No, my argument is that since what is supposed to be given to Cych are facts only, the more facts that are provided, the more information that can be used to confer to a judgment. It is assumed that only facts are fed into the system. But again, you are right in that there will be biasness. A "parent" or a programmer with higher privileges might be able to enter in another fact that lowers the priority of a previously entered fact. (Such as in the case in the article about sex) Now, this is biased towards the "parent"'s views.
According to your argument, we could say that we don't have broadband because we don't want/need it. I mean, why do we need broadband anyways.
As someone else responded, there isn't a demand for it because most people don't know about it. But like with broadband, once someone goes to cable/DSL, they'll never go back to dial-up. The case is the same here with cell phones.
Secondly, I don't think the market is inherently different. Once people are aware of the capabilities, they will demand more of it.
They do have it. In Japan's NTT's Docomo network, they have iMODE (ie 3G phones) that have screens that can STREAM videos and other stuff. The US market has just been VERY slow in adopting it.
This is a pure example of a product with an ill-defined target audience. All in all, it comes down to that this can only be used ideally as a MP3 player. But with a $449 price tag, this is rather expensive for this purpose.
With 64 MB memory, it can maybe hold a couple minutes of video at most. Maybe with an expansion card, it can hold a little more. But in the end, why would you spend this much money on a device that can only hold a couple minutes of video? At this price, you might as well get an iPaq that will be able to do the same exact thing plus more.
What would be a killer-app would be if they expanded the hdd to (what many of you mentioned) a Toshiba 10 GB hdd. At this point, you will then be able to hold a couple full length movies. Build in an external port to TV-out and there will be some actual application.
But to summarize, the limiting factor of this device is that relatively small storage space and a high price tag. In the end, they are not targetting any specific audience successfully.
Human language is by nature ambiguous, because it isn't spoken with supreme knowledge of everything.
No, I contend that human language is inherently ambiguous because it is very loosely structured. Take the following example:
Hannibal ate rice with Clarice [It's actually a popular sentence used to demonstrate context free grammar]
Now that sentence can be read as:
Hannibal and Clarice ate rice together
Hannibal ate rice and ate Clarice
It is because human language is ambiguous that we can use it to write poetry and art.
You are right, what I meant to say about Legalese is that it is ambiguous to common people, but to the people that understand it, it is often quite clear. But because of this disparity, lawyers can utilize the language of the law to achieve something that is not in the spirit of the law. As you said, that is why it's so complex.
In the same way that a child is biased by their parents and/or interactions with their educators, Cyc will have the same bias. The point here is that they have opened it to the public to reduce/limit the biasness.
My professor discussed this in one of my AI classes. Basically the problem is that it is often rather difficult to decipher human language. Human language was designed to be ambiguous. Legal language is designed to be even more so ambiguous. This allows humans to be able to make the final decisions and assumptions.
It is pretty impressive that they were able to get 1.4 million knowledge representation into this system. Like a child, knowledge learning will learn everything that is fed into it, whether it is good or bad. As the article mentioned, it had to teach Cyc that there are certain things (such as Sex terms) that are sedacious and should not be mentioned in public.
Also they boot over the network so each that updates only have to be done on the network images rather than at the individual machines. They are very good setup for "kiosk" setup, where you would only use it to quickly check your email, print pages, and hop on AIM Express, but besides that, it's rather limited. [I mean, you probably wouldn't want to stand in front of a kiosk for too long anyways]
As long as the vendor loses absolute control over the system at the point of delivery, it can never be declared "unbreakable." The vendor can shut down all services and daemons, thereby making it the most secure OS, but at this point, is it any longer userful? Most system vulnerabilities are the result of the users/administrators that open services to suit their needs. There is a equilibrium between the amount of vulnerabilities and the userfulness of the system.
No system can be made 100% secure AND be totally functional.
"Is this just too much work for our lazy American manufacturers to do?"
Is it the lazy manufacturers' or the lazy consumers' fault that people don't read the manual?
But on another note, because of the letigious nature of this country, the manufacturer has to cover its ass with a bunch of worthless and stupid warnings. The more warnings that they put on the package/manual, the less likely the consumer will read it.
IBM is and has been a R&D company. They do better at the forefront of technology then maintaining/selling current technology. I mean look at it this way. The first person that made a rotary telephone made a lot of money. But after a while, there is no profit in it anymore. Those companies either moved to pulse telephones or died trying to compete. I'd rather see IBM spend their resources on developing holographic storage devices then spend their resources on building IDE hdds.
Not sad...but good
on
IBM Spins Down
·
· Score: 5, Insightful
IBM has always been tops on the Research and Development in the field of Computer Science. It is not too bad that they are leaving the hard drive market, but actually good that they are doing this. The Hard drives have turned into a commodity. People are making them cheaper and cheaper. At some point, there will so cheap that 1) there will be very little profit margin 2) only a handful of companies will be able to profit.
I'd rather see IBM dump this branch and be able to earn royalty or have stock ownership in this new company than bog down their budget with this sector. By dumping this sector, they can now effectively use their R&D to develop something new. Maybe a new hdd technology, that they will license to the new company.
Actually Korea has done a great deal in getting you online. The majority of the RAM used on computers now a days originate from Korea. Samsung is a Korean company. In addition, Korea is getting up there in terms of semiconductor manufacturing..
but you also have to consider the patents/royalty system. Without such patent and royalties, companies would no longer have any incentive to research and develop. Why should they plop down $xx million if they can just "steal" or "use" the technology that another company researches for free.
But if you let them read your emails, you must surely be willing to allow them to listen to your phone calls. If that's the case, you must surely support the government putting camera's everwhere. Since, I mean, you have nothing to hide.
See the problem is not that you don't have anything to hide, but the American system is based on freedom for all individuals. In that, everyone should be treated innocent until proven guilty. That's the basis of this entire system.
I remember reading about this in Time magazine. But the thing is you don't want to launch when Mars is at its closest, but within the trajectory. It would take far more energy to travel a straightline path rather than follow the orbit of the earth. The plan is to launch and then arc out to meet Mars. Secondly, in planning a launch, you also need to find a time that would work out best for the return flight. So, the launch window become significantly smaller.
I think you have it confused with the moon. China recently announce that they are planning on building a base on the moon within 10 years. I'm sure this will respark our interest in the moon (as long as we aren't spending every cent we have chasing after, but not capturing this binladin guy..)
Another consideration is that some of these projectors do not work well in lit rooms or sunlight. Secondly, there is a cost in new bulbs and stuff. I'm not sure exactly, but I've heard that bulbs don't last that long and are quite expensive.
It seems like this is the US reacting to China's Plan to create moonbases by 2010. It would be a MAJOR setback for the US if the Chinese were able to do it before the Americans. I mean, the US, the most scientifically advanced country lost the moon to the chinese.
But this brings up another problem. Who's jurisdiction does the moon fall under? It's just like legistlating the internet. Legistlators have to realize that just because there is a law doesn't mean that people will follow it. What they have to do instead is work with other nations and trying to come up with a consensus.
The Pentagon and any other government agencies can in fact view the source codes anytime they want through the MS Shared Source program. In fact, ANYBODY [that has the money to] can access the source code to Windows 2000, Windows XP, and Windows.NET Server
I believe Microsoft dropped RealNames because they sucked all the intellectual lifeblood it could from the company, not because it thought RealNames was a bad idea
How much "intellectual lifeblood" is there in a bad business plan? The logic behind the RealName idea is just counterintuitive to the standards that engineers and people have tried to establish in this industry.
He has not cost Microsoft a sale or otherwise deprived them of revenue they would have had. If Bob pirates MS Office, Microsoft has no fewer copies than they did prior to Bob pirating a copy.
Let's say that I'm an author. I decide to copy Hemingway's "The Sun Also Rises" and put my name on it and sell it. Hemingway isn't losing any money neither.
The issue is what gives you the right to use someone else's work. Money is not the issue here and should not be made the issue. The issue is always, someone invested a lot of time/money into it and they should be compensated for the work. If you want to use it, you have to pay. If you can't pay, you shouldn't use it. There are plenty of alternatives to these pricy software.
Slashdot Mirror
No, my argument is that since what is supposed to be given to Cych are facts only, the more facts that are provided, the more information that can be used to confer to a judgment. It is assumed that only facts are fed into the system. But again, you are right in that there will be biasness. A "parent" or a programmer with higher privileges might be able to enter in another fact that lowers the priority of a previously entered fact. (Such as in the case in the article about sex) Now, this is biased towards the "parent"'s views.
According to your argument, we could say that we don't have broadband because we don't want/need it. I mean, why do we need broadband anyways.
As someone else responded, there isn't a demand for it because most people don't know about it. But like with broadband, once someone goes to cable/DSL, they'll never go back to dial-up. The case is the same here with cell phones.
Secondly, I don't think the market is inherently different. Once people are aware of the capabilities, they will demand more of it.
They do have it. In Japan's NTT's Docomo network, they have iMODE (ie 3G phones) that have screens that can STREAM videos and other stuff. The US market has just been VERY slow in adopting it.
This is a pure example of a product with an ill-defined target audience. All in all, it comes down to that this can only be used ideally as a MP3 player. But with a $449 price tag, this is rather expensive for this purpose.
With 64 MB memory, it can maybe hold a couple minutes of video at most. Maybe with an expansion card, it can hold a little more. But in the end, why would you spend this much money on a device that can only hold a couple minutes of video? At this price, you might as well get an iPaq that will be able to do the same exact thing plus more.
What would be a killer-app would be if they expanded the hdd to (what many of you mentioned) a Toshiba 10 GB hdd. At this point, you will then be able to hold a couple full length movies. Build in an external port to TV-out and there will be some actual application.
But to summarize, the limiting factor of this device is that relatively small storage space and a high price tag. In the end, they are not targetting any specific audience successfully.
What you said reminded me of the toy Furbies that were popular a while ago. If you put two of them together, they start talking to each other.
Hannibal ate rice with Clarice [It's actually a popular sentence used to demonstrate context free grammar]
Now that sentence can be read as:
- Hannibal and Clarice ate rice together
- Hannibal ate rice and ate Clarice
It is because human language is ambiguous that we can use it to write poetry and art.You are right, what I meant to say about Legalese is that it is ambiguous to common people, but to the people that understand it, it is often quite clear. But because of this disparity, lawyers can utilize the language of the law to achieve something that is not in the spirit of the law. As you said, that is why it's so complex.
In the same way that a child is biased by their parents and/or interactions with their educators, Cyc will have the same bias. The point here is that they have opened it to the public to reduce/limit the biasness.
My professor discussed this in one of my AI classes. Basically the problem is that it is often rather difficult to decipher human language. Human language was designed to be ambiguous. Legal language is designed to be even more so ambiguous. This allows humans to be able to make the final decisions and assumptions.
It is pretty impressive that they were able to get 1.4 million knowledge representation into this system. Like a child, knowledge learning will learn everything that is fed into it, whether it is good or bad. As the article mentioned, it had to teach Cyc that there are certain things (such as Sex terms) that are sedacious and should not be mentioned in public.
Also they boot over the network so each that updates only have to be done on the network images rather than at the individual machines. They are very good setup for "kiosk" setup, where you would only use it to quickly check your email, print pages, and hop on AIM Express, but besides that, it's rather limited. [I mean, you probably wouldn't want to stand in front of a kiosk for too long anyways]
As long as the vendor loses absolute control over the system at the point of delivery, it can never be declared "unbreakable." The vendor can shut down all services and daemons, thereby making it the most secure OS, but at this point, is it any longer userful? Most system vulnerabilities are the result of the users/administrators that open services to suit their needs. There is a equilibrium between the amount of vulnerabilities and the userfulness of the system.
No system can be made 100% secure AND be totally functional.
"Is this just too much work for our lazy American manufacturers to do?"
Is it the lazy manufacturers' or the lazy consumers' fault that people don't read the manual?
But on another note, because of the letigious nature of this country, the manufacturer has to cover its ass with a bunch of worthless and stupid warnings. The more warnings that they put on the package/manual, the less likely the consumer will read it.
IBM is and has been a R&D company. They do better at the forefront of technology then maintaining/selling current technology. I mean look at it this way. The first person that made a rotary telephone made a lot of money. But after a while, there is no profit in it anymore. Those companies either moved to pulse telephones or died trying to compete. I'd rather see IBM spend their resources on developing holographic storage devices then spend their resources on building IDE hdds.
IBM has always been tops on the Research and Development in the field of Computer Science. It is not too bad that they are leaving the hard drive market, but actually good that they are doing this. The Hard drives have turned into a commodity. People are making them cheaper and cheaper. At some point, there will so cheap that 1) there will be very little profit margin 2) only a handful of companies will be able to profit.
I'd rather see IBM dump this branch and be able to earn royalty or have stock ownership in this new company than bog down their budget with this sector. By dumping this sector, they can now effectively use their R&D to develop something new. Maybe a new hdd technology, that they will license to the new company.
Actually Korea has done a great deal in getting you online. The majority of the RAM used on computers now a days originate from Korea. Samsung is a Korean company. In addition, Korea is getting up there in terms of semiconductor manufacturing..
but you also have to consider the patents/royalty system. Without such patent and royalties, companies would no longer have any incentive to research and develop. Why should they plop down $xx million if they can just "steal" or "use" the technology that another company researches for free.
That's good and all when you can trust the people that are doing this. But we have seen through history and in recent weeks (FBI agents indicted on Insider Trading) What's next? What if the FBI sold your information to a competitor company (like the CIA telling Boeing about a secret deal that Airbus, Boeing's competitor, was discussing with Saudi Arabia, allowing Boeing to beat their offer)
But if you let them read your emails, you must surely be willing to allow them to listen to your phone calls. If that's the case, you must surely support the government putting camera's everwhere. Since, I mean, you have nothing to hide.
See the problem is not that you don't have anything to hide, but the American system is based on freedom for all individuals. In that, everyone should be treated innocent until proven guilty. That's the basis of this entire system.
I remember reading about this in Time magazine. But the thing is you don't want to launch when Mars is at its closest, but within the trajectory. It would take far more energy to travel a straightline path rather than follow the orbit of the earth. The plan is to launch and then arc out to meet Mars. Secondly, in planning a launch, you also need to find a time that would work out best for the return flight. So, the launch window become significantly smaller.
I think you have it confused with the moon. China recently announce that they are planning on building a base on the moon within 10 years. I'm sure this will respark our interest in the moon (as long as we aren't spending every cent we have chasing after, but not capturing this binladin guy..)
Another consideration is that some of these projectors do not work well in lit rooms or sunlight. Secondly, there is a cost in new bulbs and stuff. I'm not sure exactly, but I've heard that bulbs don't last that long and are quite expensive.
It seems like this is the US reacting to China's Plan to create moonbases by 2010. It would be a MAJOR setback for the US if the Chinese were able to do it before the Americans. I mean, the US, the most scientifically advanced country lost the moon to the chinese.
But this brings up another problem. Who's jurisdiction does the moon fall under? It's just like legistlating the internet. Legistlators have to realize that just because there is a law doesn't mean that people will follow it. What they have to do instead is work with other nations and trying to come up with a consensus.
It's all about "marketing"...
If you read the article, you'd read that $2.64 is profit. So "free" is rather $2.64. They do this a lot on TV products.
The Pentagon and any other government agencies can in fact view the source codes anytime they want through the MS Shared Source program. In fact, ANYBODY [that has the money to] can access the source code to Windows 2000, Windows XP, and Windows .NET Server
The issue is what gives you the right to use someone else's work. Money is not the issue here and should not be made the issue. The issue is always, someone invested a lot of time/money into it and they should be compensated for the work. If you want to use it, you have to pay. If you can't pay, you shouldn't use it. There are plenty of alternatives to these pricy software.