Yeah, but you've changed the context rather radically. The true elements of an accusation of copying are access and substantial similarity -to an existing work that has been proven to predate the work in question-. At that point, there's a presumption of infringement unless proved otherwise. Without that, the assumption is that it's original work.
I know you're probably being pedantic more for the humor of it than anything, but who cares if he can prove it? It's up to them to prove he doesn't. "Some people may be leaving campus to commit crimes, so we've opted to prevent anyone from leaving." wouldn't fly. Neither should this.
Every cancer is personal, since it's a genetic aberration. You might cure the one you've got. That doesn't mean you might not get another. If you do, though, it won't be the same one.
Now, whether or not it's a 100% effective cure (i.e., always eradicates every cancerous cell of the current batch) is a different question. If you're hung up on that distinction, all I can say is that a total remission is as close to a cure as you ever get. That's a cure with a "but we may be wrong" rider attached.
Well, yes, except our body of law has gotten so complex and arbitrary that it's pretty easy to come up with a reason for arrest. If nothing else, nearly everyone speeds at some point in their day.
Any word yet on whether it'll run adequately as a shell replacement under Windows? Running it over Explorer doesn't sound all that attractive, but instead of Explorer might be.
Like I said, I get your argument, and got it the moment you made it. And if you allow the original to continue living after scanning, I even agree with it. In VM talk, that would be the difference between a migration and a clone. What I'm saying is if the order of operations is:
1) Scan original, while killing/disintegrating original. 2) Simultaneously or near-simultaneously with 1), integrate destination. 3) Destination continues from there.
Then A) the original consciousness has no new experiences after scan, and B) the destination sees contintuity in new experiences from scan. To me, that's effectively teleporting the consciousness, by migrating it. It's a fairly similar scenario to Greg Egan's scenarios in -Permutation City- and other scan-the-consciousness stories.
There are other scenarios you can play out that lend themselves more to your argument: you kill the original body after allowing it to have new experiences, you never kill the original body at all, etc. I'm concentrating on the one that has a wordplay-host here on one tick and a wordplay-host there on the next.
Obviously, I acknowledge that you're killing the original body--despite your assurances that I am, I'm not an idiot. Again, our primary difference is that I see the body as substrate, not identity. The only reason substrate and identity are tied together is because we currently have no way to perfectly duplicate the substrate elsewhere.
It's not a red herring in the sense that 4D's argument was that you are your physical body, vs. my argument that you are the emergent behavior of your physical body. I don't believe in souls, but I've been a software developer for years, and work for a major VM company now. Programs, hosts, migration, etc, I believe in, whether the substrate is silicon or meat.
Again, it depends on what you define as you. To me, I'm the program, not the host. As long as the program continues (and at no time are there two copies running), I see it as being roughly analogous to migrating a VM. Whether or not this particular mass of meat dies is of no concern to me. As has already been pointed out, it's died many times over already. Continuity is an illusion, any way you look at it.
Plainly, your philosophy differs, and that's fine. I understand your argument.
I don't know about that. I lean towards a theory that our consciousness is emergent behavior from a very complex set of electrochemical reactions (whether it was designed to be that way or not is an entirely different argument). Duplicate the electrochemical factors exactly, and you're essentially "forking" the process, creating the exact same emergent behavior -at that exact moment-. And at that point, are you really different? In my mind, no more so than my copy of Firefox and your copy of Firefox are different. They're two different instances of the same program (nitpicking about versions aside). Close one, and Firefox still exists.
Truly, to me the atrocity would be a teleportation process that did not simultaneously destroy the source. One tick later, and you'd be two different people. At that point, you are killing a unique consciousness irrevocably.
Can you give a cite for the weakening of privilege in California? This is news to me.
I know HIPAA has provisions that allow disclosure of medical info for payment--i.e. they can tell your insurance company so they can recoup funds--but this is the first I've heard of their being no privilege whatsoever. In the case of a psychiatrist in this case, they're paid by the session, not for a specific treatment, so there should be no necessity to disclose.
They were announced within the last few days. I haven't seen them available anywhere yet, though someone on eeeuser.com reported being able to buy accessories at Best Buy. Nothing on their website, though.
The N8x0 falls down on general purpose software, though. Maemo and Nokia have done an awesome job, but nothing beats just being able to reimage the thing with Ubuntu or XP and run whatever you want. Even Eee's default hacked-up-Xandros has a bunch of stuff available if you know what repositories to add.
After purchasing an Eee 8G, I gave my N800 and Stowaway to a friend for Christmas. I have slight pangs about that (particularly after I updated to OS2008 for him and found the Stowaway support -much- more reliable), but I know I wouldn't be using it much with the Eee around.
I always felt Linux and Mac were a bit of a strange fit, particularly after Mac went semi-Unix-based. It's so much cheaper to buy commodity hardware--and even smallish commodity laptops aren't bad nowadays--than to buy anything brand name, particularly from Apple. The cheaper stuff often gets the best support anyway, given the Linux community's "let's not spend much money if we don't have to" approach.
I don't think people get their news from Wiki, but an increasing number are looking to it for established info. It has been very successful in that regard, but again, the important thing is to look for solid primary sources. Not everyone does that, any more than they do for the Encyclopedia Britannica or any other omnibus reference.
Sure, these things won't make it into research papers and other peer-reviewed publications, but that's not who they're aiming at. They're aiming at Joe Neighbor and Nancy Teenager, who probably do read Wiki rather credulously.
I wouldn't. Propaganda just means tilting public opinion towards positive through use of the media and other mass communications, with an implication (but not requirement) that it's less than honest. That could be adding positive info, that could be deleting negative info, given access. Wiki is unusual in that it would actually let you do the latter, oversight considerations aside.
Enough people don't understand that Wiki's only -really- valid as a collection of other cites and take it at face value that this sort of thing could be very effective if it's not outed.
Specifically, it's usually a certain dB value from a specified distance, which is generally pretty short. I have no idea how much sound one of the things pushes if you were 10 feet away instead of 80 feet away, but I wouldn't rule out the possibility that they'd fall under the law.
I can see my friends' rental histories on Netflix, and I'm sure they can see mine. I probably checked a box somewhere, but I don't think I consented to this sort of thing "in writing."
Yeah, but in this case I think the problem is that there's nothing keeping a broadcast packet coming from one system from going to all the other systems in the neighborhood, or wherever the share is. I remember when cable modems first came out, ARP storms were a big problem, and you'd also get fun stuff like seeing your neighbor's shared directories (which use/used netbeui broadcast protocols) because there was absolutely no partitioning or routing that kept you away from your neighbor's packets.
The other poster responded at length, but didn't address that you obviously missed the point. He didn't just swap a video card. He dropped the hard drive into an entirely new system, which likely invalidated all of the drivers (some of the generic stuff would be the same, but if you invalidate some of the top-level stuff like PCI bus, you invalidate everything attached to it as well).
I'm guessing it's more likely they do remember, and would really like for it to happen while making for damned sure that it's someone else who hangs their success on it.
Of course, they're also glossing over the fact that every console maker also wants this--they just want their proprietary console to be the One True Console of the generation.
Yeah, but it's not the lowest-common denominator format. An SDHC slot can take MMC, SD, SDHC, MiniSD, and MicroSD, assuming adapters for the latter two (which usually come with sticks of that form factor). A MiniSD can only take MiniSD and MicroSD.
I assume it's for space reasons, but it's an unfortunate tradeoff.
Slashdot Mirror
Yeah, but you've changed the context rather radically. The true elements of an accusation of copying are access and substantial similarity -to an existing work that has been proven to predate the work in question-. At that point, there's a presumption of infringement unless proved otherwise. Without that, the assumption is that it's original work.
I know you're probably being pedantic more for the humor of it than anything, but who cares if he can prove it? It's up to them to prove he doesn't. "Some people may be leaving campus to commit crimes, so we've opted to prevent anyone from leaving." wouldn't fly. Neither should this.
Every cancer is personal, since it's a genetic aberration. You might cure the one you've got. That doesn't mean you might not get another. If you do, though, it won't be the same one.
Now, whether or not it's a 100% effective cure (i.e., always eradicates every cancerous cell of the current batch) is a different question. If you're hung up on that distinction, all I can say is that a total remission is as close to a cure as you ever get. That's a cure with a "but we may be wrong" rider attached.
Well, yes, except our body of law has gotten so complex and arbitrary that it's pretty easy to come up with a reason for arrest. If nothing else, nearly everyone speeds at some point in their day.
Any word yet on whether it'll run adequately as a shell replacement under Windows? Running it over Explorer doesn't sound all that attractive, but instead of Explorer might be.
Like I said, I get your argument, and got it the moment you made it. And if you allow the original to continue living after scanning, I even agree with it. In VM talk, that would be the difference between a migration and a clone. What I'm saying is if the order of operations is:
1) Scan original, while killing/disintegrating original.
2) Simultaneously or near-simultaneously with 1), integrate destination.
3) Destination continues from there.
Then A) the original consciousness has no new experiences after scan, and B) the destination sees contintuity in new experiences from scan. To me, that's effectively teleporting the consciousness, by migrating it. It's a fairly similar scenario to Greg Egan's scenarios in -Permutation City- and other scan-the-consciousness stories.
There are other scenarios you can play out that lend themselves more to your argument: you kill the original body after allowing it to have new experiences, you never kill the original body at all, etc. I'm concentrating on the one that has a wordplay-host here on one tick and a wordplay-host there on the next.
Obviously, I acknowledge that you're killing the original body--despite your assurances that I am, I'm not an idiot. Again, our primary difference is that I see the body as substrate, not identity. The only reason substrate and identity are tied together is because we currently have no way to perfectly duplicate the substrate elsewhere.
It's not a red herring in the sense that 4D's argument was that you are your physical body, vs. my argument that you are the emergent behavior of your physical body. I don't believe in souls, but I've been a software developer for years, and work for a major VM company now. Programs, hosts, migration, etc, I believe in, whether the substrate is silicon or meat.
Thanks for the flame. :)
Again, it depends on what you define as you. To me, I'm the program, not the host. As long as the program continues (and at no time are there two copies running), I see it as being roughly analogous to migrating a VM. Whether or not this particular mass of meat dies is of no concern to me. As has already been pointed out, it's died many times over already. Continuity is an illusion, any way you look at it.
Plainly, your philosophy differs, and that's fine. I understand your argument.
I don't know about that. I lean towards a theory that our consciousness is emergent behavior from a very complex set of electrochemical reactions (whether it was designed to be that way or not is an entirely different argument). Duplicate the electrochemical factors exactly, and you're essentially "forking" the process, creating the exact same emergent behavior -at that exact moment-. And at that point, are you really different? In my mind, no more so than my copy of Firefox and your copy of Firefox are different. They're two different instances of the same program (nitpicking about versions aside). Close one, and Firefox still exists.
Truly, to me the atrocity would be a teleportation process that did not simultaneously destroy the source. One tick later, and you'd be two different people. At that point, you are killing a unique consciousness irrevocably.
I suspect HIPAA (which is much more recent) would come into play now, but the point of needing to know the details is certainly not lost.
Can you give a cite for the weakening of privilege in California? This is news to me.
I know HIPAA has provisions that allow disclosure of medical info for payment--i.e. they can tell your insurance company so they can recoup funds--but this is the first I've heard of their being no privilege whatsoever. In the case of a psychiatrist in this case, they're paid by the session, not for a specific treatment, so there should be no necessity to disclose.
And since temperature in Kelvin is truly a measure of heat (degrees above absolute 0) that makes perfect sense to me too. Thank you very much.
Ah, I see he cites that famous source, "a psychological study."
Here's something slightly more specific, with some references.
http://www.madsci.org/posts/archives/1997-03/858984531.Ns.r.html
They were announced within the last few days. I haven't seen them available anywhere yet, though someone on eeeuser.com reported being able to buy accessories at Best Buy. Nothing on their website, though.
The N8x0 falls down on general purpose software, though. Maemo and Nokia have done an awesome job, but nothing beats just being able to reimage the thing with Ubuntu or XP and run whatever you want. Even Eee's default hacked-up-Xandros has a bunch of stuff available if you know what repositories to add.
After purchasing an Eee 8G, I gave my N800 and Stowaway to a friend for Christmas. I have slight pangs about that (particularly after I updated to OS2008 for him and found the Stowaway support -much- more reliable), but I know I wouldn't be using it much with the Eee around.
I always felt Linux and Mac were a bit of a strange fit, particularly after Mac went semi-Unix-based. It's so much cheaper to buy commodity hardware--and even smallish commodity laptops aren't bad nowadays--than to buy anything brand name, particularly from Apple. The cheaper stuff often gets the best support anyway, given the Linux community's "let's not spend much money if we don't have to" approach.
I don't think people get their news from Wiki, but an increasing number are looking to it for established info. It has been very successful in that regard, but again, the important thing is to look for solid primary sources. Not everyone does that, any more than they do for the Encyclopedia Britannica or any other omnibus reference.
Sure, these things won't make it into research papers and other peer-reviewed publications, but that's not who they're aiming at. They're aiming at Joe Neighbor and Nancy Teenager, who probably do read Wiki rather credulously.
I wouldn't. Propaganda just means tilting public opinion towards positive through use of the media and other mass communications, with an implication (but not requirement) that it's less than honest. That could be adding positive info, that could be deleting negative info, given access. Wiki is unusual in that it would actually let you do the latter, oversight considerations aside.
Enough people don't understand that Wiki's only -really- valid as a collection of other cites and take it at face value that this sort of thing could be very effective if it's not outed.
Specifically, it's usually a certain dB value from a specified distance, which is generally pretty short. I have no idea how much sound one of the things pushes if you were 10 feet away instead of 80 feet away, but I wouldn't rule out the possibility that they'd fall under the law.
On the other hand, if you're on Slashdot and you're going to guess...
I can see my friends' rental histories on Netflix, and I'm sure they can see mine. I probably checked a box somewhere, but I don't think I consented to this sort of thing "in writing."
Yeah, but in this case I think the problem is that there's nothing keeping a broadcast packet coming from one system from going to all the other systems in the neighborhood, or wherever the share is. I remember when cable modems first came out, ARP storms were a big problem, and you'd also get fun stuff like seeing your neighbor's shared directories (which use/used netbeui broadcast protocols) because there was absolutely no partitioning or routing that kept you away from your neighbor's packets.
The other poster responded at length, but didn't address that you obviously missed the point. He didn't just swap a video card. He dropped the hard drive into an entirely new system, which likely invalidated all of the drivers (some of the generic stuff would be the same, but if you invalidate some of the top-level stuff like PCI bus, you invalidate everything attached to it as well).
I'm guessing it's more likely they do remember, and would really like for it to happen while making for damned sure that it's someone else who hangs their success on it.
Of course, they're also glossing over the fact that every console maker also wants this--they just want their proprietary console to be the One True Console of the generation.
Yeah, but it's not the lowest-common denominator format. An SDHC slot can take MMC, SD, SDHC, MiniSD, and MicroSD, assuming adapters for the latter two (which usually come with sticks of that form factor). A MiniSD can only take MiniSD and MicroSD.
I assume it's for space reasons, but it's an unfortunate tradeoff.