Robi one wykadaj (uczyæ) obmyoelanie zrêcznooe& w waszym kraju? Przeprosiny dla biednego tumaczenia, sprawiaæ przyjemnooeæ (proszê) odpowiadaj w Angielski (jêzyk angielski) jeeli moliwy, uywaj www.poltran.com.
Against true dangers as represented by those that would commit atrocities such as biological warfare, nuclear terrorism or other indiscriminant undreamed of horrors against another population. When I said Civilization, I mean't CIVILIZATION, not the US. Or any other country for that matter.
Civilizations first responsibility is to defend itself. After that it's responsibility is to strengthen itself.
I pray (figure of speech, I'm athiest) that those who run the death squads realize that my agenda falls within the second responsibility. I'm the nag that say's 'do better'. And I only expect to see real results on time scales of 50-100 years minimum.
Please ignore my sig for the duration of this post.
I make no attempt to obscure my identity. The reason for this is due to deep philosophical beliefs that boil down to: once your dead, your dead. From your point of view it's like you never existed at all. So you might as well do what your going to do. Or as Ghandi said, Nothing you do is important, but it is very important that you do it.
In a more pragmatic sense, I know I am expendable. This is unfortunate but acceptable. However, I am not an island in the ocean, I exist within a social network of friends and family. Most of them are really normal people, some of them however are a counter to your vague threats. Unlike yourself though, they would ensure that you got your day in court.
I don't agree with what he said, in fact I believe there is a medium probability that he is actually a counter-revolutionary. Go eat your cake in my original reply insinuates this. Regardless, he has a right to say whatever the fuck he wants to say and I will die to preserve that right.
You know, here's a few more thoughts:
I wonder if socialism must achieve world domination to succeed lie's in the fact that it's expensive. It cost's money to keep your people healthy, send them to school, and generally do good things for everyone. A lone socialist state is at an economic disadvantage compared to right wing states.
Another thought, the conditions the G8 is imposing on the third world has a strong projection of actually instilling socialist values in them once they develop fully; they will remember the pain and it's lesson. 70 years from now it might be a whole different ball-game.
And pity the Taliban, just wait until some biotechnologist develops a 'sanity plague' that suddenly educates them on the dangers of not proceeding with technology.
Your right, I'm am very sorry. I was reacting from my own conservative political viewpoint. I have not felt the pinch that pushes a nation over the edge.
Quote:Martynov's implied conclusion is that the working class should impose self-restraint on itself so as not to 'frighten' the bourgeoisie; but at the same time he states that it should persistently press the bourgeoisie to lead the revolution: 'The struggle to influence the course and outcome of the bourgeoisie can be expressed simply in the proletariat's exerting revolutionary pressure on the will of the liberal and radical bourgeoisie, the more democratic 'lower' section of society's compelling the 'higher' section to agree to lead the bourgeois revolution to its logical conclusion.' (A Martynov Dve Diktatury, Geneva, 1905, pp 57-8).
Do you think the US falls under this category?: Dissolving cultures give rise to a powerful urge for a new integration that must be total and dynamic if it is to fill the social and spiritual vacuum, that must combine religious fervour with militant nationalism
I think you have had enough time to read up on all of your revolutionary idea's because of not breaking your back all day plowing some little tract of land. You would be much better off focusing your energy on the more salient dangers of nanotechnology, namely the grey goo scenario where an uncontrolled nano-replication accidently turns all of the Earth into copies of itself.
Moreover, I find your idea of revolution to be a little outmoded, Trotsky's Theory of Permanent Revolution was written under a government that did not allow the right to demonstrate. To take the kernal of the idea into today's realities, consider it in idea space. Convince people it's a better way then vote for them. In old style revolutions things tend to get broken, and I for one do not want my things to get broken.
Go eat your cake.
Quote: The majority of the rejected ballots were eventually added into the total.
If they were illegal to begin with why were they added later? Who decided it was an oversight of the law?
Alpha Centauri: Alien Crossfire is a great thinking game. Would you like to have a game sometime? You should play as the Data Angel's. They are balanced in gameplay by NOT being able to make the Power social model choice. I'll play as the Free Drones. They are balanced by having increased production to compensate for their lack of knowledge or up-to-date military hardware.
As you'll probably be able to compromise quite a few of my bases intially I should start with 70% of the World base population.
Quote: If they don't want their citizens to see stuff - then its up to them to filter it
I must take an aside here and mention that in the US, if 'they' don't want you to see stuff they just don't report it.
I'm going to give you a couple of links to a web site that has forced me to admit that I knew nothing about the world. The site is the World Socialist Web Site. These people have an agenda, which I find quite refreshing because once you get used to it you can quite easily learn to look past it to read the quality news and analysis beneath. There's nothing worse than the myth of of objectivism, someone who's pretending to be objective is merely hiding their opinions inside the news insidiously. Why are all those WTO protesters violent anarchists? Why can't I find information on CNN that describes why 150,000 people show up in Genoa? Besides one page that after reading other opinions elsewhere is just so much of Huxley's soma. Remember many of these people were foreign nationals who spent a non-trivial amount of money to travel there specifically to protest.
I don't believe myself to be a radical, as some may accuse me. I believe in Democracy, I believe in Capitalism, I don't believe we should all rush out and overthrow our government. The other component of government is values and that is what I read the WSWS for. I'm a Canadian so I readily identify with Socialist values and am naturally open-minded to them.
As a further aside, what about the US' last elections? This article talks about the military role is those elections and is based primarily on an article written by The New York Times. If the conclusions in the article are valid (and only you the reader can decide that) then the US has taken a step off of democracy's road and onto the road of authoritarianism.
I'm afraid of Americans.
I like your sig, if I could I would probably have extended sig's that rotated daily to keep them interesting.
End of comment beginning of extended sig
To her Bene Gesserit eye, the people of Ix were always recognizable no matter
the disguises. Basic structure of their society colored its individuals.
Ixians displayed a Hogbenesque attitude toward their science: that political
and economic requirements determined permissible research. That said the
innocent naivete of Ixian social dreams had become the reality of bureaucratic
centralism -- a new aristocracy. So they were headed into a decline that would
not be stopped by whatever accommodation this Ixian party made with Honored
Matres.
Despite a growing sense of doom, Lucilla forced herself to practice Bene
Gesserit naivete as she reviewed her encounter with the Rabbi. Her Proctors had
called this "the innocence that goes naturally with inexperience, a condition
often confused with ignorance." Into this naivete all things flowed. It was
close to Mentat performance. Information entered without prejudgment. "You are
a mirror upon which the universe is reflected. That reflection is all you
experience. Images bounce from your senses. Hypotheses arise. Important even
when wrong. Here is the exceptional case where more than one wrong can produce
dependable decisions."
- Frank Herbert, Chapterhouse Dune.
Dammit. I hope nobody assasinates me for this:)
The reason science works so well is that people are encouraged to try and break it, if this author has then kudo's to him. But without peer review nobody else get's a chance to break his theory. Hmm.
Heheh, go break my.sigs theory - I tried and the bastards assimilated me:)
Just think of all those books locked up in public libraries right now. If I could 'rent' one of those for a week and not have to pay anything beside's my membership fee's to the library I'd be a happy man. Yup, logging on to Oxford's site in England and borrowing some of their books would be very nice. As far as I see it this could let public libraries comply with copyright laws while extending themselves onto the internet.
This condenses a couple of earlier posts I made and just wasn't satisfied with and adds some more.
Like it or not Microsoft deserves their day in court. If it was you - for whatever offense - you would want yours too. This doesn't mean that Microsoft is going to get off scot-free, there's still the penalty phase. The government could decide that technologies such as.NET are essential services and expropriate[?] them and allow them to be freely used as web standards. Or if they weren't willing to go that far they could require full disclosure of the API's and force royalty-free licenses of all required patents to allow the interoperability of technologies. There is much leeway in the future, including future lawsuits to address future monopoly concerns. Remember, Microsoft is convicted of being a monopoly - this will not change. With this established, future litigation will already have the big hurdle out of the way.
Quoting myself: As much as I dislike Microsoft, this is due process. In the end however, I hope whoever makes the final decision on Microsoft factors in their delaying tactic in the sentence. They are so obviously guilty of being an anti-competitive monopoly.
Heheh, I should have said that the penalty phase should include a requirement that ALL of.NET be released under Open Source to correct the future monopoly of the Internet.
As much as I dislike Microsoft, this is due process. In the end however, I hope whoever makes the final decision on Microsoft factors in their delaying tactic in the sentence. They are so obviously guilty of being an anti-competitive monopoly.
The article does mention Ad Aware to get rid of this if you accidently let it get installed in the first place. In addition I use the Proxomitron to just get rid of those annoying pop-ups/unders/whatever completely. It's fully configurable and let's you create your own filters in a manner similar to Perl's regular expressions.
I agree the Internet is an equalizer but I don't believe that many dissident's in Nigeria have access to a computer, much less an Internet connection. Both are pretty hard to get when you make less than $1/day on a good day. Here in North America at least there are places like public library's where people can get online and express their opinions. I'm lucky enough to own my own computer but I do know that my public library doesn't charge anything for the Internet access they provide. Kudo's to them.
There is no contest at all, the brain wins. However in this particular game the computer has the advantage. First of all let's go over how it operates. The computer takes a brute force/god's eye view of the game, using rules it creates a set of all possible moves and recursively evaluates these sets of possible moves until it finds a winning condition. This is really easy to program, I can do it so can you the only thing we don't have is a massively parallel supercomputer kicking around to evaluate 21 moves in advance every second for us. What makes the computer better than a brain in this domain is that the rules are known so the game is finite - it's a combination problem, a set of all possible states exists.
But, this isn't how the brain operates. A brain on the other hand deals with incomplete, unknown or outright false information and must construct a system that operates without knowing the rules or even what information is even relevant to solving a problem. The problem with the real world is that it is chaotic - the combination of problems grows in such a way that to evaluate all possible combinations for even one move would take more time than has already passed since the big bang. I'm exaggerating a little with the previous sentence but it is the central issue. So to deal with this influx of information the brain has to find ways to reduce the sensory information into important features which can then be used to drive higher order logics (in the AI sense, not mathematical sense). Strategies for condensing raw information include Baysian logic, Fuzzy logic, and Common sense. The greatest area of research in the future is in extending Cyc, with something not quite like Expert Systems but along the same lines - contextual knowledge. Contextual knowledge is simply constraining the possible choices from moment to moment by following scripts or stories. An example might be 'How to make a cup of coffee'.
So to sum it up, yeah it can beat me at chess but ask it to make me a cup of coffee and I win:)
You obviously did not read/understand the article. This is a hybrid-license. It combines the GPL and Commercial approaches to software licensing. Basically it rewards people who don't charge for their software by not charging them in return. And on the other side it charges people a fee to use it's technology when they in turn charge other people to use it. I see this as absolutely fair and really the best of both worlds. The commercial end is NOTforced to place their software under the GPL they can license it just like any other piece of commercial code. The only technical flaw I can perceive in this hybrid approach is that the originator of the software is able to reap increasing returns on the value of the software licensed to commercial users as the GPL user community improves the software.
I really like the way this works. It prevents the co-opting of the abstract of the program for commercial use. For example the way IBM's early BIOS was clean-room reverse engineered to provide copyright-free alternatives. When it comes to GPL software I'd be happy to see a commercial entity have to pay to use the underlying idea of a program for commercial closed-source use while the GPL world get's to use it for free.
Slashdot Mirror
Robi one wykadaj (uczyæ) obmyoelanie zrêcznooe& w waszym kraju? Przeprosiny dla biednego tumaczenia, sprawiaæ przyjemnooeæ (proszê) odpowiadaj w Angielski (jêzyk angielski) jeeli moliwy, uywaj www.poltran.com.
Against true dangers as represented by those that would commit atrocities such as biological warfare, nuclear terrorism or other indiscriminant undreamed of horrors against another population. When I said Civilization, I mean't CIVILIZATION, not the US. Or any other country for that matter.
Civilizations first responsibility is to defend itself. After that it's responsibility is to strengthen itself.
I pray (figure of speech, I'm athiest) that those who run the death squads realize that my agenda falls within the second responsibility. I'm the nag that say's 'do better'. And I only expect to see real results on time scales of 50-100 years minimum.
Please ignore my sig for the duration of this post.
I make no attempt to obscure my identity. The reason for this is due to deep philosophical beliefs that boil down to: once your dead, your dead. From your point of view it's like you never existed at all. So you might as well do what your going to do. Or as Ghandi said, Nothing you do is important, but it is very important that you do it.
In a more pragmatic sense, I know I am expendable. This is unfortunate but acceptable. However, I am not an island in the ocean, I exist within a social network of friends and family. Most of them are really normal people, some of them however are a counter to your vague threats. Unlike yourself though, they would ensure that you got your day in court.
I don't agree with what he said, in fact I believe there is a medium probability that he is actually a counter-revolutionary. Go eat your cake in my original reply insinuates this. Regardless, he has a right to say whatever the fuck he wants to say and I will die to preserve that right.
You know, here's a few more thoughts:
I wonder if socialism must achieve world domination to succeed lie's in the fact that it's expensive. It cost's money to keep your people healthy, send them to school, and generally do good things for everyone. A lone socialist state is at an economic disadvantage compared to right wing states.
Another thought, the conditions the G8 is imposing on the third world has a strong projection of actually instilling socialist values in them once they develop fully; they will remember the pain and it's lesson. 70 years from now it might be a whole different ball-game.
And pity the Taliban, just wait until some biotechnologist develops a 'sanity plague' that suddenly educates them on the dangers of not proceeding with technology.
Your probably right, I haven't kept up on nanotechnology as much as I should have.
Your right, I'm am very sorry. I was reacting from my own conservative political viewpoint. I have not felt the pinch that pushes a nation over the edge.
Quote:Martynov's implied conclusion is that the working class should impose self-restraint on itself so as not to 'frighten' the bourgeoisie; but at the same time he states that it should persistently press the bourgeoisie to lead the revolution: 'The struggle to influence the course and outcome of the bourgeoisie can be expressed simply in the proletariat's exerting revolutionary pressure on the will of the liberal and radical bourgeoisie, the more democratic 'lower' section of society's compelling the 'higher' section to agree to lead the bourgeois revolution to its logical conclusion.' (A Martynov Dve Diktatury, Geneva, 1905, pp 57-8).
Do you think the US falls under this category?:
Dissolving cultures give rise to a powerful urge for a new integration that must be total and dynamic if it is to fill the social and spiritual vacuum, that must combine religious fervour with militant nationalism
I think you have had enough time to read up on all of your revolutionary idea's because of not breaking your back all day plowing some little tract of land. You would be much better off focusing your energy on the more salient dangers of nanotechnology, namely the grey goo scenario where an uncontrolled nano-replication accidently turns all of the Earth into copies of itself.
Moreover, I find your idea of revolution to be a little outmoded, Trotsky's Theory of Permanent Revolution was written under a government that did not allow the right to demonstrate. To take the kernal of the idea into today's realities, consider it in idea space. Convince people it's a better way then vote for them. In old style revolutions things tend to get broken, and I for one do not want my things to get broken.
Go eat your cake.
Quote: The majority of the rejected ballots were eventually added into the total.
If they were illegal to begin with why were they added later? Who decided it was an oversight of the law?
Alpha Centauri: Alien Crossfire is a great thinking game. Would you like to have a game sometime? You should play as the Data Angel's. They are balanced in gameplay by NOT being able to make the Power social model choice. I'll play as the Free Drones. They are balanced by having increased production to compensate for their lack of knowledge or up-to-date military hardware.
As you'll probably be able to compromise quite a few of my bases intially I should start with 70% of the World base population.
Quote: If they don't want their citizens to see stuff - then its up to them to filter it
I must take an aside here and mention that in the US, if 'they' don't want you to see stuff they just don't report it.
I'm going to give you a couple of links to a web site that has forced me to admit that I knew nothing about the world. The site is the World Socialist Web Site. These people have an agenda, which I find quite refreshing because once you get used to it you can quite easily learn to look past it to read the quality news and analysis beneath. There's nothing worse than the myth of of objectivism, someone who's pretending to be objective is merely hiding their opinions inside the news insidiously. Why are all those WTO protesters violent anarchists? Why can't I find information on CNN that describes why 150,000 people show up in Genoa? Besides one page that after reading other opinions elsewhere is just so much of Huxley's soma. Remember many of these people were foreign nationals who spent a non-trivial amount of money to travel there specifically to protest.
I don't believe myself to be a radical, as some may accuse me. I believe in Democracy, I believe in Capitalism, I don't believe we should all rush out and overthrow our government. The other component of government is values and that is what I read the WSWS for. I'm a Canadian so I readily identify with Socialist values and am naturally open-minded to them.
As a further aside, what about the US' last elections? This article talks about the military role is those elections and is based primarily on an article written by The New York Times. If the conclusions in the article are valid (and only you the reader can decide that) then the US has taken a step off of democracy's road and onto the road of authoritarianism.
I'm afraid of Americans.
Ah, how many times I've thought the exact same thing :)
Cheers
I like your sig, if I could I would probably have extended sig's that rotated daily to keep them interesting.
:)
End of comment beginning of extended sig
To her Bene Gesserit eye, the people of Ix were always recognizable no matter the disguises. Basic structure of their society colored its individuals. Ixians displayed a Hogbenesque attitude toward their science: that political and economic requirements determined permissible research. That said the innocent naivete of Ixian social dreams had become the reality of bureaucratic centralism -- a new aristocracy. So they were headed into a decline that would not be stopped by whatever accommodation this Ixian party made with Honored Matres.
Despite a growing sense of doom, Lucilla forced herself to practice Bene Gesserit naivete as she reviewed her encounter with the Rabbi. Her Proctors had called this "the innocence that goes naturally with inexperience, a condition often confused with ignorance." Into this naivete all things flowed. It was close to Mentat performance. Information entered without prejudgment. "You are a mirror upon which the universe is reflected. That reflection is all you experience. Images bounce from your senses. Hypotheses arise. Important even when wrong. Here is the exceptional case where more than one wrong can produce dependable decisions."
- Frank Herbert, Chapterhouse Dune.
Dammit. I hope nobody assasinates me for this
The reason science works so well is that people are encouraged to try and break it, if this author has then kudo's to him. But without peer review nobody else get's a chance to break his theory. Hmm. .sigs theory - I tried and the bastards assimilated me :)
Heheh, go break my
Just think of all those books locked up in public libraries right now. If I could 'rent' one of those for a week and not have to pay anything beside's my membership fee's to the library I'd be a happy man. Yup, logging on to Oxford's site in England and borrowing some of their books would be very nice. As far as I see it this could let public libraries comply with copyright laws while extending themselves onto the internet.
This condenses a couple of earlier posts I made and just wasn't satisfied with and adds some more.
.NET are essential services and expropriate[?] them and allow them to be freely used as web standards. Or if they weren't willing to go that far they could require full disclosure of the API's and force royalty-free licenses of all required patents to allow the interoperability of technologies. There is much leeway in the future, including future lawsuits to address future monopoly concerns. Remember, Microsoft is convicted of being a monopoly - this will not change. With this established, future litigation will already have the big hurdle out of the way.
Like it or not Microsoft deserves their day in court. If it was you - for whatever offense - you would want yours too. This doesn't mean that Microsoft is going to get off scot-free, there's still the penalty phase. The government could decide that technologies such as
Quoting myself: As much as I dislike Microsoft, this is due process. In the end however, I hope whoever makes the final decision on Microsoft factors in their delaying tactic in the sentence. They are so obviously guilty of being an anti-competitive monopoly.
.NET be released under Open Source to correct the future monopoly of the Internet.
Heheh, I should have said that the penalty phase should include a requirement that ALL of
As much as I dislike Microsoft, this is due process. In the end however, I hope whoever makes the final decision on Microsoft factors in their delaying tactic in the sentence. They are so obviously guilty of being an anti-competitive monopoly.
The article does mention Ad Aware to get rid of this if you accidently let it get installed in the first place. In addition I use the Proxomitron to just get rid of those annoying pop-ups/unders/whatever completely. It's fully configurable and let's you create your own filters in a manner similar to Perl's regular expressions.
I agree the Internet is an equalizer but I don't believe that many dissident's in Nigeria have access to a computer, much less an Internet connection. Both are pretty hard to get when you make less than $1/day on a good day. Here in North America at least there are places like public library's where people can get online and express their opinions. I'm lucky enough to own my own computer but I do know that my public library doesn't charge anything for the Internet access they provide. Kudo's to them.
Is there an antidote for what you have? Bwahahahaha.
I think the answer was actually 43 but a rounding error made it 42.
There is no contest at all, the brain wins. However in this particular game the computer has the advantage. First of all let's go over how it operates. The computer takes a brute force/god's eye view of the game, using rules it creates a set of all possible moves and recursively evaluates these sets of possible moves until it finds a winning condition. This is really easy to program, I can do it so can you the only thing we don't have is a massively parallel supercomputer kicking around to evaluate 21 moves in advance every second for us. What makes the computer better than a brain in this domain is that the rules are known so the game is finite - it's a combination problem, a set of all possible states exists. :)
But, this isn't how the brain operates. A brain on the other hand deals with incomplete, unknown or outright false information and must construct a system that operates without knowing the rules or even what information is even relevant to solving a problem. The problem with the real world is that it is chaotic - the combination of problems grows in such a way that to evaluate all possible combinations for even one move would take more time than has already passed since the big bang. I'm exaggerating a little with the previous sentence but it is the central issue. So to deal with this influx of information the brain has to find ways to reduce the sensory information into important features which can then be used to drive higher order logics (in the AI sense, not mathematical sense). Strategies for condensing raw information include Baysian logic, Fuzzy logic, and Common sense. The greatest area of research in the future is in extending Cyc, with something not quite like Expert Systems but along the same lines - contextual knowledge. Contextual knowledge is simply constraining the possible choices from moment to moment by following scripts or stories. An example might be 'How to make a cup of coffee'.
So to sum it up, yeah it can beat me at chess but ask it to make me a cup of coffee and I win
You obviously did not read/understand the article. This is a hybrid-license. It combines the GPL and Commercial approaches to software licensing. Basically it rewards people who don't charge for their software by not charging them in return. And on the other side it charges people a fee to use it's technology when they in turn charge other people to use it. I see this as absolutely fair and really the best of both worlds. The commercial end is NOT forced to place their software under the GPL they can license it just like any other piece of commercial code. The only technical flaw I can perceive in this hybrid approach is that the originator of the software is able to reap increasing returns on the value of the software licensed to commercial users as the GPL user community improves the software.
I really like the way this works. It prevents the co-opting of the abstract of the program for commercial use. For example the way IBM's early BIOS was clean-room reverse engineered to provide copyright-free alternatives. When it comes to GPL software I'd be happy to see a commercial entity have to pay to use the underlying idea of a program for commercial closed-source use while the GPL world get's to use it for free.