Maybe that god-awful thing will become a reality after all. If this became baked, wouldn't you (assuming you were Gates AKA Satan) reinitiate Hailstorm?
And, what of the anti-trust case? We try to punish them for a monopoly and then pull shit like this? Damn, damn, damn.
Maybe this will push the open ID systems (such as those proposed for GNU.Net) to get completed and agreed upon alot sooner. I wouldn't mind it so much with an open standard. I'd love to uncheck the US Government as able to retrive my phone number.
I think it would be a simple act of removing microsoft software from federal installations. The use of open source, public software in public places makes sense and would put a damper in the monopoly of the big M.S. in several ways.
First of all, there would be no more sales to the government. I'm sure thats a substansial ammount of MS's market.
Also, this would give open source more credit to the general populus and all those federal employees might start to enjoy linux, or whatever they're running, over the use of windows. Therefor they could use it at home and tell friends "windows sucks"
Additionally, this could be used for lots of software. For example, Oracle. Feds are their biggest customer, but as 'the people', i think we have the right to push for MySQL or another open database system.
Alot of of slashdotters refuse to buy Microsoft products. Either out of disgust, distaste, or whatever. I know I'll never buy from them again. What do you want your taxes going to?
There's plenty of projects underway trying to solve this for GNU.Net, already. Alot of them seem to be doing just fine.
My ideal system would be where I keep my data locally, and if someone requests it (or if I want to send it to an individual, or just to the general network for accessability) I would use encryptions. Perhaps a seperate key for each entity wanting to see your data?
I remember thinking up something similar a while back. It was a lot more vague, however. A sort of mass internet storage system.
Changing the past and "Parrellel Universes"
on
Time Travel
·
· Score: 1
I'd like to make a few points on the topics of changing the past and of so-called "Parrellel Universes", in context to time travel.
I've pondered on this for quite some time and I have come to a conclusion that I will keep, until proven wrong. This conclusion is that you simply can not change the past. If a person were to go back in time and affect things, nothing has changed. That is the way it always was. Because of this, it would simply be impossible for time travel to negate the existence of an object or person. You can't kill your parents before you're born.
Also, this is interesting as I recently heard that scientist managed to increase the speed of light through a crystal gas, causing the light to emerge before it entered. I think I'd like a phone made out of one of these. "Hello, Me, don't forget to where some pants!"
This is a step in the right and wrong directions at the same time. It is wrong that we can so easily be sued or whatever the email is about, but at the same time, its a good thing that electronic documents are gaining some weight!
The who zlib article is a great example of this. Upon further reading, you find it isn't nearly as bad as it was made out to be. I must admit however, they do have alot of submissions and it would be hard to research the validity of each completely. Site's like Kuro5hin have it done right, I believe. Post anything, if people like it, then it gets to the front page. It does work like that there, doesn't it? Some site should do it that way...
I think they compare other things, such as the extra info (title, author, etc) as well as dates and file sizes. I've seen (on morpheus, gnutella, etc) many times when the same filename comes up as seperate results.
Now this is what im talking about. I want this! Do you think there are any legal issues against doing this to myself? And does this work both ways? ie, could the joystick in their head have "force feedback", therefor applying a new sense?
This all relies too much on sight. These things, no matter how efficiently designed, do get in the way of your sight, even if transparent. Why use sight at all? Personally, I would prefer a system with a larger learning curve but effectively bringing a new sense into play. Electrodes applied to the body would send raw singles, which we would learn to interpret. This could have many possibilies. "Oh, would you look at that dream-woman, my alarm is going off. Hold on, let me set it back an hour." All while sleeping. Well, maybe not, but I think its cool. Just an idea.
yea but then we still gotta program the compiler for that in probably C/C++ and assembly for the first versions and im sure someone would stick zlib in there somewhere!
and for a very good reason. Apple is a hardware company. They always have been, and they always will be. Where would all the money come from if people didn't have to buy their hardware anymore? Why do you think it is so expensive anyway? This proposal is a little rediculus.
I was just about to get into some kernal hacking, and I've only ever glanced at some source. Probably a bit daunting, but I'm looking for fun!
My first project? Finish my compression and use that for a virtual compressed drive module. Of course, I'll do others before hand as practice, tweaking little things.
Now, when they say audio/video searching, how do they mean? How is the inquiry specified? Let me guess: text?
What I want to see is an A/V search engine that doesnt use text. I want to have A/V samples as my inquiries. Toss in some Cowboy Bebop and Gundam Wing, get Evangelian and some other anime back. No text involved.
With advancements in AI, this could be possible. Need a picture of an apple for some project or whatever? Give the search engine one picture and get a few thousand back. Does anything approach this sort of technology yet?
...people dont give a flying flip. The average American has either no opinion on the DMCA or no rightfully educated one. So, there just aren't enough people to counter it. And, with all the buzz about the "War", people care less. As a matter of fact, on Sept. 11 that's one of the first things I said, "Great, now no one will counter DMCA, they'll just care about this." Not that we shouldnt care, but we need to watch more than one thing in our government at a time. They aren't single-tasking.
The First Ammendment is a joke. Goverment doesn't take it all that seriously, most of the time. Look at censorship laws and harrasment cases. Yea, you can say what you want. But not if any single person has a problem with it, apparently. It's bullshit.
Forgive me if I am making a mistake, but isn't this old tech? I've seen Text-2-Speech chips for sale in at Radio Shack for like five bucks. Not with the Chinese, however. But, still...
Well we just have to get them into the right market. For example, if you could get the cells into normal sized batteries then alot of things would use them. Or, what about a generator that runs on this and powers the house? Then, everything will use it. And those that don't probably have special batteries that can be charged and therefor charged from this power source. That will be the big step, battery chargers. Because, batteries are already in big supply and use.
arrange it in such a way that the two are solidly connected, then you only need to hold the joystick with a little screen sticking out, or the other way around depending.
This, of course, would be a good standard to get set very soon. Don't want each game to need a different joystick, do we?
Slashdot Mirror
And, what of the anti-trust case? We try to punish them for a monopoly and then pull shit like this? Damn, damn, damn.
Maybe this will push the open ID systems (such as those proposed for GNU.Net) to get completed and agreed upon alot sooner. I wouldn't mind it so much with an open standard. I'd love to uncheck the US Government as able to retrive my phone number.
First of all, there would be no more sales to the government. I'm sure thats a substansial ammount of MS's market.
Also, this would give open source more credit to the general populus and all those federal employees might start to enjoy linux, or whatever they're running, over the use of windows. Therefor they could use it at home and tell friends "windows sucks"
Additionally, this could be used for lots of software. For example, Oracle. Feds are their biggest customer, but as 'the people', i think we have the right to push for MySQL or another open database system.
Alot of of slashdotters refuse to buy Microsoft products. Either out of disgust, distaste, or whatever. I know I'll never buy from them again. What do you want your taxes going to?
There's plenty of projects underway trying to solve this for GNU.Net, already. Alot of them seem to be doing just fine.
My ideal system would be where I keep my data locally, and if someone requests it (or if I want to send it to an individual, or just to the general network for accessability) I would use encryptions. Perhaps a seperate key for each entity wanting to see your data?
I remember thinking up something similar a while back. It was a lot more vague, however. A sort of mass internet storage system.
I'd like to make a few points on the topics of changing the past and of so-called "Parrellel Universes", in context to time travel.
I've pondered on this for quite some time and I have come to a conclusion that I will keep, until proven wrong. This conclusion is that you simply can not change the past. If a person were to go back in time and affect things, nothing has changed. That is the way it always was. Because of this, it would simply be impossible for time travel to negate the existence of an object or person. You can't kill your parents before you're born.
Also, this is interesting as I recently heard that scientist managed to increase the speed of light through a crystal gas, causing the light to emerge before it entered. I think I'd like a phone made out of one of these. "Hello, Me, don't forget to where some pants!"
However, after their little "cactus" bullshit and now this, I'm boycotting Sony. Anyone care to join the cause?
Could this sort of procedure be used to treat HIV?
This is a step in the right and wrong directions at the same time. It is wrong that we can so easily be sued or whatever the email is about, but at the same time, its a good thing that electronic documents are gaining some weight!
The who zlib article is a great example of this. Upon further reading, you find it isn't nearly as bad as it was made out to be. I must admit however, they do have alot of submissions and it would be hard to research the validity of each completely. Site's like Kuro5hin have it done right, I believe. Post anything, if people like it, then it gets to the front page. It does work like that there, doesn't it? Some site should do it that way...
I think they compare other things, such as the extra info (title, author, etc) as well as dates and file sizes. I've seen (on morpheus, gnutella, etc) many times when the same filename comes up as seperate results.
Now this is what im talking about. I want this! Do you think there are any legal issues against doing this to myself? And does this work both ways? ie, could the joystick in their head have "force feedback", therefor applying a new sense?
This all relies too much on sight. These things, no matter how efficiently designed, do get in the way of your sight, even if transparent. Why use sight at all? Personally, I would prefer a system with a larger learning curve but effectively bringing a new sense into play. Electrodes applied to the body would send raw singles, which we would learn to interpret. This could have many possibilies. "Oh, would you look at that dream-woman, my alarm is going off. Hold on, let me set it back an hour." All while sleeping. Well, maybe not, but I think its cool. Just an idea.
that has horrible sickening ideas stemming from it, you know? ugh...
yea but then we still gotta program the compiler for that in probably C/C++ and assembly for the first versions and im sure someone would stick zlib in there somewhere!
and for a very good reason. Apple is a hardware company. They always have been, and they always will be. Where would all the money come from if people didn't have to buy their hardware anymore? Why do you think it is so expensive anyway? This proposal is a little rediculus.
Deep Thought would, with no problem, know your every thought and motive and predict EXACTLY your next moves till the end of the game.
ive head chess programs taking days to find a good move.
I was just about to get into some kernal hacking, and I've only ever glanced at some source. Probably a bit daunting, but I'm looking for fun!
My first project? Finish my compression and use that for a virtual compressed drive module. Of course, I'll do others before hand as practice, tweaking little things.
What I want to see is an A/V search engine that doesnt use text. I want to have A/V samples as my inquiries. Toss in some Cowboy Bebop and Gundam Wing, get Evangelian and some other anime back. No text involved.
With advancements in AI, this could be possible. Need a picture of an apple for some project or whatever? Give the search engine one picture and get a few thousand back. Does anything approach this sort of technology yet?
Actually, they do cost ninty bucks. Less even. 89.99 you can get a 1.1 ghz. and I'm looking at slightly dated prices.
...people dont give a flying flip. The average American has either no opinion on the DMCA or no rightfully educated one. So, there just aren't enough people to counter it. And, with all the buzz about the "War", people care less. As a matter of fact, on Sept. 11 that's one of the first things I said, "Great, now no one will counter DMCA, they'll just care about this." Not that we shouldnt care, but we need to watch more than one thing in our government at a time. They aren't single-tasking.
The First Ammendment is a joke. Goverment doesn't take it all that seriously, most of the time. Look at censorship laws and harrasment cases. Yea, you can say what you want. But not if any single person has a problem with it, apparently. It's bullshit.
TextPad is great. Only problem is that it is just windows, we need something like this in Java.
Forgive me if I am making a mistake, but isn't this old tech? I've seen Text-2-Speech chips for sale in at Radio Shack for like five bucks. Not with the Chinese, however. But, still...
Well we just have to get them into the right market. For example, if you could get the cells into normal sized batteries then alot of things would use them. Or, what about a generator that runs on this and powers the house? Then, everything will use it. And those that don't probably have special batteries that can be charged and therefor charged from this power source. That will be the big step, battery chargers. Because, batteries are already in big supply and use.
This, of course, would be a good standard to get set very soon. Don't want each game to need a different joystick, do we?