Or if you and I both have time machines and we decided to race to 1:00 pm tomorrow it would be always be a tie.
OK, let's say that you and I race to 1:00pm tomorrow. You decide to stay right where you are and wait for 1pm to arrive. I, however, jump in my ship for a trip around the solar system at relativistic speeds and meet you there. When 1pm comes around we are both there, but you've aged like 24 hours while I've only aged a couple of minutes. I would say I have won because it took me less time to get there.
Start a company that acts as an intermediary and provides the taxation service for small businesses.
How about a company that sets up shop in a tax free state, like NH, to accept the deliveries of on-line purchases where the buyer can come and pick it up. Kind of like a mailboxes etc. Oh wait....
I couldn't find the actual text of the EULA in question, however, I've never seen an EULA that basically boils down do "Do you want to install me". I'm under the impression that EULA are documents which state how the user can use a piece of software. And typically if you decline the EULA the company doesn't want you to install the software because you are not agreeing to use the software in the way the company allows. I don't see how the declination of the agreement bar's the software from being installed anyway if the company is OK with that. The way I see it this just means the company is accepting that you are not bound by the term's of the agreement and you can use the software any way you see fit. Not that you'd want to use it at all, though.
Where are Dubya's defenders now? Do you, GOP fans, want the NSA reading your email?
Anyone who has an expectation of privacy when sending email is sadly naive. This is Internet 101. Attention World, News Flash! Your email can be read by any number of people between you and the intended recipient. Sorry, that's the way it is. If you don't like it, encrypt your email. There is certainly enough free software out there to do it.
However, the tapping voice communications over POTS lines I would consider highly illegal.
The knowledge further includes translation, processing and analysis components that are responsible for processing of vocal and/or textual and/or video input, extracts emotional characteristics of the input and produces instructions on how to respond to the customer with the appropriate substantive response and emotion based on relevant information found in the knowledge base.
So is this AI capable of turning on its creators and destroying them or can it only talk you to death?
For the ability to commit genocide is the only true test of intelligence, artificial or otherwise.
I understand completely why you guys warn us to "not try this at home". But who warns you guys?
A more interesting question would be do they believe that people actually heed their warnings. I can't wait to put my water cooler bottle rocket rig together.
I personally don't see a problem with this. What with modern technology, it seems like we should be able to build nuclear power plants much safer and more efficient than anything in the past.
I would tend to agree. However, I was reading an editorial in the latest issue of Home Power magazine which stated that nuclear power plants are not as economical as we have been lead to believe. The government (read U.S. gov) subsidizes some aspect of the operation to make it profitable.
I have never heard this before and the source is certainly not without its bias so I am somewhat skeptical. Anything that isn't strictly a renewable source to them is bad.
They say money can't buy happiness. However true this may be having the bill collectors call day in and day out certainly doesn't contribute to happiness either.
Yet another sordid chapter in the DRM saga...the insulting attempt to redefine our relationship to content we have purchased as a "privilege."
Unless you received the rights to said content from the record company the only thing you've purchased is the plastic and a license to use the content contained therein. Anything the license lets you do could be characterized as a privelege, so I don't really see anything being redefined here.
fact( P ) Pronunciation Key (fkt)
n.
1. Knowledge or information based on real occurrences: an account based on fact; a blur of fact and fancy.
2.
1. Something demonstrated to exist or known to have existed: Genetic engineering is now a fact. That Chaucer was a real person is an undisputed fact.
2. A real occurrence; an event: had to prove the facts of the case.
3. Something believed to be true or real: a document laced with mistaken facts.
3. A thing that has been done, especially a crime: an accessory before the fact.
4. Law. The aspect of a case at law comprising events determined by evidence: The jury made a finding of fact.
Idiom:
in (point of) fact
In reality or in truth; actually.
President Bush was immediately blamed for the eruption as a result of...
But seriously, do we not live in the 21st century? When the hell is GWB going to get off his ass and construct a tin-foil hat for the planet? This is totally unacceptable.
Possibly, but the US already charges more for "Audio" CD-Rs than for "Data" CD-Rs so that someone in the recording industry can get a kickback on the hunch that blank media is being used for copyrighted material. Maybe they figure people are buying the cheaper data CD-Rs for music so they're not getting as much as they could be getting on want more.
The first fallacy is its claim that evolution is a "random" process. Evolution is not random at all, as its progress is determined by natural selection
Natural selection of what, however? It is the selection of the best "random" mutation caused by cosmic rays, background radiation, whatever. So I would argue that at least an element of evolution is a random process.
Slashdot Mirror
OK, let's say that you and I race to 1:00pm tomorrow. You decide to stay right where you are and wait for 1pm to arrive. I, however, jump in my ship for a trip around the solar system at relativistic speeds and meet you there. When 1pm comes around we are both there, but you've aged like 24 hours while I've only aged a couple of minutes. I would say I have won because it took me less time to get there.
How about a prototype that is built to just commercial specifications?
Why Not? They killed a whole bunch of bees all in the name of science.
Speaker: And the winner is ... Number 3, in a quantum finish.
Farnsworth: No fair! You changed the outcome by measuring it!
I'm sure the masses just don't get this kind of stuff. I'm surprised it made it as long as it did. But here's hoping *Raises glass of Benderbraü*
Anyone who has an expectation of privacy when sending email is sadly naive. This is Internet 101. Attention World, News Flash! Your email can be read by any number of people between you and the intended recipient. Sorry, that's the way it is. If you don't like it, encrypt your email. There is certainly enough free software out there to do it.
However, the tapping voice communications over POTS lines I would consider highly illegal.
Its Britain, not Mexico. Therefore, they're just as stoopid as us Yanks.
So is this AI capable of turning on its creators and destroying them or can it only talk you to death? For the ability to commit genocide is the only true test of intelligence, artificial or otherwise.
A more interesting question would be do they believe that people actually heed their warnings. I can't wait to put my water cooler bottle rocket rig together.
I would tend to agree. However, I was reading an editorial in the latest issue of Home Power magazine which stated that nuclear power plants are not as economical as we have been lead to believe. The government (read U.S. gov) subsidizes some aspect of the operation to make it profitable.
I have never heard this before and the source is certainly not without its bias so I am somewhat skeptical. Anything that isn't strictly a renewable source to them is bad.
They say money can't buy happiness. However true this may be having the bill collectors call day in and day out certainly doesn't contribute to happiness either.
Here is an example of a statement which is not factual because a fact is, by definition, true.
Natural selection of what, however? It is the selection of the best "random" mutation caused by cosmic rays, background radiation, whatever. So I would argue that at least an element of evolution is a random process.