Each time you lie, the torturer can try the password, and if it fails, continue to torture you. This would produce effective and reliable results.
This runs into problems if the person actually doesn't know the information you want. They'll reliably give you bad information to stop the torture.
Torture only works if a lie produces different results than the truth AND you can somehow confirm that the tortured party has access to the information you seek. Moreover, the information you get has to be rapidly verifiable; if a lead takes a long time to confirm, like a week, torture will not only be far less effective, but also useless to discern between someone who doesn't want to give up a secret and someone who just doesn't want to be tortured for another week or so.
Porn definitely should not be used as sex ed. The fact that porn was your only source of sex ed shows a huge failure on the part of your parents, your school, and your culture.
It's a failure of sex-ed materials is what it is. If nobody is seeking them out on their own, they must not be very good. It's not like there's no interest.
You can set up the most intelligent, crazy whitelist type system in the world, then it'll get thwarted by someone sending an email, or someone posting something on a forum.
It's worse than that. You can force an air gap between every single computer in the entire world, forever destroying real-time communication, search engines, web presences, e-commerce, and nearly all independent journalism; yet, for all that, porn and illegal file sharing will remain almost entirely unaffected, due to the amazing bandwidth modern storage technology provides to SneakerNet. A smallish cocktail party could result in the overall exchange of a few dozen terabytes of data without any electronic networking whatsoever. As per Kevin Bacon, any individual copy could potentially be only six hops from anyone in the world to anyone else.
I suspect the porn industry is going to be ahead of the curve on transitioning to a post-copyright model. There are already porn stars who are experimenting with doing fetish clips on commission on their websites. Those performers that look good in 1080p potentially have a lot of leverage when it comes to "want me to make this film? Hit this crowdfunding target." Moreso than a lot of Hollywood actors, actually, as lots of moviegoers would gladly pay less for In The Mountains of Madness starring any number of actors who aren't Tom Cruise; but in porn, people way more often have favorite performers than they do favorite directors or favorite production companies.
Its not sending a messages. Its presenting a decoy target.
Presenting a decoy target IS sending messages. Unless you can think of a way to "present a decoy target" without sending specific, tailored information to the incoming threat's sensors...
Well if you think about it you are probably more likely paying for them to work on their next project.
Yes, if you think about it. In fact, even if you don't think about it, that's STILL what you're really paying them for. In fact, every single dollar that goes towards making the next game comes directly from customers giving money to the publisher.
The problem is, if the people actually MAKING the game successfully promote this angle, then pretty soon the people PUBLISHING the game have to get a job making french fries or something. And they don't want that, no they don't.
So computer programs appear out of thin air? They don't require programmers, artists or project managers?
Why don't they sell that service, instead of doing it entirely on spec and then, once it's totally complete, trying to recoup their costs by selling something demonstrably worthless, instead? Seems like kind of a broken business model.
Oh, wait, I know the answer: "BECAUSE THAT'S HOW IT'S ALWAYS BEEN DONE."
It is derivative in the same way that a published novel is a derivative work from the version the author sent to the editor to be published. In other words, NOT.
Producing a TV show is the same as editing a novel?
Slashdot Mirror
There's a name for that...
"...history."
You add an "es" to the end of it. Ex: "buses".
The onboard computer in your spaceship, in the game, is 16-bit.
(everyone has an exactly 100% chance of dieing).
Yes, but not everyone has a 100% chance of dying within an arbitrary 20-year period.
Assembly is "scripting" now?
Each time you lie, the torturer can try the password, and if it fails, continue to torture you. This would produce effective and reliable results.
This runs into problems if the person actually doesn't know the information you want. They'll reliably give you bad information to stop the torture.
Torture only works if a lie produces different results than the truth AND you can somehow confirm that the tortured party has access to the information you seek. Moreover, the information you get has to be rapidly verifiable; if a lead takes a long time to confirm, like a week, torture will not only be far less effective, but also useless to discern between someone who doesn't want to give up a secret and someone who just doesn't want to be tortured for another week or so.
Porn definitely should not be used as sex ed. The fact that porn was your only source of sex ed shows a huge failure on the part of your parents, your school, and your culture.
It's a failure of sex-ed materials is what it is. If nobody is seeking them out on their own, they must not be very good. It's not like there's no interest.
You can set up the most intelligent, crazy whitelist type system in the world, then it'll get thwarted by someone sending an email, or someone posting something on a forum.
It's worse than that. You can force an air gap between every single computer in the entire world, forever destroying real-time communication, search engines, web presences, e-commerce, and nearly all independent journalism; yet, for all that, porn and illegal file sharing will remain almost entirely unaffected, due to the amazing bandwidth modern storage technology provides to SneakerNet. A smallish cocktail party could result in the overall exchange of a few dozen terabytes of data without any electronic networking whatsoever. As per Kevin Bacon, any individual copy could potentially be only six hops from anyone in the world to anyone else.
The oldest known cave drawing is a stick figure with a gigantic boner.
I suspect the porn industry is going to be ahead of the curve on transitioning to a post-copyright model. There are already porn stars who are experimenting with doing fetish clips on commission on their websites. Those performers that look good in 1080p potentially have a lot of leverage when it comes to "want me to make this film? Hit this crowdfunding target." Moreso than a lot of Hollywood actors, actually, as lots of moviegoers would gladly pay less for In The Mountains of Madness starring any number of actors who aren't Tom Cruise; but in porn, people way more often have favorite performers than they do favorite directors or favorite production companies.
If you can see the internet but can't see porn, you are a statistical anomaly;
Proposed: "a successful ban on internet porn is within the noise threshhold of backhoe fade."
Having been married for plenty of years, I've concluded that pornography can actually quite harmful to at least one marriage.
Edited for scientific accuracy.
...becasue somehow you think having an imagination is the same as physically cheating?
That's what the Bible tells him.
Not finding your partner interesting enough to get "in the mood" just with them seems like a problem to me.
If you're married, it will DEFINITELY seem like a problem to you at, oh, about the 7-year mark...
Its not sending a messages. Its presenting a decoy target.
Presenting a decoy target IS sending messages. Unless you can think of a way to "present a decoy target" without sending specific, tailored information to the incoming threat's sensors...
Yeah I'm pretty sure we're all exposed to low-frequency EM radiation constantly.
What does that have to do with low-frequency sound?
Great, but the people making the digital media have bills to pay.
Perhaps they should have thought of that before making the product.
But don't steal. If it's not yours, hands OFF!
It's no one else's responsibility to make your poor business model work. Using language like "steal" where it's not appropriate just makes you look foolish.
Well if you think about it you are probably more likely paying for them to work on their next project.
Yes, if you think about it. In fact, even if you don't think about it, that's STILL what you're really paying them for. In fact, every single dollar that goes towards making the next game comes directly from customers giving money to the publisher.
The problem is, if the people actually MAKING the game successfully promote this angle, then pretty soon the people PUBLISHING the game have to get a job making french fries or something. And they don't want that, no they don't.
So computer programs appear out of thin air? They don't require programmers, artists or project managers?
Why don't they sell that service, instead of doing it entirely on spec and then, once it's totally complete, trying to recoup their costs by selling something demonstrably worthless, instead? Seems like kind of a broken business model.
Oh, wait, I know the answer: "BECAUSE THAT'S HOW IT'S ALWAYS BEEN DONE."
In the story the guy was wrongfully jailed for a _week_ but the issue presented wasn't that, but that he was strip searched.
The issue presented was that AND that he was strip searched. The wrongful arrest suit is still in play.
WTF are you talking about? Nobody forced anything on anyone. The mormons followed the legal, established process for prop 8.
Tyranny of the majority is still tyranny.
Plagarism isn't theft, dumbfuck. It's fraud.
It is derivative in the same way that a published novel is a derivative work from the version the author sent to the editor to be published. In other words, NOT.
Producing a TV show is the same as editing a novel?
And if you're asking if some of us want you to take material that wasn't considered suitable for production away from the owner.
That right there, is a downright delusional statement.