I'm not seeing the connection between sleep and self-awareness, nor why self-awareness would be non-computable. There's nothing fundamentally stopping one from adding concepts referring to its own existence to a computer program - except we don't have the program to enter it into yet.
In quantum physics, observing is altering. Thus, the question is between the many-worlds or the self-consistency theories.
In the many-worlds theory, if you alter the past a new timeline is created, with your changes in place. If you kill your mother, then the other you doesn't exist, but since he's not the one who went back in time, no problem.
In the self-consistent theory (there might be a better name, but I don't know it), any alterations you make in the past have already been made. They are part of the history that led up to your time travel in the first place. Paradoxes are impossible - the probability of such an event is zero, as it assumes multiple, inconsistent events occur.
One way to think of this is as similar to many-worlds, except with no branching - every world which is self-consistent exists, and every one with a paradox does not. While it appears to you you're going back in time to meet/kill/observe your mother, you're in fact just following a closed timelike curve through spacetime. The eventualities in which there is a paradox do not exist - even if you get to the past with killing intent, you will not be able to carry it out. Something will happen to prevent you carrying out your mission, from a simple attack of conscience to a sudden meteor strike.
Nothing happens, or, depending on how you choose to view it, everything does. That is, in the past that led to your time travel, you always had run over that guy, and you just now found out about it. So there's no inconsistency, just a mild headache.
Paper money might not work due to serial numbers, but surely coins minted before the date of purchase, or some precious metals or stones (artificially grown diamon perhaps?) would do the job nicely.
First, if every molucle, state, position, etc, then of course consciousness would be transferred - there's nothing that wasn't transferred except perhaps quantum state (and MRIs screw with that do it can't be too important).
Second, RTFA. This isn't star trek transporter technology, it's star trek hologram artificial matter tech.
This isn't google's doing. Clear your form history. I opted-into the my search history system, even, and when I clear my form history there were no saved searches in a drop-down.
True, ideally they'll hold back their release. Of course, the azureus devs have yet to document their protocol, which makes interoperability difficult. I've also heard that mainline's implementation was already essentially done when azureus released.
This is not a search system. You still need to use other methods to actually find the torrents, even if they're just magnet links now. Of course, since they're just links, one can post them to usenet text groups without violating their charter, and get them picked up by google groups. Or put them online in a forum. Or whatever.
Update: it seems bt mainline uses khashmir instead of the azureus protocol. This is a bad thing. If this reaches a release, we'll have a case where two bittorrent clients are truly incompatible, and the result may cause difficulties for the technology itself.
... here's some more info on this, assuming it's compatible with Azureus:
Peers are located with an overlay network based on the Kademlia algorithm, with small tweaks.
You can enter the overlay network either by a central seed node (which is needed only one per install) or by asking some of your peers on some other torrent for their DHT addresses.
Azureus has a magnet link system, where given a 'magnet link' containing the infohash of the torrent, it will use the DHT to find a peer and download the.torrent file from them. Hopefully the official client will get this as well.
Yes, this really does work. Grab a copy of Azureus 2.3.0.0 and enter magnet:?xt=urn:btih:MC2ZPC2TCW2TJTY5DSSOMDX533EPXV FU (no spaces!) into the open location box to try it out. Be sure to wait for the dot on the bottom to change from yellow/"Initializing..." to green, and open your UDP port (same as torrent data port by default)
The azureus implementation has support for 'magnet' links, which allow you to simply exchange a small link and download the.torrent file from the other peers directly. Search on keywords 'magnet btih' for examples, though they're not commonly used yet.
Hammered? What kinds of bandwidth usage were you seeing? I'm getting 175 bytes per second on DHT right now; if you stop responding that should only go down with time. I wouldn't overreact to the UDP packets coming in unless they're of sufficient volume to actually affect your connection speed.
Each dumpsite could just point to one member of the swarm, making it ten or a hundred targets instead of one lone tracker.
Better than that: It could just provide a magnet link. Presto, az goes out and finds one member of the swarm, downloads the.torrent from it, finds other peers via the DHT, and downloads the file. Not to mention magnet links are plenty short enough to post to eg usenet - let google do your torrent search for you! Now we just need an alt. newsgroup for them. Or perhapt post them on bitzi...
If you claim copying isn't a fundamental right, then what about copyright? It's not mentioned in theither of those places. And no, the provision in the constitution for copyright isn't a 'right' - it's a grant of authority to congress.
As for the GPL, yes, it uses copyright and thus can be seen as flawed. Its purpose is to work within the system to encourage the creation of Free Software. Ideally all licences would be unnecessary, including the GPL, but alas this isn't the case today.
Why should the rights not be inherent in the posession of a copy? Copying is a fundamental right - the restriction of this, copyright, is an economic compromise and must be treated as such.
I use my power of ownership to keep you from living in my home. From reading my mail. And eating my food if I do not give you permission. My freedom to own what I make overrides your freedom to take what I make. Like it or not but makeing people release their work as open source is slavery. Making sure that people have the freedom to write their own software and the right to give it to others is freedom.
Sure, forcing someone to release is slavery. But, forcing other people not to release is as well.
In the none GPL world I can take 6 months and write it and then sell it to other people as well. So if I can expect to sell 100 of them I only need to charge $3,000 for the program to make it worth my time. Of course I do need to limit people from giving my code away because it will cut into my sales. You pay less and have less rights but you let the software you need for a small price. And yes for business software like that a price of $3000 is pretty cheap.
Correct me if I'm wrong, but couldn't you do that even if the software was under GPL? And what does this have to do with the (im?)morality of eliminating software copyright, which I believe was the original argument
svk tends to organize itself in a tree of repository mirrors. This often isn't the desired approach; you might want to make a change based off Linus' tree, then send it to a subsystem maintainer to patch into their tree, then they'd merge to Linus. Frankly, I don't know how you'd do that with svk. Not to mention it's poorly documented and still rather alpha-quality - of course, those two complaints still apply to git as well.
Well, the bt protocol has this more or less built in; each peer will favor uploading to peers which upload fast to it. So eventually it should settle out that internal data traffic is higher than external data traffic - or else, they'll have to upgrade their international connectivity:)
The company I work for is starting to play the OSS game more and more often, but using GPLed code is out of the question - *some* code should never be shared due to security reasons.
Then don't share it. The GPL does not require you to distribute - it just says if you do distribute the source must be available.
Slashdot Mirror
I'm not seeing the connection between sleep and self-awareness, nor why self-awareness would be non-computable. There's nothing fundamentally stopping one from adding concepts referring to its own existence to a computer program - except we don't have the program to enter it into yet.
In the many-worlds theory, if you alter the past a new timeline is created, with your changes in place. If you kill your mother, then the other you doesn't exist, but since he's not the one who went back in time, no problem.
In the self-consistent theory (there might be a better name, but I don't know it), any alterations you make in the past have already been made. They are part of the history that led up to your time travel in the first place. Paradoxes are impossible - the probability of such an event is zero, as it assumes multiple, inconsistent events occur. One way to think of this is as similar to many-worlds, except with no branching - every world which is self-consistent exists, and every one with a paradox does not. While it appears to you you're going back in time to meet/kill/observe your mother, you're in fact just following a closed timelike curve through spacetime. The eventualities in which there is a paradox do not exist - even if you get to the past with killing intent, you will not be able to carry it out. Something will happen to prevent you carrying out your mission, from a simple attack of conscience to a sudden meteor strike.
- You miss, and your mother takes cover. You are arrested, and rot in jail for the next twenty years
- You get lost, miss your chance you shoot, and give up and go home
- Your time machine stalls sometime in the 1980s, and you have to get a jump-start from some lightning to get back to the present
- You never get the idea in the first place, and thus never end up doing it
As for exactly which it is, hard to say. It all boils down to probability, and some of these have very high (never-thought-about-it) probabilities.Nothing happens, or, depending on how you choose to view it, everything does. That is, in the past that led to your time travel, you always had run over that guy, and you just now found out about it. So there's no inconsistency, just a mild headache.
Paper money might not work due to serial numbers, but surely coins minted before the date of purchase, or some precious metals or stones (artificially grown diamon perhaps?) would do the job nicely.
If the ripples end up giving rise to your original time travel, or are orthogonal to what you do in the past, they are irrelevant.
First, if every molucle, state, position, etc, then of course consciousness would be transferred - there's nothing that wasn't transferred except perhaps quantum state (and MRIs screw with that do it can't be too important).
Second, RTFA. This isn't star trek transporter technology, it's star trek hologram artificial matter tech.
I heard this in IRC from one of the Azureus devs, so there is no link, sorry.
This isn't google's doing. Clear your form history. I opted-into the my search history system, even, and when I clear my form history there were no saved searches in a drop-down.
True, ideally they'll hold back their release. Of course, the azureus devs have yet to document their protocol, which makes interoperability difficult. I've also heard that mainline's implementation was already essentially done when azureus released.
This is not a search system. You still need to use other methods to actually find the torrents, even if they're just magnet links now. Of course, since they're just links, one can post them to usenet text groups without violating their charter, and get them picked up by google groups. Or put them online in a forum. Or whatever.
Update: it seems bt mainline uses khashmir instead of the azureus protocol. This is a bad thing. If this reaches a release, we'll have a case where two bittorrent clients are truly incompatible, and the result may cause difficulties for the technology itself.
Note: don't copy link location with the magnet link, slashdot killed the href. Just copy the text and remove the space.
The azureus implementation has support for 'magnet' links, which allow you to simply exchange a small link and download the .torrent file from the other peers directly. Search on keywords 'magnet btih' for examples, though they're not commonly used yet.
Hammered? What kinds of bandwidth usage were you seeing? I'm getting 175 bytes per second on DHT right now; if you stop responding that should only go down with time. I wouldn't overreact to the UDP packets coming in unless they're of sufficient volume to actually affect your connection speed.
Better than that: It could just provide a magnet link. Presto, az goes out and finds one member of the swarm, downloads the
That image's been shut down due to bandwith overuse - repost, please? In fact, use coral cache with your next link.
If you claim copying isn't a fundamental right, then what about copyright? It's not mentioned in theither of those places. And no, the provision in the constitution for copyright isn't a 'right' - it's a grant of authority to congress.
As for the GPL, yes, it uses copyright and thus can be seen as flawed. Its purpose is to work within the system to encourage the creation of Free Software. Ideally all licences would be unnecessary, including the GPL, but alas this isn't the case today.
Why should the rights not be inherent in the posession of a copy? Copying is a fundamental right - the restriction of this, copyright, is an economic compromise and must be treated as such.
svk tends to organize itself in a tree of repository mirrors. This often isn't the desired approach; you might want to make a change based off Linus' tree, then send it to a subsystem maintainer to patch into their tree, then they'd merge to Linus. Frankly, I don't know how you'd do that with svk. Not to mention it's poorly documented and still rather alpha-quality - of course, those two complaints still apply to git as well.
Well, the bt protocol has this more or less built in; each peer will favor uploading to peers which upload fast to it. So eventually it should settle out that internal data traffic is higher than external data traffic - or else, they'll have to upgrade their international connectivity :)
Then don't share it. The GPL does not require you to distribute - it just says if you do distribute the source must be available.