''
Okay, what role did MS have in the Compaq/HP merger?
Merger is narrowing the field of competition in the laptop market, and Jornada device seems to replace laptop functions.
The merger makes it more likely that HP/Compaq will have enough money and credit to aggressively market this Jornada.
This announcement seems to be timed pretty close with the merger.
I have no problem with Microsoft producing its software, but I do have a problem with social engineering - the deliberate restriction of markets outside software - such as palmtop hardware - in order to pursue its social engineering goals (e.g. replacing the laptop, and wedding MS programming to the palmtop).
should form with the best representative developers from each distro.
Yes, a linux monopoly, while preserving open source philosophy and various linux flavors.
-advantages: fanatically dedicated, growing market for free software
-encourages cross-fertilization of ideas between distros
-unified, centralized tech support
-less duplicated efforts in development and support
-coherent business model can be developed when there are fewer competing models of Linux
-larger company with pooled capital (if there is any) viewed more favorably by market
Stop trying to compete with microsoft! There are constituencies which cannot and will not use Bill's software for their computing needs. These people will continue to use linux and ancillary services and the less overhead involved the better for a company dealing with a finite market.
there are many artificial systems designed to interact with humans even now that fool humans.
One has to set different standards for different kinds of cognition, communication and interaction. An IRC user can sound like a computer if he or she is from another country and has a limited grasp of the language in which you and s/he are conversing, for instance.
A human can compete with a chess playing computer and his or her experience with computers may have been limited, so without further input that chess playing human may mistake this computer for another live person.
I think that artificial intelligence wpould be best measured with an understanding of emotion and ethics, so psychological and ethical examinations, such as those administered in Blade Runner.
I am cool with this as long as it rmains in the hands of government agencies, but not if these robitic planes are used for corporate surveillance, investigations of straying spouses, etc. etc.
The more this tech gets into use, and now the unmanned plane is going towards civilian applications, the more we need to irease privacy education in our culture.
Let's discuss these issues now and pass appropriate legislation. I don't want to spend all day craning my head into the sky, or watching corporations engage in surveillance arms races.
I am all for the government writing any kind of search program, block program, security program or what have you for whatever purpose it wants.
If we really want the Internet to permeate into our lives, then it should go into our lives as they really are. Perhaps some people will be less wary about leaving evidentiary data lying about on the Net.
When we decry against censorware, or searchware or whatever, we are decrying a social use of technology and not the technology itself. Rather than stifling the developemnt of search technologies or other supposedly "authoritarian" tech, we should be adding to the debate about what kind of a society we live in.
I will be writing a variant of this for a controversial website soon, in support of rigidly restricted appliance computers and limited-access proprietary content AOL style networks developing alongside the open Internet. In this society we have prisons, in which the prisoners can't use the Internet much because the software and hardware that would allow them to use it within prison rules (reliably, monitored by non-technical prison officials) does not exist.
I would rather the educational and self-betterment resources available on the Net be extended to prisoners with the blessing of prison officials, so prisons which have lost their education budgets can restore these services cheaply.
they say cut back, we say FIGHT BACK!
on
HP Buys Compaq
·
· Score: 2, Flamebait
When announced job reductions, of 8,500 jobs at Compaq and 9,000 at Hewlett-Packard, are completed, employment at the companies will be about 62,800 at Compaq and 87,000 at Hewlett-Packard. Further reductions seem likely, as executives said that they expect annual cost savings of $2.5 billion within several years.
In its most recent 12 months, Hewlett-Packard reported revenues of $47 billion, while Compaq had revenues of $40 billion. The combined $87 billion is close to the $90 billion reported by I.B.M., and far above the $33 billion for Dell Computer, which now ranks fourth and would move to third if the merger is completed.
In its most recent financial report, for the nine months through July, Hewlett-Packard said its revenues were down 5 percent from the comparable period a year earlier, to $33.7 billion. But its net income fell 82 percent to $506 million. Compaq, reporting on the six months through June, said revenues fell 13 percent to $14.2 billion. It suffered a net loss of $201 million for the period, compared with a profit of $684 million in the same period of 2000.
I will not ever sit back and haplessly allow my company to abandon the things that make it unique, the individuals that have brought it to where it is, in order to pursue stupid figures such as yearly profit.
Just because there is an 'economic down turn' does not mean that, for the next FIVE YEARS (not three months or one year or next week, as the rapidly changing investors' markets focus on)HP won't be pioneering in quality, reliable computer technology. As someone who actually gives a shit about the future of companies that produce products that I like, I refuse to believe that the stock market's logic can positively affect these companies.
Short term profit goals must be met in a modern investment climate. HP and Compaq merged to save money, but they will wind up cutting the very things that make them unique and separate products in order to save money.
Compaq and HP merging is like Kia and Saab merging. HP computers kick so much ass, and last for such a long time
I have an ancient HP Vectra VL2 downstairs that still carries its own weight in my household. What parts of shitty Compaq will they be using in HPs now?
Parts of hardware? Parts of support?
I don't really care one whit about the existence of Compaq or not, and I can't see any benefit from HP having a larger cashflow, except for to the stupid stock market, which has nothing to do with the basic economic dynamic of a company producing a product to please its customers.
Shakespeare used the common language of his day. Like The Sopranos, Shakespeare's oevure is meant to be a big hit.
His writing is not a language or a diction or a dialect unto itself, but to combine the ways of speaking of the poor and rich playgoers of the Elizabethan time. It's the original accessible style, and that is why 15 year olds can understand, and dig, Romeo and Juliet today.
However, this "speak your mind" crap de-shakespearizes the writing anyway. The topics may be shakespearean, but the diction is a geek-ized bastardization of Elizabethan speech.
This era's English is as complex as our own. The best way to code in such a language understandably is to write simple prose.
For coding, you need a more modular language, something less complex. The semi-linguistic grunts and signs of a Neanderthal, or Koko the signing ape,may be more useful. You would get compilable code, due to a simpler logix, and the Neanderthal observer would still understand the meanings.
The dissolved metals in seawater are supposed to be there. They are ions, positive or negative ions that play an electrochemical and a biochemical role in that ecosystem.
Gold is a very useful industrial metal, but it makes more money for the gold-miners when the gold is used as jewelry instead. Why not address the cultural roots of the gold-scarcity issue; making it less valuable in the market place by abating the jewelers' love for it would free up much existing gold for industrial use.
Most countries currencies are off the gold standard anyway.
Corel is selling it (the Linux division) because of the change in leadership. The former chief executive thought it was the future of the company but Burney thought they were putting more money into it than they needed to," said a source who wished to remain anonymous.
But I'd like to give them a bit of user-end advice.
I have a friend who is working-class and got a computer with Linux because he couldn't afford Windows, and he needs something to write with.
To get Linux to people like him, you need to do what AOL is doing - sell or give away Linux distributions out of little TAKE ONE hoppers at computer stores and supermarkets, on every continent on earth.
They should be packaged with Internet access as well.
Who has pushed for universal connectivity of most things to the Internet and why do they want it that way?
Is the Net reaching a growth limit because of the IP numbers being used for the benefit of the Net and efficiency in the transfer of information, or so New Yuckers can trade stocks on their cellphones?
Consider the NASDAQ, which has sold its soul to technological change. It expands its trading capacity every year. The sellers of trading tools anticipate this expansion, and the traders overload the system again every year, driving a further expansion.
We can get to longer and longer fingerprints for our digital devices, or we can decide to better allocate IPs. This decision is directly related to our decisions about what we eventually want the Internet to be for.
Do we want the Internet to be a marketplace, a teacher, a trainer? I would rather have limited resources allocated to training, skills enrichment, and exposure to art and culture, than to a thousand million Doom-playing boxes and gabby cellphones.
Think about it. Which places in a given city get services such as DSL first? Is that the best social choice, for both the city and the Internet?
You passed on a piece of what Kuro5hin calls "Mindless Link Propagation.." To make it a story, some analysis of the significance of this fact, the CTO/President stepped down is called for.
I know nothing about this particular company, but the reasons for the step down could be either be a) truly personal reasons,
b) Hohndel doesn't like whatever SuSE is doing to "lead the world towards what is the most powerful and acknowledged alternative to the dominance of one proprietary operating system,"
c) SuSE doesn't like the guy,
d) some horrific scandal,
e) The mob,
f) Aliens.
I suppose you expect the posters to contribute A, B, C, D, E and F.
But, if you don't do a little more research you might as well re-name Slashdot to "Mindless Link Propagation."
Trusting Borders to resolve and reconcile issues brought up by activists is like trusting them what got Microsoft's money, the government, to prosecute Microsoft.
A little comparison here.
Microsoft gets called a monopoly, gets threatened with breakup, probably WON'T get broken up since this got transferred to a new judge. They come out with XP and.NET, and continue on their merry way because the Punishment bullet of the government, anti-trust prosecution, has already been shot, at least for the nonce!
Borders takes down its technology, "resolves" issues by doing something stupid like appointing a committee or a hearing board or something like that, or some kind of diversity officer.
Or there may be some other corporate solution that is cooked up by a lawyer in order to meet the constitutional requirements while conferring the bottom-line benefits, such as lower insurance premiums for the stores, that these cameras were designed to provide.
Slashdot Mirror
The terrifying thing is that robots can replace many of the tasks of ground troops, more and more. This means that there will be troops, but those troops may not be in the contexts where they can observe for themselves what they are doing and form their own conclusions about it.
More and more, troops fall into technical roles, controlling machines on great aircraft carriers and evaluating machine gathered data.
This contrasts with the role of the "grunt" in Vietnam. The infantrymen returning from that battlefield came back and relayed their stories to civilians, who used this information to form their (generally negative) opinion on the war.
Robots are under the control of commanders, who are indoctrinated differently than are ground troops and may be less inclined to feel sympathy or mercy when they push the button of destruction.
An enemy soldier, or a civilian, cannot plead mercy or beg for life to a robot; the commander controlling the 'bot may not even know a person is surrendering or begging for mercy.
I oppose anything that would distance us from the blood on our hands, including roboticization of war. You can read many science fiction novels that address these issues.
these go very well together don't you think?
I want Linux used in business and science applications, but not when a firm is likely to restrict the most media-genic and lucrative uses, such as this robot, to a closed Linux.
This will popularize Linux, but the visibility, and the profits, will go to a particular group of Linux developers who tend to stand apart from the rest of the community.
In other words, the nerds who fall in love with this robot will also drift further away from the open Linux cultures; any use RTLinux gets is an attack on the open Linux culture.
*clap*
Whether the data goes to Fry's or elsewhere, most data generated by virtual processes, and all other electronic transactions, will be used in ensuring security. This is especially likely due to Tuesday's tragedy.
Information's nature will change soon.
On NPR today, someone was explaining the use of electronic information as a possible alternative to ethnic, cultural, or social profiling of airplane passengers and other people who frequent public places.
The security officials would use credit-card data, bill and purchase data, phone records, and bank data in order to verify that you have an established address, haven't moved around too much or done anything that provokes suspicion.
In effect, we will all have different "clearance levels" in regular civilian society, which will decide for us whether we are stopped, interviewed, strip searched; what our freedom of movement and consumer activity will be; and what kinds of security-vital private sector training, such as computer or pilot skills, that we can enjoy.
windows users don't think about their operating system.
linux users do.
most linux users have a windows box or access to one when they want to do something with the great mass of consumers which use the internet, like playing video games, watching movies or multimedia, etc.
linux users use the linux box for many of the un-sexy things like operating a database or serving web pages, something which your average windows user, who is looking for Minesweeper or a DVD player, would consider "nothing to do."
It will be interesting to see a linux system meant to appeal to the Windows user. Perhaps it will be a bargain basement version of what Windows already provides, without the powerful, world-changing tools that make Linux already useful in its own niche.
I remember all the knockoff Gameboys that come out of import shops and Dollar stores after they failed in the mainstream consumer market, and I hope these will serve as a word of warning to Xandros.
these attorneys general are on a political jag, folks. they all use windows in their offices and they don't care really, personally or legally, what happens.
if they did they would break with the ashcroft office and call for a split of microsoft.
the bottom line: microsoft will not obey any conduct remedy. to do so they would have to open source code (to verify functionality of windows without IE bundling) and operation practices to outside observers.
they won't.
you think they will? i want some of your crack.
they will do anything and everything to keep this monopoly going, because the economy is crashing and linux/bsd IS gaining on them where it matters, in enterprise applications.
the attorneys general of the states are calling for a strong conduct remedy; this reminds me of someone saying, "OH, you slap that man on the wrist HARD, you hear?"
This makes me sick.
This calls for direct action.
Don't use windows, and coordinate with your friends in other technology companies to make things hard for people who do.
this also involves seriously making Linux usable so there is a clear alternative for the mass of sheep^H^H^Hconsumers when they get too frustrated and jump ship.
There is not one genetic engineering.
There are many kinds of GE.
One kind splices genes from other species into a species. This has problems with inaccurate gene-snips and potential allergies to foreign genetic matter.
Another kind of GE is simply eugenics, which many farmers have used for centuries; selecting the best representatives of a species to breed together, or hybridization. Eugenics presents political problems in humans.
Another kind of GE is the turning on of inoperative genes through hormonal treatments or other chemicals. Cancer genes (oncogenes) are turned on through sun damage and other carcinogenic interactions, for instance. This type of GE may be dangerous but it is noninvasive and can be done through conventional current gene therapy methods. I support this kind of work.
Now onto the spurious ethical questions.
There is no a-priori model of the human. Humans have been evolving for thousands of years, and our lifestyles and diets have a big part to play in that. The conscious manipulation of this process has the opportunity, actually, to be more ethical than the unconscious genetic engineering we have done.
The americans imported people from Africa in the slave trade and created "hybrid races" of humans, for instance. This has led to changes in frequency of various positive and negative genetic traits in the US population. Although slavery itself is reprehensible, I don't think anybody would consider treatments for sickle-cell anemia (which occurs primarily in Africans and African-Americans) immoral genetic engineering, for instance.
Conscious manipulation of human intelligence is a scientific technology question and is morally neutral. Methods and political superstructures surrounding the issue are not.
"Although we have many sanders throughout the shop, most of them are continuously used. I didn't have to make the decision to pull a sander away from a less-critical production line. I was able to keep right on going. If we would have had to wait for a new part, that production line would have been down for a few days. It's been a month now, and the belt sander is still going strong.
"Now if anyone asks me about the durability of the rapid prototype parts that come off the Titan, I take them over to the sanding station and tell them the story. You can see the sparks flying off the sander and hear it grinding away - it really opens some eyes. I have an aluminum replacement pulley now, but I'm in no hurry to install it. With the way this one has performed, I want to see how long it lasts!"
This is a bit of a hype situation for several reasons.
First of all, a production situation is rife with bureacracy and regulation. A polycarbonate part cannot always replace a metal or ceramic part, and to alter the machines in a way that would impart agility and flexibility -- the very purpose of the "3-d printer" - would take a mountain of paperwork.
This leads into a second critique. Globalization confers both interdependence and indepdendence.
Right now, production facilities are dependent on parts from distant places.
If facilities can design and fabricate new parts, and put them into use, at various backwaters all over the place, this will place many office workers -- and, perhaps, the entire concept of a centralized "headquarters" -- into obsolescence.
The Security Systems Standards and Certification Act (SSSCA), scheduled to be introduced by Hollings, backs up this requirement with teeth: It would be a civil offense to create or sell any kind of computer equipment that "does not include and utilize certified security technologies" approved by the federal government.
It also creates new federal felonies, punishable by five years in prison and fines of up to $500,000. Anyone who distributes copyrighted material with "security measures" disabled or has a network-attached computer that disables copy protection is covered.
Hollings' draft bill, which Wired News obtained on Friday, represents the next round of the ongoing legal tussle between content holders and their opponents, including librarians, programmers and open-source advocates.
I guess that the time has come where the computer world will divide into above ground and an underground groupings.
If you can't sell a computer that's not security equipped, we who want to control our own technology will be like the people in a cyberpunk novel or in the Matrix, who have to cobble together their own technology apart from the mainstream.
Open Source and Free Spftware communities may come together on this too; I can't see a small group of developers providing the same glossy presentations to Congress describing their security that Windows and its associated companies would.
It's not a law yet, but it shows the way the law is going.
And if the law is going this way we have to consider the question reform or revolution; are we going to allow the vrey concept of computing to be taken over by a small corporate elite if it will allow computing and the Internet to extend to places where it hasn't reached before?
Or, do we have to act as free people do under repression - keeping our very names and acts truly secret, building computers and writing in basements instead of at bright stores?
Actually, the fascism comment comes from my thoughts on things that are not necessarily related to the music biz.
However, the mentality that permits more and more of this sort of thing does lead to fascism in my opinion.
This is a deeply held belief and that's why I jumped out at the AC. More politely phrased disagreement I tend to reply to..
The demand that the user identify himself or herself is a little checkpoint, especially when computers are connected to the Internet and the cd can't be played on a cd player.
If this propagates, a known criminal on the run can't listen to his own music collection if it might tip off the police. Or a pirate might get fined off his or her credit card or debit account, like the speeders in the rental car.
The more checkpoints we accept in our daily lives, whether they exist on a computer or at a "sobriety checkpoint," the more fascism we are tolerating in our lives. People who go along with this unthinkingly are at least collaborating with the fascists, because they are a security risk to people who think outside the increasingly tiny legal box.
It's a long conceptual jump from typing your name in to listen to music, to going along with a national ID card/chip. But it's a jump that can happen overnight.
If I were here in person I would beat the living shit out of you, and I don't care who knows it, and fuck karma too.
i am a musician and i give away all of it. i dont sell it.
this is the only way to keep out controls like this.
this shit is just going to get worse, and it makes me very quiet, i feel like everyone around me is a little fascist now. i won't take an opportunity in music although it's not likely i'd get one anyway since i don't look like britney spears.
i guess that i am willing to get sick and die and not go to a hospital, or to have my own teeth fall out because i don't have benefits, so a corporate system doesn't own me.
in a few months my honeymoon will be over.. if i don't post anymore it means i am gone for good.
The herd instinct played a large part in the defection of so many students to cyberbusinesses. Before the bubble burst, everybody seemed to be getting in on the action, and no one wanted to be left behind.
....
Then, in August, Bluedog.com went under, and Mr. Douglas was suddenly just another unemployed dot-commer. "There was a great deal of grieving," he said. "It was really comforting to come back to school and throw myself into something more stable -- write papers, study for tests, earn my degree. No one can take those things from me." After graduation, he chose one of the oldest professions around: acting.
I think I will let this one speak for itself.
Among the first machines loaded with Pocket PC 2000 will be Hewlett-Packard Co.'s (NYSE:HWP - news) HP Jornada 565 and 568 devices, with suggested retail prices of $599 and $649, respectively, less a $50 rebate good through the end of 2001.
The new Jornadas will be previewed tomorrow at the DemoMobile conference in La Jolla, California and are expected to ship in October.
Like most other Pocket PC devices, the Jornadas occupy the high end of the market, as devices loaded with the Palm OS can be had for as little as $100.
The higher-priced devices offer so many functions, according to Giga's Enderle, that they constitute viable stand-alone computers.
``The thing that impressed me the most is that it's a full Outlook client,'' he said, meaning the computer can have receive e-mail without relying on a desktop or laptop computer. ``These changes move the Pocket PC into what will likely be the sustaining generation of devices: they're always on, always connected and function as a stand-alone platform.''
Okay, what role did MS have in the Compaq/HP merger?
Merger is narrowing the field of competition in the laptop market, and Jornada device seems to replace laptop functions.
The merger makes it more likely that HP/Compaq will have enough money and credit to aggressively market this Jornada.
This announcement seems to be timed pretty close with the merger.
I have no problem with Microsoft producing its software, but I do have a problem with social engineering - the deliberate restriction of markets outside software - such as palmtop hardware - in order to pursue its social engineering goals (e.g. replacing the laptop, and wedding MS programming to the palmtop).
should form with the best representative developers from each distro.
Yes, a linux monopoly, while preserving open source philosophy and various linux flavors.
-advantages: fanatically dedicated, growing market for free software
-encourages cross-fertilization of ideas between distros
-unified, centralized tech support
-less duplicated efforts in development and support
-coherent business model can be developed when there are fewer competing models of Linux
-larger company with pooled capital (if there is any) viewed more favorably by market
Stop trying to compete with microsoft! There are constituencies which cannot and will not use Bill's software for their computing needs. These people will continue to use linux and ancillary services and the less overhead involved the better for a company dealing with a finite market.
there are many artificial systems designed to interact with humans even now that fool humans.
One has to set different standards for different kinds of cognition, communication and interaction. An IRC user can sound like a computer if he or she is from another country and has a limited grasp of the language in which you and s/he are conversing, for instance.
A human can compete with a chess playing computer and his or her experience with computers may have been limited, so without further input that chess playing human may mistake this computer for another live person.
I think that artificial intelligence wpould be best measured with an understanding of emotion and ethics, so psychological and ethical examinations, such as those administered in Blade Runner.
I am cool with this as long as it rmains in the hands of government agencies, but not if these robitic planes are used for corporate surveillance, investigations of straying spouses, etc. etc.
The more this tech gets into use, and now the unmanned plane is going towards civilian applications, the more we need to irease privacy education in our culture.
Let's discuss these issues now and pass appropriate legislation. I don't want to spend all day craning my head into the sky, or watching corporations engage in surveillance arms races.
I am all for the government writing any kind of search program, block program, security program or what have you for whatever purpose it wants.
If we really want the Internet to permeate into our lives, then it should go into our lives as they really are. Perhaps some people will be less wary about leaving evidentiary data lying about on the Net.
When we decry against censorware, or searchware or whatever, we are decrying a social use of technology and not the technology itself. Rather than stifling the developemnt of search technologies or other supposedly "authoritarian" tech, we should be adding to the debate about what kind of a society we live in.
I will be writing a variant of this for a controversial website soon, in support of rigidly restricted appliance computers and limited-access proprietary content AOL style networks developing alongside the open Internet. In this society we have prisons, in which the prisoners can't use the Internet much because the software and hardware that would allow them to use it within prison rules (reliably, monitored by non-technical prison officials) does not exist.
I would rather the educational and self-betterment resources available on the Net be extended to prisoners with the blessing of prison officials, so prisons which have lost their education budgets can restore these services cheaply.
When announced job reductions, of 8,500 jobs at Compaq and 9,000 at Hewlett-Packard, are completed, employment at the companies will be about 62,800 at Compaq and 87,000 at Hewlett-Packard. Further reductions seem likely, as executives said that they expect annual cost savings of $2.5 billion within several years.
In its most recent 12 months, Hewlett-Packard reported revenues of $47 billion, while Compaq had revenues of $40 billion. The combined $87 billion is close to the $90 billion reported by I.B.M., and far above the $33 billion for Dell Computer, which now ranks fourth and would move to third if the merger is completed.
In its most recent financial report, for the nine months through July, Hewlett-Packard said its revenues were down 5 percent from the comparable period a year earlier, to $33.7 billion. But its net income fell 82 percent to $506 million. Compaq, reporting on the six months through June, said revenues fell 13 percent to $14.2 billion. It suffered a net loss of $201 million for the period, compared with a profit of $684 million in the same period of 2000.
I will not ever sit back and haplessly allow my company to abandon the things that make it unique, the individuals that have brought it to where it is, in order to pursue stupid figures such as yearly profit.
Just because there is an 'economic down turn' does not mean that, for the next FIVE YEARS (not three months or one year or next week, as the rapidly changing investors' markets focus on)HP won't be pioneering in quality, reliable computer technology. As someone who actually gives a shit about the future of companies that produce products that I like, I refuse to believe that the stock market's logic can positively affect these companies.
Short term profit goals must be met in a modern investment climate. HP and Compaq merged to save money, but they will wind up cutting the very things that make them unique and separate products in order to save money.
Compaq and HP merging is like Kia and Saab merging. HP computers kick so much ass, and last for such a long time
I have an ancient HP Vectra VL2 downstairs that still carries its own weight in my household. What parts of shitty Compaq will they be using in HPs now?
Parts of hardware? Parts of support?
I don't really care one whit about the existence of Compaq or not, and I can't see any benefit from HP having a larger cashflow, except for to the stupid stock market, which has nothing to do with the basic economic dynamic of a company producing a product to please its customers.
Shakespeare used the common language of his day. Like The Sopranos, Shakespeare's oevure is meant to be a big hit.
His writing is not a language or a diction or a dialect unto itself, but to combine the ways of speaking of the poor and rich playgoers of the Elizabethan time. It's the original accessible style, and that is why 15 year olds can understand, and dig, Romeo and Juliet today.
However, this "speak your mind" crap de-shakespearizes the writing anyway. The topics may be shakespearean, but the diction is a geek-ized bastardization of Elizabethan speech.
This era's English is as complex as our own. The best way to code in such a language understandably is to write simple prose.
For coding, you need a more modular language, something less complex. The semi-linguistic grunts and signs of a Neanderthal, or Koko the signing ape,may be more useful. You would get compilable code, due to a simpler logix, and the Neanderthal observer would still understand the meanings.
Not this again.
The dissolved metals in seawater are supposed to be there. They are ions, positive or negative ions that play an electrochemical and a biochemical role in that ecosystem.
Gold is a very useful industrial metal, but it makes more money for the gold-miners when the gold is used as jewelry instead. Why not address the cultural roots of the gold-scarcity issue; making it less valuable in the market place by abating the jewelers' love for it would free up much existing gold for industrial use.
Most countries currencies are off the gold standard anyway.
Corel is selling it (the Linux division) because of the change in leadership. The former chief executive thought it was the future of the company but Burney thought they were putting more money into it than they needed to," said a source who wished to remain anonymous.
Xandros does not even have a website yet.
But I'd like to give them a bit of user-end advice.
I have a friend who is working-class and got a computer with Linux because he couldn't afford Windows, and he needs something to write with.
To get Linux to people like him, you need to do what AOL is doing - sell or give away Linux distributions out of little TAKE ONE hoppers at computer stores and supermarkets, on every continent on earth.
They should be packaged with Internet access as well.
Do we want everything connected to the Internet?
Who has pushed for universal connectivity of most things to the Internet and why do they want it that way?
Is the Net reaching a growth limit because of the IP numbers being used for the benefit of the Net and efficiency in the transfer of information, or so New Yuckers can trade stocks on their cellphones?
Consider the NASDAQ, which has sold its soul to technological change. It expands its trading capacity every year. The sellers of trading tools anticipate this expansion, and the traders overload the system again every year, driving a further expansion.
We can get to longer and longer fingerprints for our digital devices, or we can decide to better allocate IPs. This decision is directly related to our decisions about what we eventually want the Internet to be for.
Do we want the Internet to be a marketplace, a teacher, a trainer? I would rather have limited resources allocated to training, skills enrichment, and exposure to art and culture, than to a thousand million Doom-playing boxes and gabby cellphones.
Think about it. Which places in a given city get services such as DSL first? Is that the best social choice, for both the city and the Internet?
Okay u have a press release. That's news.
Then you have some fud from it.
That is not news.
You passed on a piece of what Kuro5hin calls "Mindless Link Propagation.." To make it a story, some analysis of the significance of this fact, the CTO/President stepped down is called for.
I know nothing about this particular company, but the reasons for the step down could be either be a) truly personal reasons,
b) Hohndel doesn't like whatever SuSE is doing to "lead the world towards what is the most powerful and acknowledged alternative to the dominance of one proprietary operating system,"
c) SuSE doesn't like the guy,
d) some horrific scandal,
e) The mob,
f) Aliens.
I suppose you expect the posters to contribute A, B, C, D, E and F.
But, if you don't do a little more research you might as well re-name Slashdot to "Mindless Link Propagation."
Trusting Borders to resolve and reconcile issues brought up by activists is like trusting them what got Microsoft's money, the government, to prosecute Microsoft.
.NET, and continue on their merry way because the Punishment bullet of the government, anti-trust prosecution, has already been shot, at least for the nonce!
A little comparison here.
Microsoft gets called a monopoly, gets threatened with breakup, probably WON'T get broken up since this got transferred to a new judge. They come out with XP and
Borders takes down its technology, "resolves" issues by doing something stupid like appointing a committee or a hearing board or something like that, or some kind of diversity officer.
Or there may be some other corporate solution that is cooked up by a lawyer in order to meet the constitutional requirements while conferring the bottom-line benefits, such as lower insurance premiums for the stores, that these cameras were designed to provide.