Is there any evidence at all to support these predictions? I didn't see any in the article. His credentials (London School of Economics) hardly convince me that he's an "expert" in the field of... what? Super-futuristic anthropological speculation, I guess.
No one alive today knows what the next 100,000 years hold for humanity. No one. It's just too complex a subject and too long a time period to make any reasonable predictions about. Heck, no one even knows what the next 10 or 100 years hold, let alone 100,000.
This is just a typical sensationalistic "news" story designed to attract eyeballs. It's not based in science or reality. You can make up your own long-term predictions with just as much authority.
Are you kidding? Would you seriously claim that the total wealth of the human species hasn't increased immensely over time? Civilization itself is predicated on the fact that economics is NOT a zero-sum game -- it's win-win if done well.
Where do you think the hydrogen on the shuttle comes from? Not from the Great Offshore Hydrogen Mine, I'll tell you that much. Hydrogen is like a battery - it's a good way to temporarily store energy that you've obtained from somewhere else. This is why the GP is correct in saying the hydrogen is not a fuel source. Most likely, the hydrogen on the shuttle comes from a source such as (gasp) fossil fuels.
Maybe I misunderstood you. You said the laptops NEVER leave the vault, even when they're in use. I guess you meant to say that they only leave the vault when someone is using them?
Classified laptops don't leave the security vault where they're stored
Come again? What's the point of a laptop that's tied to a specific location? Buying a laptop when a desktop machine would suffice is a complete waste of money.
I think the bigger news is that they're finally releasing the animated series on DVD. I have good memories of these cartoons from when I was a kid, but I never had a chance to watch more than one or two. I'm looking forward to renting them - it's almost like having new episodes of the original series to watch.
I think the most realistic approach is to have a system where copyright holders can show infringements to some binding authority
Fine, but think about the scale of the problem. Five bazillion people are uploading ten bazillion bytes/sec at any given moment of the day, using a largely automated, very distributed system we call the Internet.
If the authority you're speaking of is a monolithic, largely manual institution that takes anything more than a few minutes make a decision, it will quickly fall behind and be useless. Instead, you'd need some sort of distributed authority which uses automated means (read: artificial intelligence) to compare two chunks of data in order to determine if one is a copy of the other.
This is an immense technological effort. Even if we could tackle the distributed aspects, we don't have the AI to make these kinds of decisions accurately. So, for now, I'm afraid your suggestion has to go into the category of science fiction.
I've been around long enough to remember that Slashdot was actually fine before the moderation system was introduced (late 90s, I think). IIRC, Taco added it as an experiment rather than a necessity. I think it was only afterwards that the serious trolling began.
You do realize that many important "classes of objects" (i.e. taxonomies) don't have clear boundaries, right? For instance, the notion of a "species" is fuzzy and very culture-dependent. Yet it's an important scientific concept and one that is far from "silly".
Article: OS/X is superior because it has built in $WHIZBANG_FEATURE, which Microsoft refuses to do (where $WHIZBANG_FEATURE = launchd, in this case).
Me: If Microsoft built in $WHIZBANG_FEATURE, people might complain that they are illegally leveraging their monopoly.
You: Microsoft would only get in trouble if $WHIZBANG_FEATURE could not be unbundled. Because, you see, lots of other $IRRELEVANT_EXAMPLES can be unbundled with no problem.
Me: Okay, but $WHIZBANG_FEATURE can't be unbundled, so they might get in trouble (by your own reasoning) if they implemented it.
It always traces back to Microsoft's untenable policy of maintaining gaps in Windows security to avoid competing with 3rd party vendors and certified partners
So if they bundled everything you list (anti-virus, anti-spam, encryption, etc.) into the operating system, you don't think they'd be accused of illegally leveraging their monopoly advantage? Just look what happened when they integrated a web browser into the OS a few years ago.
You are so full of it. The universe isn't expanding into virgin space.
Asking what's outside the universe is most likely a nonsensical question. Like asking what's underneath the earth holding it up, now that we know the earth is a planet. (N.B. "It's turtle's all the way down").
Slashdot Mirror
.,.,,.,.,
I found these on the ground. I think you must've dropped your punctuation, sir.
Is there any evidence at all to support these predictions? I didn't see any in the article. His credentials (London School of Economics) hardly convince me that he's an "expert" in the field of... what? Super-futuristic anthropological speculation, I guess.
No one alive today knows what the next 100,000 years hold for humanity. No one. It's just too complex a subject and too long a time period to make any reasonable predictions about. Heck, no one even knows what the next 10 or 100 years hold, let alone 100,000.
This is just a typical sensationalistic "news" story designed to attract eyeballs. It's not based in science or reality. You can make up your own long-term predictions with just as much authority.
Typing too fast
Not if there's only one (presidential) election every five years.
Are you kidding? Would you seriously claim that the total wealth of the human species hasn't increased immensely over time? Civilization itself is predicated on the fact that economics is NOT a zero-sum game -- it's win-win if done well.
Where do you think the hydrogen on the shuttle comes from? Not from the Great Offshore Hydrogen Mine, I'll tell you that much. Hydrogen is like a battery - it's a good way to temporarily store energy that you've obtained from somewhere else. This is why the GP is correct in saying the hydrogen is not a fuel source. Most likely, the hydrogen on the shuttle comes from a source such as (gasp) fossil fuels.
Maybe I misunderstood you. You said the laptops NEVER leave the vault, even when they're in use. I guess you meant to say that they only leave the vault when someone is using them?
Classified laptops don't leave the security vault where they're stored
Come again? What's the point of a laptop that's tied to a specific location? Buying a laptop when a desktop machine would suffice is a complete waste of money.
That's the first thing I thought of too. Diminishing the amount of sunlight that hits the earth's surface can't be good for the food chain.
I'm tempted to subscribe to Slashdot for a day just so I can demand my money back in outrage.
Granted.
I think the terms are pretty easy to understand:
:: Key : Lock
Exploit : Vulnerability
So what this guy has done is develop exploits for pre-existing vulnerabilities in PDF. No?
That's ridiculous. "Redoing them to look exactly the same"? Why bother?
I think the bigger news is that they're finally releasing the animated series on DVD. I have good memories of these cartoons from when I was a kid, but I never had a chance to watch more than one or two. I'm looking forward to renting them - it's almost like having new episodes of the original series to watch.
I think the most realistic approach is to have a system where copyright holders can show infringements to some binding authority
Fine, but think about the scale of the problem. Five bazillion people are uploading ten bazillion bytes/sec at any given moment of the day, using a largely automated, very distributed system we call the Internet.
If the authority you're speaking of is a monolithic, largely manual institution that takes anything more than a few minutes make a decision, it will quickly fall behind and be useless. Instead, you'd need some sort of distributed authority which uses automated means (read: artificial intelligence) to compare two chunks of data in order to determine if one is a copy of the other.
This is an immense technological effort. Even if we could tackle the distributed aspects, we don't have the AI to make these kinds of decisions accurately. So, for now, I'm afraid your suggestion has to go into the category of science fiction.
What does "D2" do that the Slashdotter extension doesn't do? I'm perfectly happy with that.
I read this twice, and it seems that you are mostly serious. The Shakers tried something like this (though with a very different intent) via celibacy.
Turns out that societies that don't actively reproduce tend to tie out pretty quickly. Who'd a thunk it?
I've been around long enough to remember that Slashdot was actually fine before the moderation system was introduced (late 90s, I think). IIRC, Taco added it as an experiment rather than a necessity. I think it was only afterwards that the serious trolling began.
This comes out on the same day as news that we've discovered vast new oil reserves in the Gulf of Mexico.
More carbon to pump in to the atmosphere! Hooray!
You do realize that many important "classes of objects" (i.e. taxonomies) don't have clear boundaries, right? For instance, the notion of a "species" is fuzzy and very culture-dependent. Yet it's an important scientific concept and one that is far from "silly".
Let's summarize the discussion so far:
Article: OS/X is superior because it has built in $WHIZBANG_FEATURE, which Microsoft refuses to do (where $WHIZBANG_FEATURE = launchd, in this case).
Me: If Microsoft built in $WHIZBANG_FEATURE, people might complain that they are illegally leveraging their monopoly.
You: Microsoft would only get in trouble if $WHIZBANG_FEATURE could not be unbundled. Because, you see, lots of other $IRRELEVANT_EXAMPLES can be unbundled with no problem.
Me: Okay, but $WHIZBANG_FEATURE can't be unbundled, so they might get in trouble (by your own reasoning) if they implemented it.
You: $NON_SEQUITIR about $IRRELEVANT_EXAMPLES.
So by your logic, can "launchd" be unbundled from OS/X? If not, then your critical difference doesn't really hold up in this situation.
It always traces back to Microsoft's untenable policy of maintaining gaps in Windows security to avoid competing with 3rd party vendors and certified partners
So if they bundled everything you list (anti-virus, anti-spam, encryption, etc.) into the operating system, you don't think they'd be accused of illegally leveraging their monopoly advantage? Just look what happened when they integrated a web browser into the OS a few years ago.
I use Netflix in Firefox all the time and it works fine. What problems do you see?
You are so full of it. The universe isn't expanding into virgin space.
Asking what's outside the universe is most likely a nonsensical question. Like asking what's underneath the earth holding it up, now that we know the earth is a planet. (N.B. "It's turtle's all the way down").