Some of us folks here at Georgia Tech have been working on something similar, unfortunately its not something thats completed yet and we've been having some (software) issues.
Agreed, but more importantly, for $1 or $2, I should get something thats worth it, not some trash.
If you would give me an album which has atleast half of the songs that're worthwhile to listen to, I would glady pay. Most mainstream bands suck, I have seen much better music at local clubs than a lot of the commerical stuff thats been produced.
Hey, good to find a fellow Techie! Yeah, you get those perks only if you're in CS or in some way affiliated with CS.
But then, I've heard that if you could justify the need for it, they could arrange it for you (your GSA/GRA requires it or something like that). Else, you could always ask your friends in CS:)
Neither. You see, this is almost like an one-time fee.
After this, the virus writers the world over would be scared shit to ever write a virus, especially since they would now have bounty hunters with bows and arrows aimed at their asses.
Duh. I think what would happen is that this would make it even more tempting for people to write viruses. Man! Not only did I infect a few hundred thousand systems, I also have a bounty of like a quarter mil on my head! Ain't I cool?
Hell, even in some Universities, like the one I'm at, the school has a Microsoft Alliance that gets the students the Microsoft "works" (MSDN + VS +.Net thingamajiks) for about $15 -- thats the shipping cost, nothing more.
Although GATech is largely neutral when it comes to your choice of OS and languages, this kinda support pushes a lot of students into not using Opensource. Plus, the lucrative chances of an MS Internship tempts them.
The good news is, as a lot of Professors seem to prefer Macs, there is no one right method or means. But then a lot of times, our GRA work is done on Microsoft platforms, and students end up choosing one platform over another not because they want to but because they have to.
For example, if I'm into things like AI and systems, its Linux. If I'm into media, its Mac and if I'm into generic coding its Windows.
Sucks, because this tends to segregate skillsets and beliefs.
By "go away", I take it you also include "turn into useless marktroid-driven flashy pablum". Which would be inevitable with anything MS touches. (Not a slam, just realism here.)
Hmmm, yes if MS is going to take over Google in the traditional way. However, if it were handed over to MSR, it could be different. Perhaps even better.
But then, go away could also mean being redundant the way Altavista today is. Its half-decent and its there, sure. But nobody really cares about it.
Imagine what would happen if Google were to vanish tomorrow. It would drastically reduce productivity of organizations the world over, and not necessarily those that are related to computers.
Today, Google is almost a crutch for a lot of people. Right from Universities to workplaces, its almost like the defacto tool. Don't know an answer? Can't find something? Google it.
Are companies willing to let this happen? Sure, you have a million other search engines. But it sure as hell would hurt (and hurt badly) if Google were to go.
This is something that could be leveraged to investors' benefit> Here you have, a *very* large chunk of the Internet being dependent on *one* tool. Who's willing to make sure that it does not go away? Think about it.
A man is accused of calling his ugly and painful neighbour Mrs. Gloria a pig. So the neighbour sues him, and the judge tells the man that he should never call Mrs. Gloria a pig, ever again.
So the man asks the judge, if he can call a pig Mrs. Gloria. The judges sees no reason why he should not. So before leaving the courtroom, the man looks at his neighbour and says, "Goodbye, Mrs. Gloria.";-)
Here's an interesting poem that sums up the paradox, from David Zindell's Neverness universe -- "To be fully alive is to be fully aware. To be fully aware is to be full of fear. To fear is to die. ~ saying of the Warrior Poets, Neverness"
He writes almost similar stuff, and he talks of how humans "cark" their brains into the neurologics of a computer to achieve what he calls god-hood.
If I were to cark my brain into a computer, would I still have human rights? Or would the government really be scared of what I would become, and what I could persuade others to become?
One thing is almost certain, eitherways, its more likely that AI would be treated as something terrible rather than something friendly, _if_ such a thing were to really happen.
Hmm, I guess you cannot say that for sure, but most systems today use trust metrics.
For example, an ACM/IEEE source would have a much higher trust metric than say, from some local conference in Egypt (no offence to any local conferences in Egypt, but you get the wind:)
That is true, that the answer is not straight nor is it simple.
However, one thing that I have learnt (the hard way) over a period of time is that Ontology (Specification of data conceptualization) is infinitely more important than Epistemology (Knowledge of the data).
There is nothing wrong with a system which has tags, the trouble is when you classify it eitherway -- the references of the tags are once again more important than how they are acquired. You could perhaps have a purely automated system, maybe a pseudo-automated system, or a manually supervised system or combinations of all the above. However, what does matter is how do the tags fit in the system? Are those the only reference parameters for the data, or is there something more? Does the system go beyond the tag, or is it constrained to the set of tags.
One simple question regarding categorization -- what constitutes similarity? Most often than not, its a reference KB or meta-data. And would merely data-level similarity suffice, or would you need structural similarity too? I feel that without answering these questions, its pointless to categorize data. If I remember right, Microsoft had done something similar where they used media based categorization -- which did not work out quite well. I do not quite think the human brain works by categorizing things that way -- its more of an ontological and semantic mapping.
A poster above remarked about how medical terms change little. Sure, but context does change. When you have something revolutionary thats coming in, your old system is most likely to treat it as anomalous data!
I'm not a medical person, so I cannot think up of examples off my head, but there are so many such things in physics -- Gravastars anyone? Their terminology has evolved over a period of time from being types of blackholes to being a replacement for blackholes to voids in the Universe.
Slashdot Mirror
Some of us folks here at Georgia Tech have been working on something similar, unfortunately its not something thats completed yet and we've been having some (software) issues.
Agreed, but more importantly, for $1 or $2, I should get something thats worth it, not some trash.
If you would give me an album which has atleast half of the songs that're worthwhile to listen to, I would glady pay. Most mainstream bands suck, I have seen much better music at local clubs than a lot of the commerical stuff thats been produced.
Give me some good music, dammit.
Whats scary is that this article is right next after one that says Microsoft Moving Into Chip Design. Is this an omen of some sorts?
Disturbing. Very disturbing.
Hey!
;-)
If they would promise me that they would give me all those nifty voyeur ads of what I *could* see with an X10, hell why not
Come on! Free soft pr0n when you're walking around the city is Not a Bad Thing (TM).
Hey, good to find a fellow Techie! Yeah, you get those perks only if you're in CS or in some way affiliated with CS.
:)
But then, I've heard that if you could justify the need for it, they could arrange it for you (your GSA/GRA requires it or something like that). Else, you could always ask your friends in CS
If you cared, that is!
Neither. You see, this is almost like an one-time fee.
After this, the virus writers the world over would be scared shit to ever write a virus, especially since they would now have bounty hunters with bows and arrows aimed at their asses.
Duh. I think what would happen is that this would make it even more tempting for people to write viruses. Man! Not only did I infect a few hundred thousand systems, I also have a bounty of like a quarter mil on my head! Ain't I cool?
How ridiculous can they get?
Hell, even in some Universities, like the one I'm at, the school has a Microsoft Alliance that gets the students the Microsoft "works" (MSDN + VS + .Net thingamajiks) for about $15 -- thats the shipping cost, nothing more.
Although GATech is largely neutral when it comes to your choice of OS and languages, this kinda support pushes a lot of students into not using Opensource. Plus, the lucrative chances of an MS Internship tempts them.
The good news is, as a lot of Professors seem to prefer Macs, there is no one right method or means. But then a lot of times, our GRA work is done on Microsoft platforms, and students end up choosing one platform over another not because they want to but because they have to.
For example, if I'm into things like AI and systems, its Linux. If I'm into media, its Mac and if I'm into generic coding its Windows.
Sucks, because this tends to segregate skillsets and beliefs.
By "go away", I take it you also include "turn into useless marktroid-driven flashy pablum". Which would be inevitable with anything MS touches. (Not a slam, just realism here.)
Hmmm, yes if MS is going to take over Google in the traditional way. However, if it were handed over to MSR, it could be different. Perhaps even better.
But then, go away could also mean being redundant the way Altavista today is. Its half-decent and its there, sure. But nobody really cares about it.
If you have your own site, you might want to try Kartoo, its different and its cool! :)
(And yeah, it sure as hell is geeky and slick)
I think you are looking it at it differently.
Imagine what would happen if Google were to vanish tomorrow. It would drastically reduce productivity of organizations the world over, and not necessarily those that are related to computers.
Today, Google is almost a crutch for a lot of people. Right from Universities to workplaces, its almost like the defacto tool. Don't know an answer? Can't find something? Google it.
Are companies willing to let this happen? Sure, you have a million other search engines. But it sure as hell would hurt (and hurt badly) if Google were to go.
This is something that could be leveraged to investors' benefit> Here you have, a *very* large chunk of the Internet being dependent on *one* tool. Who's willing to make sure that it does not go away? Think about it.
The RIAA is trying to make an example out of MIT
;-)
Wrong school to pick! Oh wait, that would be Harvard Law school
Because it wants to?! :-/
Duh!
Not if they're running Windows! :-p
No more etc!? Where will we put all our configuration files?
You see, it would be somewhere in there, but you wouldn't really know.
Nahh, that would be the big bang, I mean _The_ Big Bang. ;)
... or this picture? ;-)
(just kidding, yeah I know he has a girlfriend or something like that)
You know, whats funnier still is that the Slashdot fortune cookie at the bottom of the page reads:
:-)
You got to be very careful if you don't know where you're going, because you might not get there. -- Yogi Berra
There is this old joke that I'm reminded of --
;-)
A man is accused of calling his ugly and painful neighbour Mrs. Gloria a pig. So the neighbour sues him, and the judge tells the man that he should never call Mrs. Gloria a pig, ever again.
So the man asks the judge, if he can call a pig Mrs. Gloria. The judges sees no reason why he should not. So before leaving the courtroom, the man looks at his neighbour and says, "Goodbye, Mrs. Gloria."
You can have a real effect on what is going to happen. Please take a few minutes to help us out with this action.
:)
I think we just _did_ have some very real and very visible effect
Ahh!!! Quite interesting, I was not quite aware of that.
I guess a lot of modern writers have their sources from days gone by, and very few would make the connection, thank you!
A favourite quote of mine by David Zindell --
"Live? Our servants can do that for us!"
~Neverness and The Wild, D.Z.
Here's an interesting poem that sums up the paradox, from David Zindell's Neverness universe --
:)
"To be fully alive is to be fully aware.
To be fully aware is to be full of fear.
To fear is to die.
~ saying of the Warrior Poets, Neverness"
Just found it apt and interesting
You should read David Zindell then -- particularly Neverness, Broken God, The Wild and War in Heaven (the last three are part of a series called A Requiem for Homo Sapiens).
He writes almost similar stuff, and he talks of how humans "cark" their brains into the neurologics of a computer to achieve what he calls god-hood.
If I were to cark my brain into a computer, would I still have human rights? Or would the government really be scared of what I would become, and what I could persuade others to become?
One thing is almost certain, eitherways, its more likely that AI would be treated as something terrible rather than something friendly, _if_ such a thing were to really happen.
Hmm, I guess you cannot say that for sure, but most systems today use trust metrics.
:)
For example, an ACM/IEEE source would have a much higher trust metric than say, from some local conference in Egypt (no offence to any local conferences in Egypt, but you get the wind
That is true, that the answer is not straight nor is it simple.
However, one thing that I have learnt (the hard way) over a period of time is that Ontology (Specification of data conceptualization) is infinitely more important than Epistemology (Knowledge of the data).
There is nothing wrong with a system which has tags, the trouble is when you classify it eitherway -- the references of the tags are once again more important than how they are acquired. You could perhaps have a purely automated system, maybe a pseudo-automated system, or a manually supervised system or combinations of all the above. However, what does matter is how do the tags fit in the system? Are those the only reference parameters for the data, or is there something more? Does the system go beyond the tag, or is it constrained to the set of tags.
One simple question regarding categorization -- what constitutes similarity? Most often than not, its a reference KB or meta-data. And would merely data-level similarity suffice, or would you need structural similarity too? I feel that without answering these questions, its pointless to categorize data. If I remember right, Microsoft had done something similar where they used media based categorization -- which did not work out quite well. I do not quite think the human brain works by categorizing things that way -- its more of an ontological and semantic mapping.
A poster above remarked about how medical terms change little. Sure, but context does change. When you have something revolutionary thats coming in, your old system is most likely to treat it as anomalous data!
I'm not a medical person, so I cannot think up of examples off my head, but there are so many such things in physics -- Gravastars anyone? Their terminology has evolved over a period of time from being types of blackholes to being a replacement for blackholes to voids in the Universe.