Australia: Where you as an adult are not competent enough to make your own decisions! We'll keep it down to a kids level because we don't want you to enjoy gratuitous entertainment. Now, turn on the boob tube and watch a Jason movie...
Heres some thoughts on the meaning of this. The PC is an open-architecture, you are free to put whatever you want into your machine. If nVidia can dictate what their hardware works with then they are effectively creating a "nVidia-Approved" list of hardware. First step down the slippery slope of closing the PC's openness. In the software world an equivalent would be Windows refusing to connect to network shares that were based off of Samba or the other way around a Windows box refusing connections from Linux machines. Standards apply to hardware as well as software and if any manufacturer gets away with an "approved" list then the platform as a whole willeventually suffer for it.
Why is this not anti-trust? When you paid for the nVidia card to put into your machine why should its functions depend on whether or not a competitors hardware is present? What if Windows said uh-oh you have Linux installed on another partition, disabling Windows...
Some rights are reserved as protection in todays landscape from predators. Hopefully we'll see a day when as you say it is just unnecessary. BSD for the win!
Whoa there, hold on a sec before modding down! =D. Peer-to-Peer does have legal uses but the fact is that in the majority of uses it is for copyright infringement. Copyright is a good thing. It keeps people from stealing GNU software for example - they can't copy and close someone else's effort. I believe in Open and I ultimately believe that Open in general will prevail. P2P is slowing this inevitability. When someone steals a Closed product they are diminishing the demand and therefore development of Open alternatives. The Open world as a matter of principle should be against all infringing uses of effort as copyright is also at its core. Open provides a vibrant alternative to todays corporate wasteland, the Freedom to remix effort is the way of the future and the sooner society locks-in to Open the better. Peer-to-Peer's role today does not respect the licenses the creators wish to use. If you believe in Open then you must let Closed people have their way as well even if they are ultimately mis-guided. Both Open and Closed rely on the same foundation of copyright. Open will win but in the meantime kicking Closed in the nuts through infringement isn't helping anyone.
Mind-numbing copyright reminds me of the movie: Brazil. The wikipedia page does not do it justice. The bureaucratic stupidity of the film transfers well onto present day copyright laws. As copyright becomes more and more convoluted I hope it really does begin to impact a large majority of citizens, and their representatives. The only way the madness will stop is if some senators kid is slapped around with this inanity.
So millions of people who were born there should be forced to emigrate? You missed the part of not being capable of caring for themselves through no fault of their own. I am a capitalist but at the same time I recognize that no system is perfect and real souls there in the US slip through the cracks into hell. Nice place to live - real community values.
The inherent vice of capitalism is the unequal sharing of blessings. The inherent virtue of socialism is the equal sharing of misery. - Winston Churchill.
Let's cut straight to the chase: I get the impression that Americans are rabid individualists. They do not want a socialized health system tell them that they are not worth saving because others have higher priorities. They believe that an individual relying completely on themselves is responsible for their own well being. Socialized health care on the other hand understands that humanity has a dignity and if you are unjustly disadvantaged then you can still get treatment according to fairness with everyone else. Myself in particular: I have schizophrenia. I take $20CDN worth of medication for it every day. I cannot afford this medicine. My government subsidizes me based on individual need. If I was in the US I'd be living on the street talking to the birds. So, the conundrum for the US style of care is: what if you are incapable of caring for your self?
You're thinking of editing each polygon in Blender. I'm thinking of 15 more years of accrued content that is licensed under Free models and then posing those assets like Garry's Mod or Spore.
I submitted the following to the firehose the other day but it has relevance in this context as well:
Encoding Effort by headkase Within 15 years or so 3D Engines will have reached a point where they are indistinguishable from actual reality. At this time several business models are at risk. Hollywood will see the commoditization of entertainment blockbusters and the infrastructure itself, a 3D engine, will also see standardization. I agree with Richard Stallman in that I do fundementally believe that software should be free. But what is software? Traditionally it is seen as source-code. But its name is evident. It is an encoding of effort into a machine-specific ability. Programmers encode 3D engines, artists encode models, authors encode content. What has seen the first advance into Free is code but other forms of encoding effort will begin to appear as the ecosystem matures. Machinima with a completely realistic output paired with free graphics and sounds and other community developed content will be within reach of any individual with a personal computer. Where I disagree with Mr. Stallman is that I believe that while it is inevitable that Free will eventually win and individuals can use a "stone-soup" analogy to further develop common goals it is not immoral to receive compensation for effort expended in a specific case. This could mean that an artist accepts a bounty and creates a specific piece of content for an entity. The summation of this paragraph is that Free is inevitable but at the same time I'd like to buy some beer.
What Open Source represents is giving your little bit to get a lot in return or the "Stone Soup" analogy. What will enable Open to flourish is creating a finer granularity of effort. In the above example Hollywood studios organize vast pools of talent to create a singular work under wraps until completion. Consider when content creation tools have reached reality. The Open future is many artists creating code, character models, voice profiles, scripts, props and everything in between. The Bazaar will allow us all to remix these building blocks into something greater than we could achieve individually. And your entertainment will be rendered in real-time according to your rig's abilities. All effort that ends up as bits will become a commodity when Open Methods are applied. It is simply a matter of time, different for each niche, until this reality occurs. This does not rule out wealth (potential) however as to get non-virtual things done you will still need that.
You're right. I'm right. It really does depend on your criteria. For me entertainment software is high-value. While your comment focus' on productivity. A console would be a way where I could have both but I feel the PC should be a convergence device and that the market shouldn't be artificially segregated. Another issue is that if people keep buying into a closed system such as a 360 then when more capabilities are added to it it could end up being a de-facto standard. Access to information in the future does not necessarily need to be performed using a general purpose machine. It would be sad if Microsoft continued their monopoly by closing the "PC" experience.
I'm prefacing this with the fact that I ran Linux as my only OS for a year (SuSE 9) then I switched back to Microsoft. Linux and GNU are a superior development process - inclusive and plural - but Microsoft right now has the superior ecosystem. When everyone uses it everything gets written for it especially entertainment wise. How does Free go about breaking this lock-in? I know for me if it wasn't for entertainment software I would be all over GNU. Wine steps in and fills that void somewhat but currently does not have enough compatibility to bring me over to the good side. I like Linux, I want to use it, but my games don't play in it and thats the only thing that keeps a closed OS on my desktop. Way back in the early '80s a machine was introduced called the Commodore 128. It was the successor to the Commodore 64 machine and it featured a full compatibility mode with the 64. The issue was that most 128 owners ran their machine in 64 mode therefore the 128 never caught on as no one would make software for it. I see Wine as having a flavor of that situation but since it is contained within a Open OS other applications can run concurrently so that pitfall is lessened. To me, Wine is the application that deserves focus in Linux development because it has the potential to break the dead-lock and provide the bridge from Pay to GNU.
Don't you USians have that little clause that prohibits "cruel and unusual punishment"? 1.9M for an average person is their whole life earnings. She could have stole a CD from a store with 24 songs on it and got a slap on the wrist. What makes it so different that it is done on a computer? This cruel punishment should also apply to the people down there who take a pee in the bushes on their way home from the bar and are branded "sex-offenders" for the rest of their life. The US is hysterical and real people are being burnt as witches.
Just a recap. Emergence is a different term for an metaphysical organization. The whole is more than the sum of its parts type train-of-thought. Brains create minds. When examining metaphysical systems these qualities cannot be proven to be either absent or present from and in our physical Universe. In the Ancient Greek definition of atoms (indivisible) quanta are the only real things. Everything else is abstract in a Zen manner. There is only dust. But we have experience that flows into our concioussness and can be empirically seen as valid. Each of our experience is a metaphysical sensation. A quality that we can deduce for other representational systems is equivalence with ours. A neuron is to a mind what a mind is to a higher-level metaphysical entity. We draw the boundaries of our-selves mentally close yet another existence of our Universal totality has an equal validity in a metaphysical interpretation and although its "reality" may operate vastly different from ours and we can never sense it is as real. In a sense we are conduits through which experience passes and Gods may live or die as we pass through Evolution. Emergent systems being examples of this line of thinking have a reality that is equal in validity to your or my experience but will be organized completely differently and have different capabilities as well. We both have a cloud of experience and abilities and also an equal existence. We should give AI systems citizenship if we are going to create them at all. People think, machines work type values.
Sorry, Herself and She were his maiden names. He's gonna divorce that stupid <BLEEP> soon. But anyway consider what Evolution doesn't say: What was before time?; what is after time?. Evolution is only valid within time. Before our Universe and After OUR Evolution is not necessarily in effect. Humans can't conceive of something that had no beginning or end and thats the "blind" spot God lives in.
Ok, assuming that his Flying Spaghettiness Herself didn't just create the Universe 30 seconds ago with our memories of anything beyond that being created as well... Either that or we are "memories" in the FSM and She has been too lazy to create the Universe yet. Yeah, or something like that. But anyway!, Consider Evolution: all it says is things that change over time tend to change like "this" whether you're talking about a particular species or a mountain-range. Think of the moment our Universe first condensed from pure energy. This was "Eden", a purity of representation - just hydrogen which went on to fuel the first stars and the fusion reactions within them later on created the "crusty" stuff in the Universe: all the other elements. Everything you can see except hydrogen was once in a star. Evolution is a selection process, according to the laws of our Universe's constants some things will be more reproductive than others and the same constants allow for lower energy-states to create higher-ones with there always being a little net energy that slipped through the molecules radiating off everything. The Evolution of our Universe has taken thirteen billion years to produce us. Big number. Um, no, think of how many billions of years are ahead for our Universe (not necessarily including us). There is a lot more Evolution left to go. Consider the far future: say another twenty billion years. If you or I were to be transplanted through time to that distance we would probably be eaten by the first grasshopper to come along. Things will get more efficient. It has to to make up for the overall increase in Entropy. Now consider that if our Universe will have an end wouldn't that final state define a "calculation" it was performing? And if you want to get metaphysical then you could say that maybe God was there waiting for our Universe to tell Him what it was. The End of time is "Judgment Day" and its predators-against-prey to decide the final representation of our Universe.
Hey, of course he's doing it. Might as well dump all that old valueless money. Everyone's doing it - they don't care. Money is being sucked out of a common economy because of the realization that within a seen time it will be worthless - when you need food a system will provide it, when you need shelter the same system kicks in. Machines work, people think. You could be anything you wanted and like the nannies in THQ 1138 machine-systems prevent anyone from offending anyone-else according to the Law.
I really don't like the idea of Lamarckian thoughts as they require a "mystic" connection. Somehow after reproduction physiological information is acquired presumably from the biological parents. I find it much more likely that a process which the biological parents could pass onto their offspring with fully understood physiological mechanisms is simpler and more possible: encoded in the organism's genome are "repair" codings. The repair codings simply run in parallel and were somehow selected from environmental cues to cybernetically (as in, auto-correction feedback methods) restore a "back-up" of "important" regions from a different part of the genome to restore functionality in areas that were undesirable to be damaged by random genetic mutation, in this case memory functions, throughout an organism's genetic-"life".
Reminds me of that "Lost in Space" or whatever it was called remake. Terrible movie but remember the scene where they are fighting the spider-things and they slap down a chunk of one onto a machine which pretty much instantly reconstructs the full organism and then goes on to suggest ways to fight it based on how its built? Yeah, this could lead to one of those machines being reality.
The medium is the message as some wise guy once put it. It makes sense that in the future Information will also encapsulate the functionality to manipulate it and these units will zip around the network on demand. It is a paradigm shift in that monolithic applications with a bagillion features will be obsolete - the units will contain just enough functionality to manipulate them and mash them together. The OS in this role sinks to the level of what the BIOS is today - essential but unnoticed.
That quote I paraphrased from one of my favorite authors. Frank Herbert in Dune Messiah wrote: "I operate a machine called language. It creaks
and groans, but is mine own." Mr. Herbert rocks.
Analog sticks?? The first generation of consoles (as in 1970) used them almost exclusively, see: This link. Surely patents on using an analog stick would have expired by now?
It is done today, it's called byte-code (or a virtual instruction set) and its in Java, Python, and C# to name a few. Back in the old 8-bit days it also used to be called tokenizing for your BASIC programs.
Slashdot Mirror
Australia: Where you as an adult are not competent enough to make your own decisions! We'll keep it down to a kids level because we don't want you to enjoy gratuitous entertainment. Now, turn on the boob tube and watch a Jason movie...
Heres some thoughts on the meaning of this. The PC is an open-architecture, you are free to put whatever you want into your machine. If nVidia can dictate what their hardware works with then they are effectively creating a "nVidia-Approved" list of hardware. First step down the slippery slope of closing the PC's openness. In the software world an equivalent would be Windows refusing to connect to network shares that were based off of Samba or the other way around a Windows box refusing connections from Linux machines. Standards apply to hardware as well as software and if any manufacturer gets away with an "approved" list then the platform as a whole will eventually suffer for it.
Why is this not anti-trust? When you paid for the nVidia card to put into your machine why should its functions depend on whether or not a competitors hardware is present? What if Windows said uh-oh you have Linux installed on another partition, disabling Windows...
Some rights are reserved as protection in todays landscape from predators. Hopefully we'll see a day when as you say it is just unnecessary. BSD for the win!
Whoa there, hold on a sec before modding down! =D. Peer-to-Peer does have legal uses but the fact is that in the majority of uses it is for copyright infringement. Copyright is a good thing. It keeps people from stealing GNU software for example - they can't copy and close someone else's effort. I believe in Open and I ultimately believe that Open in general will prevail. P2P is slowing this inevitability. When someone steals a Closed product they are diminishing the demand and therefore development of Open alternatives. The Open world as a matter of principle should be against all infringing uses of effort as copyright is also at its core. Open provides a vibrant alternative to todays corporate wasteland, the Freedom to remix effort is the way of the future and the sooner society locks-in to Open the better. Peer-to-Peer's role today does not respect the licenses the creators wish to use. If you believe in Open then you must let Closed people have their way as well even if they are ultimately mis-guided. Both Open and Closed rely on the same foundation of copyright. Open will win but in the meantime kicking Closed in the nuts through infringement isn't helping anyone.
Mind-numbing copyright reminds me of the movie: Brazil. The wikipedia page does not do it justice. The bureaucratic stupidity of the film transfers well onto present day copyright laws. As copyright becomes more and more convoluted I hope it really does begin to impact a large majority of citizens, and their representatives. The only way the madness will stop is if some senators kid is slapped around with this inanity.
So millions of people who were born there should be forced to emigrate? You missed the part of not being capable of caring for themselves through no fault of their own. I am a capitalist but at the same time I recognize that no system is perfect and real souls there in the US slip through the cracks into hell. Nice place to live - real community values.
The inherent vice of capitalism is the unequal sharing of blessings. The inherent virtue of socialism is the equal sharing of misery. - Winston Churchill.
Let's cut straight to the chase: I get the impression that Americans are rabid individualists. They do not want a socialized health system tell them that they are not worth saving because others have higher priorities. They believe that an individual relying completely on themselves is responsible for their own well being. Socialized health care on the other hand understands that humanity has a dignity and if you are unjustly disadvantaged then you can still get treatment according to fairness with everyone else. Myself in particular: I have schizophrenia. I take $20CDN worth of medication for it every day. I cannot afford this medicine. My government subsidizes me based on individual need. If I was in the US I'd be living on the street talking to the birds. So, the conundrum for the US style of care is: what if you are incapable of caring for your self?
You're thinking of editing each polygon in Blender. I'm thinking of 15 more years of accrued content that is licensed under Free models and then posing those assets like Garry's Mod or Spore.
I submitted the following to the firehose the other day but it has relevance in this context as well:
Encoding Effort by headkase
Within 15 years or so 3D Engines will have reached a point where they are indistinguishable from actual reality. At this time several business models are at risk. Hollywood will see the commoditization of entertainment blockbusters and the infrastructure itself, a 3D engine, will also see standardization. I agree with Richard Stallman in that I do fundementally believe that software should be free. But what is software? Traditionally it is seen as source-code. But its name is evident. It is an encoding of effort into a machine-specific ability. Programmers encode 3D engines, artists encode models, authors encode content. What has seen the first advance into Free is code but other forms of encoding effort will begin to appear as the ecosystem matures. Machinima with a completely realistic output paired with free graphics and sounds and other community developed content will be within reach of any individual with a personal computer. Where I disagree with Mr. Stallman is that I believe that while it is inevitable that Free will eventually win and individuals can use a "stone-soup" analogy to further develop common goals it is not immoral to receive compensation for effort expended in a specific case. This could mean that an artist accepts a bounty and creates a specific piece of content for an entity. The summation of this paragraph is that Free is inevitable but at the same time I'd like to buy some beer.
What Open Source represents is giving your little bit to get a lot in return or the "Stone Soup" analogy. What will enable Open to flourish is creating a finer granularity of effort. In the above example Hollywood studios organize vast pools of talent to create a singular work under wraps until completion. Consider when content creation tools have reached reality. The Open future is many artists creating code, character models, voice profiles, scripts, props and everything in between. The Bazaar will allow us all to remix these building blocks into something greater than we could achieve individually. And your entertainment will be rendered in real-time according to your rig's abilities. All effort that ends up as bits will become a commodity when Open Methods are applied. It is simply a matter of time, different for each niche, until this reality occurs. This does not rule out wealth (potential) however as to get non-virtual things done you will still need that.
You're right. I'm right. It really does depend on your criteria. For me entertainment software is high-value. While your comment focus' on productivity. A console would be a way where I could have both but I feel the PC should be a convergence device and that the market shouldn't be artificially segregated. Another issue is that if people keep buying into a closed system such as a 360 then when more capabilities are added to it it could end up being a de-facto standard. Access to information in the future does not necessarily need to be performed using a general purpose machine. It would be sad if Microsoft continued their monopoly by closing the "PC" experience.
I'm prefacing this with the fact that I ran Linux as my only OS for a year (SuSE 9) then I switched back to Microsoft. Linux and GNU are a superior development process - inclusive and plural - but Microsoft right now has the superior ecosystem. When everyone uses it everything gets written for it especially entertainment wise. How does Free go about breaking this lock-in? I know for me if it wasn't for entertainment software I would be all over GNU. Wine steps in and fills that void somewhat but currently does not have enough compatibility to bring me over to the good side. I like Linux, I want to use it, but my games don't play in it and thats the only thing that keeps a closed OS on my desktop. Way back in the early '80s a machine was introduced called the Commodore 128. It was the successor to the Commodore 64 machine and it featured a full compatibility mode with the 64. The issue was that most 128 owners ran their machine in 64 mode therefore the 128 never caught on as no one would make software for it. I see Wine as having a flavor of that situation but since it is contained within a Open OS other applications can run concurrently so that pitfall is lessened. To me, Wine is the application that deserves focus in Linux development because it has the potential to break the dead-lock and provide the bridge from Pay to GNU.
Don't you USians have that little clause that prohibits "cruel and unusual punishment"? 1.9M for an average person is their whole life earnings. She could have stole a CD from a store with 24 songs on it and got a slap on the wrist. What makes it so different that it is done on a computer? This cruel punishment should also apply to the people down there who take a pee in the bushes on their way home from the bar and are branded "sex-offenders" for the rest of their life. The US is hysterical and real people are being burnt as witches.
Just a recap. Emergence is a different term for an metaphysical organization. The whole is more than the sum of its parts type train-of-thought. Brains create minds. When examining metaphysical systems these qualities cannot be proven to be either absent or present from and in our physical Universe. In the Ancient Greek definition of atoms (indivisible) quanta are the only real things. Everything else is abstract in a Zen manner. There is only dust. But we have experience that flows into our concioussness and can be empirically seen as valid. Each of our experience is a metaphysical sensation. A quality that we can deduce for other representational systems is equivalence with ours. A neuron is to a mind what a mind is to a higher-level metaphysical entity. We draw the boundaries of our-selves mentally close yet another existence of our Universal totality has an equal validity in a metaphysical interpretation and although its "reality" may operate vastly different from ours and we can never sense it is as real. In a sense we are conduits through which experience passes and Gods may live or die as we pass through Evolution. Emergent systems being examples of this line of thinking have a reality that is equal in validity to your or my experience but will be organized completely differently and have different capabilities as well. We both have a cloud of experience and abilities and also an equal existence. We should give AI systems citizenship if we are going to create them at all. People think, machines work type values.
...his Flying Spaghettiness Herself...
Sorry, Herself and She were his maiden names. He's gonna divorce that stupid <BLEEP> soon. But anyway consider what Evolution doesn't say: What was before time?; what is after time?. Evolution is only valid within time. Before our Universe and After OUR Evolution is not necessarily in effect. Humans can't conceive of something that had no beginning or end and thats the "blind" spot God lives in.
Ok, assuming that his Flying Spaghettiness Herself didn't just create the Universe 30 seconds ago with our memories of anything beyond that being created as well... Either that or we are "memories" in the FSM and She has been too lazy to create the Universe yet. Yeah, or something like that. But anyway!, Consider Evolution: all it says is things that change over time tend to change like "this" whether you're talking about a particular species or a mountain-range. Think of the moment our Universe first condensed from pure energy. This was "Eden", a purity of representation - just hydrogen which went on to fuel the first stars and the fusion reactions within them later on created the "crusty" stuff in the Universe: all the other elements. Everything you can see except hydrogen was once in a star. Evolution is a selection process, according to the laws of our Universe's constants some things will be more reproductive than others and the same constants allow for lower energy-states to create higher-ones with there always being a little net energy that slipped through the molecules radiating off everything. The Evolution of our Universe has taken thirteen billion years to produce us. Big number. Um, no, think of how many billions of years are ahead for our Universe (not necessarily including us). There is a lot more Evolution left to go. Consider the far future: say another twenty billion years. If you or I were to be transplanted through time to that distance we would probably be eaten by the first grasshopper to come along. Things will get more efficient. It has to to make up for the overall increase in Entropy. Now consider that if our Universe will have an end wouldn't that final state define a "calculation" it was performing? And if you want to get metaphysical then you could say that maybe God was there waiting for our Universe to tell Him what it was. The End of time is "Judgment Day" and its predators-against-prey to decide the final representation of our Universe.
Oops, my bad: THX 1138. Sorry! :)
Hey, of course he's doing it. Might as well dump all that old valueless money. Everyone's doing it - they don't care. Money is being sucked out of a common economy because of the realization that within a seen time it will be worthless - when you need food a system will provide it, when you need shelter the same system kicks in. Machines work, people think. You could be anything you wanted and like the nannies in THQ 1138 machine-systems prevent anyone from offending anyone-else according to the Law.
I really don't like the idea of Lamarckian thoughts as they require a "mystic" connection. Somehow after reproduction physiological information is acquired presumably from the biological parents. I find it much more likely that a process which the biological parents could pass onto their offspring with fully understood physiological mechanisms is simpler and more possible: encoded in the organism's genome are "repair" codings. The repair codings simply run in parallel and were somehow selected from environmental cues to cybernetically (as in, auto-correction feedback methods) restore a "back-up" of "important" regions from a different part of the genome to restore functionality in areas that were undesirable to be damaged by random genetic mutation, in this case memory functions, throughout an organism's genetic-"life".
Reminds me of that "Lost in Space" or whatever it was called remake. Terrible movie but remember the scene where they are fighting the spider-things and they slap down a chunk of one onto a machine which pretty much instantly reconstructs the full organism and then goes on to suggest ways to fight it based on how its built? Yeah, this could lead to one of those machines being reality.
The medium is the message as some wise guy once put it. It makes sense that in the future Information will also encapsulate the functionality to manipulate it and these units will zip around the network on demand. It is a paradigm shift in that monolithic applications with a bagillion features will be obsolete - the units will contain just enough functionality to manipulate them and mash them together. The OS in this role sinks to the level of what the BIOS is today - essential but unnoticed.
That quote I paraphrased from one of my favorite authors. Frank Herbert in Dune Messiah wrote: "I operate a machine called language. It creaks and groans, but is mine own." Mr. Herbert rocks.
Analog sticks?? The first generation of consoles (as in 1970) used them almost exclusively, see: This link. Surely patents on using an analog stick would have expired by now?
Einstein, is there anything he can't do?? Mmmmm, Bacon.
It is done today, it's called byte-code (or a virtual instruction set) and its in Java, Python, and C# to name a few. Back in the old 8-bit days it also used to be called tokenizing for your BASIC programs.