Actually I don't think he ever "left" Apple per se...I think at some point he was working on a side project and Steve thought that it competed with Apple so he displaced Woz or something...I don't remember...check out Woz's site.
I think Katz is somewhat clueless again. Just because Apple candy coats its hardware doesn't mean it is any more creative and less corporate than any other company...it is merely selling to its audience, or in my opinion telling its captive audience what to buy. Apple is as corporate, or MORE corporate than any other computer company. I will not glorify Jobs...I think he's an asshole who screwed over Woz and thinks he's a hot shit, and that anything he touches becomes brilliant and insanely great somehow. Katz, you're sucking right up the exact media you were only decrying just a few articles ago. The same interface that you marvel at for its ability to hide the complexity of the computer for you has hidden from you the fact that Apple is just as corporate as any other, and in fact LESS consumer-oriented (umm...can we say firmware?) than any other company. Apple is the computer analogue of the epitomy of media-saturated pop-culture. Apple, I'll be "thinking for my self" thank you.
Shouldn't ALL moderation be Meta-moderation? I sort of proposed this a while back. For instance, who moderates the Meta-moderators, or the meta-moderator-moderators? Everybody should have some Karma which they can add/subtract from a post. The Karma the moderator gains or loses when moderating is given by a weighted sum of the amount against and towards the direction he/she moderated. For instance, if 2 of 4 moderators post one way, and the others the other way, nobody gains points...they all break even. If a 5th poster then posts one way, everybody in that group will gain some fractional amount of Karma. The more people that post their way, the higher the post's rating in their direction is and the more Karma they gain. This should be the baseline. Of course, excellent posts in the minority should still get "bonuses" or "informative/insightful" ratings, which is person-specific, but totally outside the automatic Karma adjustment. We don't just want to reward people for going with the herd.
Side effects of this are that if you post to a moderated down thread, you automatically incur a karma penalty...so those off the wall, or trollish threads will die sooner. Also, if AC is now considered just one person, AC's Karma will fluctuate according to the behavior of ACs...if ACs see their posts being automatically skewed downwards because other ACs are spamming, etc., they will be more inclined to get a real account, or post better posts. There must be a lower limit though (as I suspect there is), because any AC would then be able to screw over all other ACs by spamming, flaming, etc. Those are the risks of being an AC I guess...
I think most of this article is clueless media spam (FUD about the poor digital illiterati). I found this disgusting though: "According to Cyber Dialogue, more than 43 million users -70 per cent of all Americans online - were using the Web for sports, movies, TV, music or gaming." As if Americans weren't pop-culture/media/commerce saturated/brainwashed drones enough! So now there is an interactive medium and what do they use it for? A replacment for passive TV! Don't try to tell me the web is "used" for sports/whatever. That's not what I call "usage". People are too used to the media using/them/.
Um...that seems really stupid (re: avoiding security by allowing a boot from a floppy). The MUST be an option to NOT boot from a floppy. I can hardly believe that Linux has no way of letting you do this. Just set it in BIOS if all else fails. Probably someone figured that they might have to get into the box at some point later in time so they kept "boot from floppy" in the boot sequence. Anyway, *physical* security is always a prerequisite for electronic security. NSA doesn't keep their boxes on the front lawn you know;)
Many posts have said that it is well within companies' legal rights to put forth a policy like this as long as no prior guarantee to privacy was ever made (I don't think this is ever the case). I do not look at porn at work (although I usually have a slashdot window opn;), however, as an employee, I would really feel paranoid if I knew somebody was watching all traffice that passed through my machine. If a policy like this was set in place I would probably start looking for another job. Imagine if you had "paper" job, and there was always someone standing next to your desk, or a camera over you, watching every single thing you do, making sure you didn't abuse company ledger and take company stationary and writing utensils. Sure, it would be illegal to, and you probably don't do it anyway, but it would still probably reduce your productivity if not job satisfaction. At a job I like to think that I'm working, not the company working me.
AFAIK Gutenburg is not "open source" writing per se...it's just a whole bunch of people trying to get public domain books into electronic text format. This doesn't mean any Joe Schmoe can contribute a random "update" to War and Peace.
"Please note that no action on your part is necessary to take advantage of the updated Hotmail."
Microsoft expects everyone to be socialized to believe that the default expectation is that it actually IS NECESSARY to take action to take advantage of a patched bug. ha
"Please not that no action on your part is necessary to take advantage of the updated non-spontaneously-combustible fuel tanks in Ford Foobar"....
So is the server in place? I've been getting unusually fast page loads. I thought it was my cache or something, but I cleared that. Even the adfu ads are coming up fast.
The first post I read in response to the IPv4 article indicated it was a piece of garbage. Compare this against Ms. Jane reporter who has some "informant" tell her about something she doesn't understand which she subsequently posts as fact. I prefer the peer-review method much better. Don't believe everything FNORD you read in the paper.
Actually I was thinking about the same thing. What if we just "helped" it along. What if we pre-evolved FPGA-writing software. What if we gave it access to some sort of duplication mechanism. Could it somehow take advantage of these? What if an evolvement-program was evolved? A sort of supervisor for the evolving?
BTW, I'm not convinced that some of the more recent blockbuster sci-fi flicks weren't written by a robot:
Humor aside, I think this is really cool. Somehow a working design evolved entirely outside the human constriction of an entirely digital world. AI is tough because biological organims simply don't work on a digital premise. It is hard to model organic intelligence within the constraints of a digital world. AI, unfortunately, hasn't been able to make much progress recently, but with an article like this, I don't think it is implausible that one day I might shake hands with a C3PO. Hey, we humans evolved after all anyway right? If we can fast-forward the evolution of these things I think there is a hope for emergent intellegence. Anyway, there are plenty of practical short-term goals. The first one that popped into my head was: Hey! Use this technique on my graphics card and let me be able to play Quake at 1280x1024 32bit 40frames/sec. Cool. This is cool stuff and I hope it gives AI a boost. I wonder what religious zealots think about this evolution though.
I read this yesterday. It was hilarious. I keep on seeing things posted here that I've been aware of for a while. Perhaps I should start sending in news.
THAT is the problem in the FIRST PLACE. Are you really advocating increasing technology access to poor, sick, junkies, so that in some bizzarre manner that would help them one damn bit?! Feed them, cure them, and got them damn jobs! The scenario you describe will not be fixed by increased access to new technology!
I hope the person writing the article realizes that FIRST one must fix the underlying problems. When it is found that there is a humongous gap in homeless people's access to computers, is the solution to increase their access to computers! Of course not! It's to make them NOT homeless.
There is nothing about being black or hispanic or any other "race"/"color"/whatever that inherently keeps anybody from accessing technology. If all these people were on the same economic footing they would have the same capability. Please Mr. techno-futurist, let's not step into the next millenium thinking that if we cure the symptoms we cure the disease.
If anybody, Mac heads should be worshipping Steve Wozniak...remember...the guy that designed and invented everything and got screwed over and over again by Steve Jobs?
Slashdot Mirror
Yeah...I like the sound of Enlightenment! Can we have classes and hit points too ;)
What about the meta-meta-moderators?
...I say figure out a flat, auto-adjusting moderation system...see my post in the past slashdot headline...
Actually I don't think he ever "left" Apple per se...I think at some point he was working on a side project and Steve thought that it competed with Apple so he displaced Woz or something...I don't remember...check out Woz's site.
I think Katz is somewhat clueless again. Just because Apple candy coats its hardware doesn't mean it is any more creative and less corporate than any other company...it is merely selling to its audience, or in my opinion telling its captive audience what to buy. Apple is as corporate, or MORE corporate than any other computer company. I will not glorify Jobs...I think he's an asshole who screwed over Woz and thinks he's a hot shit, and that anything he touches becomes brilliant and insanely great somehow. Katz, you're sucking right up the exact media you were only decrying just a few articles ago. The same interface that you marvel at for its ability to hide the complexity of the computer for you has hidden from you the fact that Apple is just as corporate as any other, and in fact LESS consumer-oriented (umm...can we say firmware?) than any other company. Apple is the computer analogue of the epitomy of media-saturated pop-culture. Apple, I'll be "thinking for my self" thank you.
Shouldn't ALL moderation be Meta-moderation? I sort of proposed this a while back. For instance, who moderates the Meta-moderators, or the meta-moderator-moderators? Everybody should have some Karma which they can add/subtract from a post. The Karma the moderator gains or loses when moderating is given by a weighted sum of the amount against and towards the direction he/she moderated. For instance, if 2 of 4 moderators post one way, and the others the other way, nobody gains points...they all break even. If a 5th poster then posts one way, everybody in that group will gain some fractional amount of Karma. The more people that post their way, the higher the post's rating in their direction is and the more Karma they gain. This should be the baseline. Of course, excellent posts in the minority should still get "bonuses" or "informative/insightful" ratings, which is person-specific, but totally outside the automatic Karma adjustment. We don't just want to reward people for going with the herd.
;)
Side effects of this are that if you post to a moderated down thread, you automatically incur a karma penalty...so those off the wall, or trollish threads will die sooner. Also, if AC is now considered just one person, AC's Karma will fluctuate according to the behavior of ACs...if ACs see their posts being automatically skewed downwards because other ACs are spamming, etc., they will be more inclined to get a real account, or post better posts. There must be a lower limit though (as I suspect there is), because any AC would then be able to screw over all other ACs by spamming, flaming, etc. Those are the risks of being an AC I guess...
I'm for "Auto-moderation"
I think most of this article is clueless media spam (FUD about the poor digital illiterati). I found this disgusting though: "According to Cyber Dialogue, more than 43 million users -70 per cent of all Americans online - were using the Web for sports, movies, TV, music or gaming." As if Americans weren't pop-culture/media/commerce saturated/brainwashed drones enough! So now there is an interactive medium and what do they use it for? A replacment for passive TV! Don't try to tell me the web is "used" for sports/whatever. That's not what I call "usage". People are too used to the media using /them/.
Um...that seems really stupid (re: avoiding security by allowing a boot from a floppy). The MUST be an option to NOT boot from a floppy. I can hardly believe that Linux has no way of letting you do this. Just set it in BIOS if all else fails. Probably someone figured that they might have to get into the box at some point later in time so they kept "boot from floppy" in the boot sequence. Anyway, *physical* security is always a prerequisite for electronic security. NSA doesn't keep their boxes on the front lawn you know ;)
Many posts have said that it is well within companies' legal rights to put forth a policy like this as long as no prior guarantee to privacy was ever made (I don't think this is ever the case). I do not look at porn at work (although I usually have a slashdot window opn ;), however, as an employee, I would really feel paranoid if I knew somebody was watching all traffice that passed through my machine. If a policy like this was set in place I would probably start looking for another job. Imagine if you had "paper" job, and there was always someone standing next to your desk, or a camera over you, watching every single thing you do, making sure you didn't abuse company ledger and take company stationary and writing utensils. Sure, it would be illegal to, and you probably don't do it anyway, but it would still probably reduce your productivity if not job satisfaction. At a job I like to think that I'm working, not the company working me.
AFAIK Gutenburg is not "open source" writing per se...it's just a whole bunch of people trying to get public domain books into electronic text format. This doesn't mean any Joe Schmoe can contribute a random "update" to War and Peace.
"Please note that no action on your part is necessary to take advantage of the updated Hotmail."
Microsoft expects everyone to be socialized to believe that the default expectation is that it actually IS NECESSARY to take action to take advantage of a patched bug. ha
"Please not that no action on your part is necessary to take advantage of the updated non-spontaneously-combustible fuel tanks in Ford Foobar"....
like 1 second page loads AND post submissions
wow
So is the server in place? I've been getting unusually fast page loads. I thought it was my cache or something, but I cleared that. Even the adfu ads are coming up fast.
Anonymous users still require dynamic content. They must still be able to retrieve updated news, etc.
So a Futurama world really isn't that far off.
"The Frankenstein legend, where a human being is constructed by sewing parts together, will become a reality early in the 21st century."
Why do I not feel as exuberant as this guy...
"You're" is a valid contraction and can probably legally be pronounced identically to "Your"
IMHO,
"You're" should sound more like "yUr" and
"Your" should sound more like "yOr",
although I haven't thought about it until just now. I think in practice they both come out sounding like "yOr" (at least here in the US).
Realise is the perfectly acceptable British spelling. Most American English "ize"s are British English "ise"s.
Geeks abound. I'm glad there's some on the force. I am hoping for 100% cluefullness percentage in those that police us in the future.
The first post I read in response to the IPv4 article indicated it was a piece of garbage. Compare this against Ms. Jane reporter who has some "informant" tell her about something she doesn't understand which she subsequently posts as fact. I prefer the peer-review method much better. Don't believe everything FNORD you read in the paper.
and it was evolved in hardware?
I think I like the idea of watching other AI organisms eat M$ retarded organism alive.
Actually I was thinking about the same thing. What if we just "helped" it along. What if we pre-evolved FPGA-writing software. What if we gave it access to some sort of duplication mechanism. Could it somehow take advantage of these? What if an evolvement-program was evolved? A sort of supervisor for the evolving?
BTW, I'm not convinced that some of the more recent blockbuster sci-fi flicks weren't written by a robot:
super.hype_movie()
manufacture_merchandise()
advertise_on_happy_meals()
sleep(30000)
Graphics cool = doFX()
Plot sucks = order_monkeys_to_type()
sleep(30000)
showMovie(sucks, cool)
prepare_for_next(Titanic)
http://www.theonion.com/onion3522/robots_are_the_f uture.html
----
Humor aside, I think this is really cool. Somehow a working design evolved entirely outside the human constriction of an entirely digital world. AI is tough because biological organims simply don't work on a digital premise. It is hard to model organic intelligence within the constraints of a digital world. AI, unfortunately, hasn't been able to make much progress recently, but with an article like this, I don't think it is implausible that one day I might shake hands with a C3PO. Hey, we humans evolved after all anyway right? If we can fast-forward the evolution of these things I think there is a hope for emergent intellegence. Anyway, there are plenty of practical short-term goals. The first one that popped into my head was: Hey! Use this technique on my graphics card and let me be able to play Quake at 1280x1024 32bit 40frames/sec. Cool. This is cool stuff and I hope it gives AI a boost.
I wonder what religious zealots think about this evolution though.
I read this yesterday. It was hilarious. I keep on seeing things posted here that I've been aware of for a while. Perhaps I should start sending in news.
THAT is the problem in the FIRST PLACE. Are you really advocating increasing technology access to poor, sick, junkies, so that in some bizzarre manner that would help them one damn bit?! Feed them, cure them, and got them damn jobs! The scenario you describe will not be fixed by increased access to new technology!
I hope the person writing the article realizes that FIRST one must fix the underlying problems. When it is found that there is a humongous gap in homeless people's access to computers, is the solution to increase their access to computers! Of course not! It's to make them NOT homeless.
There is nothing about being black or hispanic or any other "race"/"color"/whatever that inherently keeps anybody from accessing technology. If all these people were on the same economic footing they would have the same capability. Please Mr. techno-futurist, let's not step into the next millenium thinking that if we cure the symptoms we cure the disease.
If anybody, Mac heads should be worshipping Steve Wozniak...remember...the guy that designed and invented everything and got screwed over and over again by Steve Jobs?