Sorry, but your offensive claims have no basis in fact. The Nazi party did not begin the campaign of censorship until after they'd taken control, and it was really not a signicant factor until after the Holocaust was laready underway. "Six million dead Jews (and about as many other casualties of death and work camps)" isn't really a thing to throw around as the impact of your little censorship disadvantage.
We already have this sort of technology in, well, "analog" form. Profiling for likely committers of school violence is possible. Psychological evaluation that can predict/discover pedophilia is possible. These things are being *dealt with*, and our legal system is proving itself just as capable of dealing with them as it has proven capable of dealing with every major idea that has ever been added to it. Don't sweat it.
I'm aware of the difficulties in reducing a response such as an emotion into objective code. However, it's only logical that the lower the level that we can break these response down to, the closer to having a "blueprint" for such responses we will be. If all factors are known, it will be possible to model this phenomenon. This is one more factor to work with, and an extremely important one at that.
Now we may know how personality interacts with environment, and therefore we could be able to model this for a program. Basically, we'd be using similar (in the mathematical sense of the word) i/o functions for both a computer and a person. If the data stream is the same, that takes out one extremely difficult step (converting between vastly different formats) in emulating human consciousness.
One step closer...
The best I can think of is Alpha Centauri. It's basically a vastly simplified version of the real world, as seen through the lense of scifi. Only one of the four modes of victory can be achieved through a zero-sum philosophy. To achieve Transcendence, economic or diplomatic victory, one needs the other factions to be successful and advanced. Military victory is a zero-sum game, but the ending sequence for that one is short and relatively uninteresting, and you cannot get as high of a score.
Deja vu is probably caused by aspects of the trigger situation acting as retrieval cues that unconsciously remind one of an earlier situation, causing a feeling of familiarity. I don't see quite how mirror cells could cause this. However...
Jamais vu(French for "never seen"), the feeling that one is experiencing something for the first time, even though they've experienced it before, is related. This may be explained by the encoding specificity principle. Despite the overt similarity of the current and past situations, the cues of the current situation do not match the encoded features of the earlier situation. If one's mirror cells aren't properly triggered, but other aspects of the brain are, you may *know* that the situation should seem familiar, but be unable to get the proper response from your mirror cells.
They say that these mirror cells are *how* we learn from culture, society, peers, experiences, and such, and then *apply* this knowledge to life. It does not create the personality, it allows the personality to interact with the world.
So, basically, you're against trying to figure things out?
This view makes no sense to me. How is it like botany, might I ask? Perhaps you were unaware that botany means "the study of plants." In any case, what they are doing is trying to conduct beneficial research into the nature of behavior, learning, and consciousness.
Currently, it is possible to feed everyone on earth. World hunger exists for a variety of economic reasons, mostly to do with keeping the price of grain up, but it's *possible* to feed everyone. By the year 2030, this will no longer be possible. And now they wanna make more people?
We don't stop people from offering anonymous email now!
(Hushmail, and to a lesser extent,
Hotmail are some examples.)
There really is no way to keep knowledge of tacnuke construction and the like a secret. Look at what the credit card companies tried to do with magstrip encoding; now any determined young post-h4x0[Z kid can encode their very own Visa, and the tech to make the physical card has been out since the 80s.
Probably, the only effective way of keeping these sort of things under control is to either restrict the materials or strike somewhere else entirely, such as with heavier penalties for child porn and the like. Just a suggestion, given the fact that the current system fails by your definition of success.
Ender's Game was a man's idea of what war would be like in the future that was thought up in the 70s. The focus of the book was on characterization and the nature of leadership, anyhow. If you own a later edition, read the introduction.
I referred to the "Incredible, 100%-shootdown, missle-killing laser satellites" version of Star Wars, as hyped by the Reagan admin. That is not off the ground, period.
How exactly does one "use" space? Can you, say, open a can with Space? Will it wash your car? If you pay Space reasonable wages, will it work in your athletic shoe factory? Perhaps this may delay the peaceful *exploration* of space (though the smart money's on "It never gets off the ground"), but as for the "use" of space, nuh-uh.
They're being a little optimistic about SDI, now, aren't they? When I see evidence to suggest we'll have our Magical Laser Satellites in the next 20 years, I'll believe it.
And the point of war, from a modern standpoint (assuming it's US v China) is to destroy everything your enemy owns. Someone fires the first (nuclear) shot, and we all die.
Sorry, but my bet's on it going the other way around.
"Brilliant" hackers say "step back, bitch," for a little while, and valiantly defy Big Corp.Big Corp. retaliates.
Slashdot Mirror
If this idea was being debated by the government of, say, Spain, I don't think you'd be calling their parliament Neo-Nazis. Stop the racism, please.
Sorry, but your offensive claims have no basis in fact. The Nazi party did not begin the campaign of censorship until after they'd taken control, and it was really not a signicant factor until after the Holocaust was laready underway. "Six million dead Jews (and about as many other casualties of death and work camps)" isn't really a thing to throw around as the impact of your little censorship disadvantage.
If every time people try to use the benefits of the internet business model, consumers yowl for their privacy, the internet will die.
I'll give ya that one.
We already have this sort of technology in, well, "analog" form. Profiling for likely committers of school violence is possible. Psychological evaluation that can predict/discover pedophilia is possible. These things are being *dealt with*, and our legal system is proving itself just as capable of dealing with them as it has proven capable of dealing with every major idea that has ever been added to it. Don't sweat it.
Now we may know how personality interacts with environment, and therefore we could be able to model this for a program. Basically, we'd be using similar (in the mathematical sense of the word) i/o functions for both a computer and a person. If the data stream is the same, that takes out one extremely difficult step (converting between vastly different formats) in emulating human consciousness.
One step closer...
Basically, it encourages a cooperative strategy.
See my earlier post, "Possible applications..."
Deja vu is probably caused by aspects of the trigger situation acting as retrieval cues that unconsciously remind one of an earlier situation, causing a feeling of familiarity. I don't see quite how mirror cells could cause this. However...
Jamais vu(French for "never seen"), the feeling that one is experiencing something for the first time, even though they've experienced it before, is related. This may be explained by the encoding specificity principle. Despite the overt similarity of the current and past situations, the cues of the current situation do not match the encoded features of the earlier situation. If one's mirror cells aren't properly triggered, but other aspects of the brain are, you may *know* that the situation should seem familiar, but be unable to get the proper response from your mirror cells.
They say that these mirror cells are *how* we learn from culture, society, peers, experiences, and such, and then *apply* this knowledge to life. It does not create the personality, it allows the personality to interact with the world.
So, basically, you're against trying to figure things out?
This view makes no sense to me. How is it like botany, might I ask? Perhaps you were unaware that botany means "the study of plants." In any case, what they are doing is trying to conduct beneficial research into the nature of behavior, learning, and consciousness.
Applications are endless...user friendly anticipation of commands, targeted ads, digital sentience...
Currently, it is possible to feed everyone on earth. World hunger exists for a variety of economic reasons, mostly to do with keeping the price of grain up, but it's *possible* to feed everyone. By the year 2030, this will no longer be possible. And now they wanna make more people?
Somehow, I'm not seeing the "Clinton Sells Nuclear Secrets" view on any site that's not a paranoiac right-wing fundamentalist bastion.
No, I actually meant like it *didn't* delay those things. Sarcasm, pal.
There really is no way to keep knowledge of tacnuke construction and the like a secret. Look at what the credit card companies tried to do with magstrip encoding; now any determined young post-h4x0[Z kid can encode their very own Visa, and the tech to make the physical card has been out since the 80s.
Probably, the only effective way of keeping these sort of things under control is to either restrict the materials or strike somewhere else entirely, such as with heavier penalties for child porn and the like. Just a suggestion, given the fact that the current system fails by your definition of success.
If war is as "uneccessary" as you claim it is, why has it been such an integral part of human history?
"I know not with what weapons World War III will be fought, but World War IV will be fought with sticks and stones." --Albert Einstein (actual quote)
Ender's Game was a man's idea of what war would be like in the future that was thought up in the 70s. The focus of the book was on characterization and the nature of leadership, anyhow. If you own a later edition, read the introduction.
Can we get some evidence on that?
The episode is "A taste of Armeggedon."
I referred to the "Incredible, 100%-shootdown, missle-killing laser satellites" version of Star Wars, as hyped by the Reagan admin. That is not off the ground, period.
How exactly does one "use" space? Can you, say, open a can with Space? Will it wash your car? If you pay Space reasonable wages, will it work in your athletic shoe factory?
Perhaps this may delay the peaceful *exploration* of space (though the smart money's on "It never gets off the ground"), but as for the "use" of space, nuh-uh.
They're being a little optimistic about SDI, now, aren't they? When I see evidence to suggest we'll have our Magical Laser Satellites in the next 20 years, I'll believe it. And the point of war, from a modern standpoint (assuming it's US v China) is to destroy everything your enemy owns. Someone fires the first (nuclear) shot, and we all die.
Sorry, but my bet's on it going the other way around.
"Brilliant" hackers say "step back, bitch," for a little while, and valiantly defy Big Corp. Big Corp. retaliates.