Yes, that's what the research showed.. the cockroaches will follow the robots 60% of the time. RTFA.
More interesting, I thought, was that the researchers seemed pissed off when the journalists asked the kind of "how would you apply this?" questions that you just asked.
Although when you actually look at the pitiful amount of money the music industry actually pulls in, I wouldn't be surprised if it was funded predominately by college kids.
Arguing from analogy is just that, making unsupported statements. If you say X is like Y, and I say X isn't like Y, then what have we got? A disagreement.. which we already had. There's no way to say why X isn't like Y without descending into an ever widening spiral of analogy. This is why arguing by analogy (or metaphor) is just so very pointless - it doesn't help us discover truth.
If you understand logic quite well, why do you avoid it so by turning to analogy?
You aren't disrespecting their privacy and property any more than you would have been if they had, mistakenly or intentaionally, left an "open house" sign on their front lawn (or anything along those lines inviting the public in) and you started exploring the property. Ohh, a stupid analogy! Cool. Ya know what it's more like? It's like if you bought that house and it had written on the front door "open house" in binary and you didn't remove it. Every now and then some uber-geek would wonder into your house and you'd tell him to get the hell out but you wouldn't know why they keep coming back. You might think about locking your front door, but God damn it, this isn't New York, I shouldn't have to lock my front door.. people should have more respect.
Not that I blame you, the idiots who sell you a house with an "open house" sign still on it, even if it is written in binary, are just jerks.
one thing that some of the slashdot crowd tends to ignore is that content owners have rights too. You're painting a lot of people with a very wide brush there.. after all, aren't YOU a member of the "slashdot crowd". Would seem so from where I'm sitting.
There are no "content owners". There are "copyright holders" and they have the rights ascribed to them by copyright law.. of which I am opposed and believe should be drastically reduced, if not immediately and completely abolished.
Ohhh, a stupid car analogy, cool.. Ya know what it's more like? It's more like the government enacted some special laws hundreds of years ago that made it so only the manufacturer of fuzzy dice could transport those fuzzy dice on the road for the 19 years after manufacturer, then anyone could transport them. But the manufacturers of fuzzy dice wanted to maintain their stranglehold on the fuzzy dice transportation business so they lobbied the government to have a 20 year extension placed on their monopoly.. then it became 50 years, then 70. The government was happy to oblige because the original intention of the law, to encourage the creation of fuzzy dice for the public, never really made much sense anyway.. cause what good are fuzzy dice when you can only hang dusty old ones in your car, anyway. Obviously you could enjoy the fuzzy dice behind closed doors but the real purpose of fuzzy dice is to make a public statement, so really, ya gotta wonder who is buying all these fuzzy dice. As it turns out, not to many people do buy the fuzzy dice.. cause, as I've said, all the interesting uses are forbidden, unless the fuzzy dice are really old. And now that people are being harassed by lawyers for displaying recently acquired fuzzy dice, we really need to install fuzzy dice detectors on every street corner to make sure the ones on display are sufficiently old.
And while some of the slashdot crowd consists of "information wants to be free" hippies, there is also a good community of people who reasonably understand the value of intellectual property rights. And while some people are more than willing to sell everyone's rights up the river for fist full of gold, there is also a good community of people who have morals and are willing to refuse to obey bad laws.
Laptops range in power from quite low with very long battery life Such as? Where do you buy these long battery life laptops? Far as I can tell there's none on the market.
Better efficiency hasn't been used to improve battery life Bingo. The biggest problem with laptops is the people who design them. "CPU power usage is really low now.. great, we can up the cycles per second." Uhh, excuse me? "This new LCD component is great, it draws half as much power.. great, double the resolution." Uhh, excuse me? The OLPC is example of the completely different machine you can get if you break out of the box in which the typical manufacturers think in.
I'm kinda sick of the vaporware.. I often fly 13 hour trips (non-stop) on a plane with no power outlets (not even in business class, or so they tell me!).. If I take 4 sets of rechargeable batteries my GP2X will last me 12 hours, but playing games and watching movies is not getting work done.
I once reverse engineered the classic id software game Commander Keen. John Carmack did some cool stuff in that code.. each sprite had two function pointers in it, one was called when the sprite came into contact with another sprite, the other was called every frame to animate the sprite (he called it the "think" function). When you killed a monster the sprite was replaced with a "body" which was just like a sprite but had a few less fields (so it took up less memory). One of the neatest things he did was use this exact same framework of sprites and bodies to animate the "static" parts of the game. For example, the color coded doors that you have to get the key cards to open were sprites with a contact function that checked if the player had the right key card, at which time they would "die" and be replaced by a body that had a think function would make them slide out of the way.
I've seen Ghost Busters and Ghost Busters II so many times that I sometimes forget what happened in which. The (fictional) mythology of II was superior to the (fictional) mythology of the first one I feel.
If the police have a warrant to search my house and I have a safe, I am required to open the safe. I'm also required to open any doors and closets.. and they are allowed to break down the doors if I refuse.
Now if there's a computer on the premises, they are allowed to search the computer.. it almost seems like you don't need any special laws to extend a search to encrypted data. If you know the password, you would be required to type it in.. just like if you know the combination to the safe.
Ya know humans have only been around, in our current form, for a few million years right? And what was it that drove us out of the trees and out into the savanna in the first place? Yeah, that's right, climate change.
Ha! If you think space solar energy satellites are mega-engineering then you clearly have no concept of how big the problem of global climate engineering is. Quite besides which is the sorry fact that we can't even make space solar energy satellites.. hell, we can't even make the kinds of colonies envisioned by O'Neill which he would have been the first to tell you were a heck of a lot simpler than space solar energy satellites. We have to admit that we're at least 100 years away from having the capability of maintaining the climate on this planet.. and perhaps even longer before it is practical to move any significant amount of our population off this planet. And so yeah, we just have to hope that is long enough.. that we don't find ourselves extinct before we have the technology.
How is that a reply to my post? At all? I said: regardless of how valid the argument for alternate energy sources may be as a means for reducing greenhouse gas emissions, it in no way helps in stopping and reversing global warming. Even if the whole world was to stop producing green house gases right now and for the next 100 years the earth would still continue to heat up at an alarming rate. None of these passive solutions can make this planet fit for human occupation 200 years from now (assuming no major changes in humans). We need mega-engineering to shape the global climate of this planet to meet our needs, otherwise we're soon to be extinct.
You know. You can choose whether or not you want them to get money from your clicks.. frankly, if Google wants to give the Mozilla foundation money for me choosing to use my preferred browser I'm all for it. Better them forking over the cash than me.
Slashdot Mirror
Yes, that's what the research showed.. the cockroaches will follow the robots 60% of the time. RTFA.
More interesting, I thought, was that the researchers seemed pissed off when the journalists asked the kind of "how would you apply this?" questions that you just asked.
Although when you actually look at the pitiful amount of money the music industry actually pulls in, I wouldn't be surprised if it was funded predominately by college kids.
Thanks for reminding me.
Arguing from analogy is just that, making unsupported statements. If you say X is like Y, and I say X isn't like Y, then what have we got? A disagreement.. which we already had. There's no way to say why X isn't like Y without descending into an ever widening spiral of analogy. This is why arguing by analogy (or metaphor) is just so very pointless - it doesn't help us discover truth.
If you understand logic quite well, why do you avoid it so by turning to analogy?
All analogies are poor. It's an antiquated way of arguing, long abandoned by people who actually understand logic.
Not that I blame you, the idiots who sell you a house with an "open house" sign still on it, even if it is written in binary, are just jerks.
There are no "content owners". There are "copyright holders" and they have the rights ascribed to them by copyright law.. of which I am opposed and believe should be drastically reduced, if not immediately and completely abolished.
Ohhh, a stupid car analogy, cool.. Ya know what it's more like? It's more like the government enacted some special laws hundreds of years ago that made it so only the manufacturer of fuzzy dice could transport those fuzzy dice on the road for the 19 years after manufacturer, then anyone could transport them. But the manufacturers of fuzzy dice wanted to maintain their stranglehold on the fuzzy dice transportation business so they lobbied the government to have a 20 year extension placed on their monopoly.. then it became 50 years, then 70. The government was happy to oblige because the original intention of the law, to encourage the creation of fuzzy dice for the public, never really made much sense anyway.. cause what good are fuzzy dice when you can only hang dusty old ones in your car, anyway. Obviously you could enjoy the fuzzy dice behind closed doors but the real purpose of fuzzy dice is to make a public statement, so really, ya gotta wonder who is buying all these fuzzy dice. As it turns out, not to many people do buy the fuzzy dice.. cause, as I've said, all the interesting uses are forbidden, unless the fuzzy dice are really old. And now that people are being harassed by lawyers for displaying recently acquired fuzzy dice, we really need to install fuzzy dice detectors on every street corner to make sure the ones on display are sufficiently old.
Bittorrent already has good encryption yeah.. and something like 25% of people have it turned on in the US and close to 80% of people in the UK.
As soon as this absurd technology starts working (if ever) everyone will turn on the encryption.
Ha! What in the world makes you think Carmack still has copyright over this code? Last I heard, Tom Hall had the rights.
I'm kinda sick of the vaporware.. I often fly 13 hour trips (non-stop) on a plane with no power outlets (not even in business class, or so they tell me!).. If I take 4 sets of rechargeable batteries my GP2X will last me 12 hours, but playing games and watching movies is not getting work done.
Heh, I wasn't aware of that, thanks for the info.
Don't make me make a car analogy.
I actually agree with you.. mind you, I also believe squatting laws in the UK are awesome.
I once reverse engineered the classic id software game Commander Keen. John Carmack did some cool stuff in that code.. each sprite had two function pointers in it, one was called when the sprite came into contact with another sprite, the other was called every frame to animate the sprite (he called it the "think" function). When you killed a monster the sprite was replaced with a "body" which was just like a sprite but had a few less fields (so it took up less memory). One of the neatest things he did was use this exact same framework of sprites and bodies to animate the "static" parts of the game. For example, the color coded doors that you have to get the key cards to open were sprites with a contact function that checked if the player had the right key card, at which time they would "die" and be replaced by a body that had a think function would make them slide out of the way.
For anyone who would like to take a look, I've put the re-engineered source code up.
Yeah, that's way more entertaining than, say, reruns of the X-Files.
I've seen Ghost Busters and Ghost Busters II so many times that I sometimes forget what happened in which. The (fictional) mythology of II was superior to the (fictional) mythology of the first one I feel.
Hmm.. I call bullshit.
If the police have a warrant to search my house and I have a safe, I am required to open the safe. I'm also required to open any doors and closets.. and they are allowed to break down the doors if I refuse.
Now if there's a computer on the premises, they are allowed to search the computer.. it almost seems like you don't need any special laws to extend a search to encrypted data. If you know the password, you would be required to type it in.. just like if you know the combination to the safe.
Ya know humans have only been around, in our current form, for a few million years right? And what was it that drove us out of the trees and out into the savanna in the first place? Yeah, that's right, climate change.
Ha! If you think space solar energy satellites are mega-engineering then you clearly have no concept of how big the problem of global climate engineering is. Quite besides which is the sorry fact that we can't even make space solar energy satellites.. hell, we can't even make the kinds of colonies envisioned by O'Neill which he would have been the first to tell you were a heck of a lot simpler than space solar energy satellites. We have to admit that we're at least 100 years away from having the capability of maintaining the climate on this planet.. and perhaps even longer before it is practical to move any significant amount of our population off this planet. And so yeah, we just have to hope that is long enough.. that we don't find ourselves extinct before we have the technology.
How is that a reply to my post? At all? I said: regardless of how valid the argument for alternate energy sources may be as a means for reducing greenhouse gas emissions, it in no way helps in stopping and reversing global warming. Even if the whole world was to stop producing green house gases right now and for the next 100 years the earth would still continue to heat up at an alarming rate. None of these passive solutions can make this planet fit for human occupation 200 years from now (assuming no major changes in humans). We need mega-engineering to shape the global climate of this planet to meet our needs, otherwise we're soon to be extinct.
Regardless of the validity of your first two lines, your final line is absolutely correct.
The only way to stop, and reverse global warming is mega-engineering and we, as a species, are just not capable of it.. yet.
You know. You can choose whether or not you want them to get money from your clicks.. frankly, if Google wants to give the Mozilla foundation money for me choosing to use my preferred browser I'm all for it. Better them forking over the cash than me.