But try telling them they're not allowed to skip the commercial/FBI warning...
I get turned off every time I come to an unskippable part of a DVD. If DVD quality wasn't so much better than VHS, I wouldn't bother with it. The lack of control the customer has over their own purchase is ridiculous.
I really want a system that will drive my car for me - more or less - while in stop and go traffic. I think this is totally within reach of our current technology.
Basically, the system would use a laser and sense how far ahead the car in front of you is. If more than 10-15 feet, keep moving. If less, slow down or stop. The system would only work if you are doing 30 kilometers per hour or slower, for safety reasons. Once traffic picks up again, it automatically disengages and you drive manually again.
What is to stop people from broadcasting SMS text messages or Internet traffic over shortwave radio? How much bandwidth is there to play with? Sounds like great wireless possibilities.
1/60? Where the heck are you getting those odds from? It sounds like you are looking at the failure rate for the Space Shuttle.
What about all the unmanned launches? That should lower the odds some...
That's correct - 1 in 60 is what I remember hearing.
And true that counting unmanned launches into space would increase the success rate noticeably, but still what is that? 1 in 5,000 chance of failure? No risk of failure is worth taking when it comes to nuclear materials. As one poster said, an orbital explosion would destroy much more than a city - possibly global implications! That should concern the rest of the world.
If my car goes off the road, it doesn't contaminate an entire city with radioactivity for centuries. It doesn't kill thousands of people.
There's no guarantee that it will blow up, but there is a pretty fair chance. 1 in 60? Would you buy a lottery ticket with 1 in 60 odds? People buy tickets for 1 in 1000000000 odds!
Technically, we could sit on our asses for 30 years until nanotech becomes more advanced, and use that to manufacture nuclear facilities on the moon. No more risky transporation from planet Earth. Don't base tomorrow's needs on today's technology.
I'm going to stick with WinZip. PkWare was out of the game for way too long... it seemed forever that their 2.04g MS-DOS compressor was their last release. Then they finally released a lackluster Windows version which really sucked.
WinZip is way more polished and anybody can use it.
As to why would anybody use WinZip to encrypt their files - well, everybody already has it! Must be one of the most widely distributed pieces of software in the world.
I was thinking in another direction: That the plethora of information available about anybody would be so great that it would become devalued. People would say "yeah, yeah, well who hasn't done that" and become de-sensitized to other people's private affairs. Only the really sensational would continue to be news.
And if the Bush administration overcame congressional objections and got a deep data-mining system working? An insane information-hungry KGB or a relatively open and decent government? Vote with your feet. Get the hell away from those lunatics. Who the hell wants to live in a USA with a TIA in it? Why would you want to invest it that country? The currency would crash. The political elite would annihilate one another.
Mr. Sterling is making a big assumption here: you will always have somewhere that is different to move to. One _conspiracy theory_ I've been harbouring is that the USA's plan is to politically assimilate the rest of the world so that there will not BE another place to go to, in effect. Everyone will have basically the same privacy, human rights, freedom of speech (or lack of it) laws.
I believe that years of beta testing on systems like this may be needed. The system should be put in place to gather data and compare what it would have done to what the person working did.
Once enough time has passed and the system has proven itself, it can be put into production. Only then! Or else situations like this will always occur.
But since large industry always seems to hold contempt against its own consumers, I don't see this situation changing for the better.
Seriously, how can I trust another person's code? If it fails, I will take the responsiblity.
That's a little heady, don't you think? Considering how much you use "other people's code" every day to write your own code, not to mention other people's code makes up your operating system.
Microsoft had made an agreement with Sendo that should either party go bust, the other would pick up the IP rights associated with the project.
Call me paranoid, but this paragraph would have made me just a little uneasy, considering the "winning a lottery 10 times in a row" odds of Microsoft going bust.
Anyway, certainly the story summary was misleading. I admit I didn't RTFS. I'd just assumed it was another one of the patent-asshole-gone-money-hungry scenarios which I am thoroughly sick and tired of.
Sounds like another case of "I have a patent and I intend on doing nothing with it. In fact, I will sue anybody who tries to do anything along the lines of what my patent describes. I will stifle innovation."
Umm, isn't that a bad idea? I mean, it's bad publicity for Microsoft that there's a new bug reported and patched each week. It's bad when something like the Slammer Worm makes the front page news. Sure, it's good that they're finding and fixing the bugs but it's bad for mainstream America to hear about it.
It would be really bad if there were a lot of alternatives, but there aren't. Most people feel they are stuck with Windows because in some way they depend on it (or at least feel they do).
So, while the security flaws make Microsoft look bad, they end up fueling users' desire to upgrade to the next version of the Microsoft product.
I think the key clue in this article is that Microsoft wants to change who spends the money. It'll be less messy to convince the scientists rather than the government to blow money on Microsoft.
I peeked through microscopes myself already, so I take this as proof that we don't live in a simulation. At least not one of those corner-cutting el-cheapo simulations.
Or, wait.. Maybe THEY have temporarily put me into the "extended detail" processing queue back then?
Heh, so what if we ALL look into a microscope at the same time? Would we notice a slowdown?
I say "no", because each processor cycle would produce the same amount of work. Our perception of how things run would remain the same. The thing running the simulation, on the other hand, would say "damn! time to upgrade!"
Consider the worst case: I make an observation, then I look away and you stop simulating what I don't see.
Assuming the ones simulating our world even _need_ to recover that small amount of computing power saved when you looked away. Based on what is happening on our planet, in our solar system, and galaxy, computing power is not a factor.
So it's certainly capable of determining that you are peering through a microscope and adjusting the level of detail accordingly. How detailed is the simulation? Precisely as detailed as it needs to be, but no more.
That reminded me of lossy compression algorithms used for music and video (eg. MP3, MPEG). The ears and eyes can only detect so many sounds and colours. We are able to manipulate more sounds and colours, but we can't actually ear or see them.
Perhaps we only think there is infinite detail, when in fact the sound is quite coarse?
But what's really going to bake your noodle;) is how can dogs hear and smell better than us, and why can eagles see better than us? Because they are Agents? Who knows...
Sounds like what McBride is saying is "let's wait until somebody with lots of money walks into the situation... then we can squeeze it out of them."
If you try and follow his logic (which seems to be lacking), then there's no reason to prosecute big time video game pirates because they don't have any money worth taking. Say what?
I get the feeling that SCO is hoping someone will buy them out BEFORE the evidence must be shown (and after the smoke screen has dissipated). It's too weak to get much, if anything, so a quick buyout would produce much more cash (eg. dot com era amounts) quicker and easier than drawn out and possibly vain law suits.
But like the parent said, dude needs to get his story straight.
Somehow I think the AOL settlement ($750 million) is Microsoft's way of expediating this process. If so, the amount shows you how important this is to them.
What I find very ironic and sad, is that Bill Gates used to be a computer geek who tinkered with hardware and software. Then his company brought computers to the masses. His next step is taking everyone's freedom to tinker away from them.
Slashdot Mirror
But try telling them they're not allowed to skip the commercial/FBI warning...
I get turned off every time I come to an unskippable part of a DVD. If DVD quality wasn't so much better than VHS, I wouldn't bother with it. The lack of control the customer has over their own purchase is ridiculous.
I really want a system that will drive my car for me - more or less - while in stop and go traffic. I think this is totally within reach of our current technology.
Basically, the system would use a laser and sense how far ahead the car in front of you is. If more than 10-15 feet, keep moving. If less, slow down or stop. The system would only work if you are doing 30 kilometers per hour or slower, for safety reasons. Once traffic picks up again, it automatically disengages and you drive manually again.
They failed to realize the golden rule: you can't strong-arm your customer base until it's reached a critical mass.
So long, see ya.
What is to stop people from broadcasting SMS text messages or Internet traffic over shortwave radio? How much bandwidth is there to play with? Sounds like great wireless possibilities.
1/60? Where the heck are you getting those odds from? It sounds like you are looking at the failure rate for the Space Shuttle.
What about all the unmanned launches? That should lower the odds some...
That's correct - 1 in 60 is what I remember hearing.
And true that counting unmanned launches into space would increase the success rate noticeably, but still what is that? 1 in 5,000 chance of failure? No risk of failure is worth taking when it comes to nuclear materials. As one poster said, an orbital explosion would destroy much more than a city - possibly global implications! That should concern the rest of the world.
If my car goes off the road, it doesn't contaminate an entire city with radioactivity for centuries. It doesn't kill thousands of people.
There's no guarantee that it will blow up, but there is a pretty fair chance. 1 in 60? Would you buy a lottery ticket with 1 in 60 odds? People buy tickets for 1 in 1000000000 odds!
Technically, we could sit on our asses for 30 years until nanotech becomes more advanced, and use that to manufacture nuclear facilities on the moon. No more risky transporation from planet Earth. Don't base tomorrow's needs on today's technology.
They say that everybody is good at something.
Now those who are "all thumbs" can excel!
I'm going to stick with WinZip. PkWare was out of the game for way too long... it seemed forever that their 2.04g MS-DOS compressor was their last release. Then they finally released a lackluster Windows version which really sucked.
WinZip is way more polished and anybody can use it.
As to why would anybody use WinZip to encrypt their files - well, everybody already has it! Must be one of the most widely distributed pieces of software in the world.
You make some excellent points.
I was thinking in another direction: That the plethora of information available about anybody would be so great that it would become devalued. People would say "yeah, yeah, well who hasn't done that" and become de-sensitized to other people's private affairs. Only the really sensational would continue to be news.
And if the Bush administration overcame congressional objections and got a deep data-mining system working?
An insane information-hungry KGB or a relatively open and decent government? Vote with your feet. Get the hell away from those lunatics. Who the hell wants to live in a USA with a TIA in it? Why would you want to invest it that country? The currency would crash. The political elite would annihilate one another.
Mr. Sterling is making a big assumption here: you will always have somewhere that is different to move to. One _conspiracy theory_ I've been harbouring is that the USA's plan is to politically assimilate the rest of the world so that there will not BE another place to go to, in effect. Everyone will have basically the same privacy, human rights, freedom of speech (or lack of it) laws.
I believe that years of beta testing on systems like this may be needed. The system should be put in place to gather data and compare what it would have done to what the person working did.
Once enough time has passed and the system has proven itself, it can be put into production. Only then! Or else situations like this will always occur.
But since large industry always seems to hold contempt against its own consumers, I don't see this situation changing for the better.
Did anyone else half expect to get a goatse link when clicking on the Uranus link? Damn Slashdot conditioning... ;)
Seriously, how can I trust another person's code? If it fails, I will take the responsiblity.
That's a little heady, don't you think? Considering how much you use "other people's code" every day to write your own code, not to mention other people's code makes up your operating system.
Between [Edison] and Standard Oil, they wrote the book on monopolistic tyrany.
That's funny, when I learned about Thomas Edison in school they never told me he was an asshole.
I wonder if Bill Gates' illegal activities will be downplayed 100 years from now. I'd bet on Yes.
Microsoft had made an agreement with Sendo that should either party go bust, the other would pick up the IP rights associated with the project.
Call me paranoid, but this paragraph would have made me just a little uneasy, considering the "winning a lottery 10 times in a row" odds of Microsoft going bust.
Anyway, certainly the story summary was misleading. I admit I didn't RTFS. I'd just assumed it was another one of the patent-asshole-gone-money-hungry scenarios which I am thoroughly sick and tired of.
Sounds like another case of "I have a patent and I intend on doing nothing with it. In fact, I will sue anybody who tries to do anything along the lines of what my patent describes. I will stifle innovation."
Umm, isn't that a bad idea? I mean, it's bad publicity for Microsoft that there's a new bug reported and patched each week. It's bad when something like the Slammer Worm makes the front page news. Sure, it's good that they're finding and fixing the bugs but it's bad for mainstream America to hear about it.
It would be really bad if there were a lot of alternatives, but there aren't. Most people feel they are stuck with Windows because in some way they depend on it (or at least feel they do).
So, while the security flaws make Microsoft look bad, they end up fueling users' desire to upgrade to the next version of the Microsoft product.
I think the key clue in this article is that Microsoft wants to change who spends the money. It'll be less messy to convince the scientists rather than the government to blow money on Microsoft.
While they're fixing the postal code system, why not "tack on":
- globalized metric system usage
- Star Trek time code (star dates)
- global environmental standards
- IPV6!
This particular project would be even cooler (no pun intended) if that cat5 carried some information instead of just power.
The problem with using CAT5 for power is if you (or someone else) ever accidentally plugged it into a computer device... lots of fried equipment!
I peeked through microscopes myself already, so I take this as proof that
we don't live in a simulation. At least not one of those corner-cutting
el-cheapo simulations.
Or, wait.. Maybe THEY have temporarily put me into the "extended detail"
processing queue back then?
Heh, so what if we ALL look into a microscope at the same time? Would we notice a slowdown?
I say "no", because each processor cycle would produce the same amount of work. Our perception of how things run would remain the same. The thing running the simulation, on the other hand, would say "damn! time to upgrade!"
Consider the worst case: I make an observation, then I look away and you stop simulating what I don't see.
Assuming the ones simulating our world even _need_ to recover that small amount of computing power saved when you looked away. Based on what is happening on our planet, in our solar system, and galaxy, computing power is not a factor.
So it's certainly capable of determining that you are peering through a microscope and adjusting the level of detail accordingly. How detailed is the simulation? Precisely as detailed as it needs to be, but no more.
;) is how can dogs hear and smell better than us, and why can eagles see better than us? Because they are Agents? Who knows...
That reminded me of lossy compression algorithms used for music and video (eg. MP3, MPEG). The ears and eyes can only detect so many sounds and colours. We are able to manipulate more sounds and colours, but we can't actually ear or see them.
Perhaps we only think there is infinite detail, when in fact the sound is quite coarse?
But what's really going to bake your noodle
Sounds like what McBride is saying is "let's wait until somebody with lots of money walks into the situation... then we can squeeze it out of them."
If you try and follow his logic (which seems to be lacking), then there's no reason to prosecute big time video game pirates because they don't have any money worth taking. Say what?
I get the feeling that SCO is hoping someone will buy them out BEFORE the evidence must be shown (and after the smoke screen has dissipated). It's too weak to get much, if anything, so a quick buyout would produce much more cash (eg. dot com era amounts) quicker and easier than drawn out and possibly vain law suits.
But like the parent said, dude needs to get his story straight.
Somehow I think the AOL settlement ($750 million) is Microsoft's way of expediating this process. If so, the amount shows you how important this is to them.
What I find very ironic and sad, is that Bill Gates used to be a computer geek who tinkered with hardware and software. Then his company brought computers to the masses. His next step is taking everyone's freedom to tinker away from them.