IANAL.. but... The reason you don't have the right of first sale (#4) is because of what they say in #1... you are not buying their software, you are liscensing it. That's how they get around having to allow you to sell the software. ---
Have you ever travelled to a country vastly different than your own... e.g. from North America to India? Culture is not nearly as global as we sometimes think online. There's a reason the term "Culture Shock" exists... because attitudes and behaviours vary widely among different countries. While neighbouring countries might have only subtle differences, globally we still are very culturally diverse. We may be exposed to more ideas through computers, and have a better idea of what a different culture is like, but when it comes down to it, we are still largely defined by the country we live in. (This is obviously a generalisation, and not always true) ---
Offspring is just being childish... napster's legal line is that they are not violating copyright, they just provide a service (that makes that possible)... Offspring is fairly directly violating a trademark. This really seems silly to me. Sure, it may make napster look hypocritical, but what does that accomplish? To keep their trademark, they have to defend it. It's really a different issue. ---
If you're looking for a good laugh... Watch one of the City Hunter series, which is very goofy, but fun... then, rent the JACKIE CHAN live action version of City Hunter. It's hilarious. It's totally not your usual Jackie Chan, but it's got cool action and it's very funny. There's a great 'Streetfighter' sequence... I won't explain it, cuz I don't want to ruin the surprise, but trust me, it's great! Only be sure to watch the anime first, so you have some clue as to what's going on!:) ---
I recently did a research paper on cyberpunk(ish) anime and watched the following films:
Ghost in the Shell (by far my most favourite anime ever: gorgeous animation, cool story)
Akira (I was a bit disappointed in Akira, after all the stuff I'd heard about it... it was visually beautiful, but the story was very crammed, since it was originally an 1800pg manga)
Bubblegum Crash (this is the sequel to the Bubblegum Crisis series, ok, but not great)
Armitage III: Polymatrix (one of those anime where the heroine inexplicably looks like a dominatrix..., characters were interesting, some visuals were very reminiscent of Blade Runner)
Black Magic M-66 (ok, not great, about a mindless cyborg assasin who escapes)
Appleseed (pretty cool characters and ideas, perfect for my paper, but not that great to watch)
Armageddon (awful!!)
Some other stuff I've seen:
Record of Lodoss War (very D&D-ish, but an interesting group of adventurers)
Slayers (very silly and fun)
Oh My Goddess! (lighthearted and funny)
Space Warriors (really cheesy!)
Castle Cagliostro (one of many with the same main character, pretty goofy...)
Perfect Blue (as described by Taco, a very cool anime)
Almost all of these were subtitled, since I prefer to watch subtitled anime. I have heard that some of them, notably Akira, are worse in the dubbed version. They often get cut more, and the story is adjusted more for western audiences. IMHO, while subtitled versions still have these changes, I think they are generally better. ---
There's a project out of UBC (University of British Columbia) that has a program for teaching teenagers Java. It involves programming a Virtual Family. A bit reminiscent of the Sims idea... The website is here Look for links pertaining to 'Virtual Family'. It's intended for Win95/98, and I believe it's still being worked on. I am not sure if you can just 'buy' a copy, I think you may have to get a beta version and give them feedback on it, after using it. (I may be wrong here... info should be on the website). ---
That's what I thought too, but then I read the article and realised that it wasn't so much the information being kept, but that there was no real regulation of it.
The Privacy Commissioner reccomends "a fixed shelf-life for data, penalties for misuse, strict control on collection and legislative changes to set out the research mandate of the database."
Currently, the data is never erased, and the Human Resources Dep't is not under the same strict provisions about the usage and collection of this data as Statistics Canada. (the other guys who collect a lot of data).
I agree that it's not weird information to collect, it's just that in this particular case, there doesn't seem to be much that protects the usage of the database other than "staff professionalism"... oh goody. ---
What about an AI that takes a given pool of data (e.g.current news headlines, a collection of images, etc) and creates an electronic image *inspired* by these. I don't mean a random mishmash of whatever it was handed, but rather, identifies some underlying theme in the data and interprets it in an artistic fashion... ok, maybe it's weird or impossible, but I thought it would be cool... probably fairly challenging too. ---
I think that to make a sweeping decision like this could get a lot of people into trouble... My comments fall into several categories:
those I never want reprinted
those I would only want reprinted in certain situations or publications
those I don't care what happens to them
I suppose we could have a check box form to fill out every time we post... but I think that's going a bit far. In the second situation, how could I really specify where I wouldn't mind my comment being reprinted? If taken out of context, an innocent seeming conmment could be made to say something you never intended. I think it makes more sense to have the interested parties contact the posters concerned and allow them to make up their mind when actually confronted with the possibility.
Disclaimer: Yes, this is just an opinion, I could always check the "Don't reprint this" box, and just ignore it. But maybe if the right party approached me, I might want my comment reprinted. ---
I don't know about other schools, but everyone in Computer Science at the University of Waterloo has to take a course in 3rd year that, among other things (problems solvable by FA, PDA's, TM's), talks about problems that are unsolvable.Studying these topics seems like basic theory and I imagine most schools have something similar.
I would bet most of the people who Jon Katz is talking about are rather naive when it comes to anything about computers, not just the limits of their capability. ---
Let some GLOBAL group set the rules on this.
on
Planet Gattaca
·
· Score: 2
Whether or not you (or me for that matter) like what the UN does, it seems like a more suitable body to decide on the issues surrounding genetic ethics, than some USA-centric (or anywhere-else-centric) commitee. If some other global group gets created to debate these issues, great... but I'd rather have the UN discuss it, than some non-global group. This issue affects all humans, not just Americans. That was the point I was really trying to get at. ---
Reactionary and Uniformed Article
on
Planet Gattaca
·
· Score: 2
This article seemed quite uninformed to me. It had a lot of misconceptions that the general public has about genetics and science. I think if Jon Katz wants to look at these issues, he should spend a serious amount of time researching them, instead of writing a fluff piece that tries to stir up fear, just like mainstream media.
This is all is too far away to worry about, they squawk. Or it won't really happen. Only scientists, programmers and biologists understand it enough to talk about it, anyhow.
Instant science does not exist. Although mapping the human genome sounds fantastic... it doesn't necessarily mean that you understand it completely. I think people have seen too many movies that contain Instant Science(tm) and they think that happens IRL. The thing I am thinking of in particular is movies like Outbreak, where some new disease is found, and during the course of a few weeks, days or even hours... they manage to create a vaccine to save the main character who is dying. This does not happen in the real world. From knowing which genes are necessary for life, it's quite a step to be creating it yourself, I'll bet.
And since when do programmers know all that much about genetic science? People spend years studying it in university and will often only work in a specialized area. I admit I don't know all that much about it myself. I do, however, know someone who works in the field (admittedly, they work in plant genetics). And I think that I have a bit more balanced view of genetics than the average Joe Schmoe.
What's so bizarre about "Gattaca" is that it's not really even science fiction, but an early documentary of the 21st Century.
Um... right... I think we're still a ways from a society that buys genes for their kids. Comparing current research to that is like comparing a horse drawn wagon to a car.
But where is this debate supposed to occur? In Threads on Slashdot? In the United States Congress, whose idea of technological debate is requiring the Ten Commandments to be posted in schools? Or in the American media, still stuck on hacking and cracking, e-commerce, or whether or not Johnny will sneak onto the Playboy website?
Why is Jon Katz *always* so USA-centric. When this debate becomes necessary (I think it's still a bit early on to really know what we can do), it should be held at the UN or on some other similarly global level.
And as for the religious issues, I'm sure the various religions will work it in and change their interpretation of things, just as they have done through out history. People who go on faith are most likely to argue about it a bit and then find a way to incorporate it into their beliefs. ---
The Chinese factory working making $300 per year is living in China... You have to take that $300 in the context of someone in China. They have a lower cost of living than people in North America. It may sound like an impossible amount to live on, and true, it's not much, but it certainly goes farther in China than it would in N.America. ---
Jon Katz has now written too many stories on thsis topic, with too little new content. They are all emotional pulls about geeks and how highschool is unkind to them.
Hellmouth 1: The Original story. Hellmouth 2: The Sequel story. Hellmouth 3: The Let's-Make-it-a-Trilogy story. Hellmouth 4: The Mosaic-2000 story. Hellmouth 5: The Here's Proof story.
And currently posted at a slashdot forum near you.... Hellmouth 6. (You're reading it!)
While the first couple Hellmouth articles might have been informative and interesting, I think Katz has exhausted the topic. The articles seem to have very little to say, other than 'this is how geeks in highschool are being treated unfairly now'. They don't contain much new information, and certainly, Katz never seems to have any new insights. Obviously these articles connect to a lot of us, who do fit such "profiles" to some degree, and a lot of us had not-so-good high school experiences, but I am getting a bit sick of these emotionally overwrought fluff articles.
That FLT was able to be solved (albeit not in the same way that Fermat did it)
Many people believe that Fermat had a flawed proof for his theorem. There are many reasons for this belief, most of which I am entirely unqualified to judge and the rest of which I probably shouldn't judge, but I think it rather likely that his proof was flawed. The sheer number of brilliant minds who attempted to prove it, and the fact that the final proof used such modern techniques, suggests to me that it is unlikely that Fermat had a valid proof.
I know this isn't really related to what you had to say, but I thought it was interesting enough to mention... and maybe someone who knows more about it will have something useful to mention. ---
Ok, I realised that they actually meant ALL digits odd, as opposed to the actual numbers. That would then rule out 3/11/1999 (march 11, 1999) becuase it's actually 03/11/1999, and 0 is even... well sort of, that's actually mathematically debate-able, but I guess the idea is that all the digits are odd (and even if 0 isn't even, then neither is it odd). ---
Odd numbers? Prime numbers? Nov 23rd?
on
Happy Odd Day!
·
· Score: 2
It said odd numbers though... I don't quite get that... that would be silly since 21/11/1999 (november 21, 1999) should be the next "odd" day... and even if it's primes... then 23/11/1999 (november 23, 1999) should be the next "prime" day. What's up with this... maybe I missed some significance here... I'm confused about what's so special with today!! ---
I can't use what I learned in that class to write and sell a book on C programming?
That's not the point at all... it's not what you learned in class, it's the notes you take from the lecture. You might argue that these are a "student's interpretation" of the material, but most students I know (myself included), take down pretty much the exact same things that go on the board and/or are said. If the professor does a proof of some theorem, I'm going to copy his/her proof because it's likely the way he/she will want it done on assignments and exams. I'm sure there are exceptions, but there always are.
The problem is with profiting directly from the above described notes... not with using knowledge derived from the material in the notes. ---
Something screwy seems to have happened with my comment format. I don't have hard thresholds set, but that's still how it comes out... I no longer see "X replies below current threshold". It's confused me, sorry. ---
Um... why have you replied to my post ?? Your comment quotes someone else and clearly pertains to a completey different view point than mine... so much for threads! ---
atleast half the questions posed aren't relevant to today's 'net.
The course was called the Future of Computing. The point is to consider the effects of 'what is' now, on 'what may eventually be'.
I don't think the point of any of the questions was practical applications. I think they were supposed to be theoretical... the questions were intended to make the students THINK. I got the impression that the course was intended to teach the students to think about causes and effects. They were supposed to learn about thinking, not learn about how to do a specific task. The point is that in the future, and now, they will be prepared to think about how to address problems and create solutions. That will be the practical skill... knowing how to think. ---
Slashdot Mirror
IANAL.. but...
The reason you don't have the right of first sale (#4) is because of what they say in #1... you are not buying their software, you are liscensing it. That's how they get around having to allow you to sell the software.
---
Have you ever travelled to a country vastly different than your own... e.g. from North America to India? Culture is not nearly as global as we sometimes think online. There's a reason the term "Culture Shock" exists... because attitudes and behaviours vary widely among different countries. While neighbouring countries might have only subtle differences, globally we still are very culturally diverse. We may be exposed to more ideas through computers, and have a better idea of what a different culture is like, but when it comes down to it, we are still largely defined by the country we live in. (This is obviously a generalisation, and not always true)
---
cute, but that won't hold up in court.
As many people have already commented, Offspring is clearly breaking a law, it's not a grey area at all.
---
Offspring is just being childish... napster's legal line is that they are not violating copyright, they just provide a service (that makes that possible)... Offspring is fairly directly violating a trademark. This really seems silly to me. Sure, it may make napster look hypocritical, but what does that accomplish? To keep their trademark, they have to defend it. It's really a different issue.
---
If you're looking for a good laugh... :)
Watch one of the City Hunter series, which is very goofy, but fun... then, rent the JACKIE CHAN live action version of City Hunter. It's hilarious. It's totally not your usual Jackie Chan, but it's got cool action and it's very funny. There's a great 'Streetfighter' sequence... I won't explain it, cuz I don't want to ruin the surprise, but trust me, it's great! Only be sure to watch the anime first, so you have some clue as to what's going on!
---
Ghost in the Shell (by far my most favourite anime ever: gorgeous animation, cool story)
Akira (I was a bit disappointed in Akira, after all the stuff I'd heard about it... it was visually beautiful, but the story was very crammed, since it was originally an 1800pg manga)
Bubblegum Crash (this is the sequel to the Bubblegum Crisis series, ok, but not great)
Armitage III: Polymatrix (one of those anime where the heroine inexplicably looks like a dominatrix..., characters were interesting, some visuals were very reminiscent of Blade Runner)
Black Magic M-66 (ok, not great, about a mindless cyborg assasin who escapes)
Appleseed (pretty cool characters and ideas, perfect for my paper, but not that great to watch)
Armageddon (awful!!)
Some other stuff I've seen:
Record of Lodoss War (very D&D-ish, but an interesting group of adventurers)
Slayers (very silly and fun)
Oh My Goddess! (lighthearted and funny)
Space Warriors (really cheesy!)
Castle Cagliostro (one of many with the same main character, pretty goofy...)
Perfect Blue (as described by Taco, a very cool anime)
Almost all of these were subtitled, since I prefer to watch subtitled anime. I have heard that some of them, notably Akira, are worse in the dubbed version. They often get cut more, and the story is adjusted more for western audiences. IMHO, while subtitled versions still have these changes, I think they are generally better.
---
There's a project out of UBC (University of British Columbia) that has a program for teaching teenagers Java. It involves programming a Virtual Family. A bit reminiscent of the Sims idea... The website is here
Look for links pertaining to 'Virtual Family'. It's intended for Win95/98, and I believe it's still being worked on. I am not sure if you can just 'buy' a copy, I think you may have to get a beta version and give them feedback on it, after using it. (I may be wrong here... info should be on the website).
---
How many are left?
... the only one I know about being solved is FLT.
---
The Privacy Commissioner reccomends "a fixed shelf-life for data, penalties for misuse, strict control on collection and legislative changes to set out the research mandate of the database."
Currently, the data is never erased, and the Human Resources Dep't is not under the same strict provisions about the usage and collection of this data as Statistics Canada. (the other guys who collect a lot of data).
I agree that it's not weird information to collect, it's just that in this particular case, there doesn't seem to be much that protects the usage of the database other than "staff professionalism"... oh goody.
---
What about an AI that takes a given pool of data (e.g.current news headlines, a collection of images, etc) and creates an electronic image *inspired* by these. I don't mean a random mishmash of whatever it was handed, but rather, identifies some underlying theme in the data and interprets it in an artistic fashion... ok, maybe it's weird or impossible, but I thought it would be cool... probably fairly challenging too.
---
those I never want reprinted
those I would only want reprinted in certain situations or publications
those I don't care what happens to them
I suppose we could have a check box form to fill out every time we post... but I think that's going a bit far. In the second situation, how could I really specify where I wouldn't mind my comment being reprinted? If taken out of context, an innocent seeming conmment could be made to say something you never intended. I think it makes more sense to have the interested parties contact the posters concerned and allow them to make up their mind when actually confronted with the possibility.
Disclaimer: Yes, this is just an opinion, I could always check the "Don't reprint this" box, and just ignore it. But maybe if the right party approached me, I might want my comment reprinted.
---
My first thought was that I bet half the people caught by this are minors and thus CANNOT be legally bound by *any* contract... silly, huh.
---
I would bet most of the people who Jon Katz is talking about are rather naive when it comes to anything about computers, not just the limits of their capability.
---
Whether or not you (or me for that matter) like what the UN does, it seems like a more suitable body to decide on the issues surrounding genetic ethics, than some USA-centric (or anywhere-else-centric) commitee. If some other global group gets created to debate these issues, great... but I'd rather have the UN discuss it, than some non-global group. This issue affects all humans, not just Americans. That was the point I was really trying to get at.
---
This article seemed quite uninformed to me. It had a lot of misconceptions that the general public has about genetics and science. I think if Jon Katz wants to look at these issues, he should spend a serious amount of time researching them, instead of writing a fluff piece that tries to stir up fear, just like mainstream media.
This is all is too far away to worry about, they squawk. Or it won't really happen. Only scientists, programmers and biologists understand it enough to talk about it, anyhow.
Instant science does not exist. Although mapping the human genome sounds fantastic... it doesn't necessarily mean that you understand it completely. I think people have seen too many movies that contain Instant Science(tm) and they think that happens IRL. The thing I am thinking of in particular is movies like Outbreak, where some new disease is found, and during the course of a few weeks, days or even hours... they manage to create a vaccine to save the main character who is dying. This does not happen in the real world. From knowing which genes are necessary for life, it's quite a step to be creating it yourself, I'll bet.
And since when do programmers know all that much about genetic science? People spend years studying it in university and will often only work in a specialized area. I admit I don't know all that much about it myself. I do, however, know someone who works in the field (admittedly, they work in plant genetics). And I think that I have a bit more balanced view of genetics than the average Joe Schmoe.
What's so bizarre about "Gattaca" is that it's not really even science fiction, but an early documentary of the 21st Century.
Um... right... I think we're still a ways from a society that buys genes for their kids. Comparing current research to that is like comparing a horse drawn wagon to a car.
But where is this debate supposed to occur? In Threads on Slashdot? In the United States Congress, whose idea of technological debate is requiring the Ten Commandments to be posted in schools? Or in the American media, still stuck on hacking and cracking, e-commerce, or whether or not Johnny will sneak onto the Playboy website?
Why is Jon Katz *always* so USA-centric. When this debate becomes necessary (I think it's still a bit early on to really know what we can do), it should be held at the UN or on some other similarly global level.
And as for the religious issues, I'm sure the various religions will work it in and change their interpretation of things, just as they have done through out history. People who go on faith are most likely to argue about it a bit and then find a way to incorporate it into their beliefs.
---
The Chinese factory working making $300 per year is living in China...
You have to take that $300 in the context of someone in China. They have a lower cost of living than people in North America. It may sound like an impossible amount to live on, and true, it's not much, but it certainly goes farther in China than it would in N.America.
---
Jon Katz has now written too many stories on thsis topic, with too little new content. They are all emotional pulls about geeks and how highschool is unkind to them.
Hellmouth 1: The Original story.
Hellmouth 2: The Sequel story.
Hellmouth 3: The Let's-Make-it-a-Trilogy story.
Hellmouth 4: The Mosaic-2000 story.
Hellmouth 5: The Here's Proof story.
And currently posted at a slashdot forum near you .... Hellmouth 6. (You're reading it!)
While the first couple Hellmouth articles might have been informative and interesting, I think Katz has exhausted the topic. The articles seem to have very little to say, other than 'this is how geeks in highschool are being treated unfairly now'. They don't contain much new information, and certainly, Katz never seems to have any new insights. Obviously these articles connect to a lot of us, who do fit such "profiles" to some degree, and a lot of us had not-so-good high school experiences, but I am getting a bit sick of these emotionally overwrought fluff articles.
There is nothing new about this "News".
---
The Jack Straw letter was mentioned in a previous slashdot story and included links to the
letter and the photo essay.
---
Many people believe that Fermat had a flawed proof for his theorem. There are many reasons for this belief, most of which I am entirely unqualified to judge and the rest of which I probably shouldn't judge, but I think it rather likely that his proof was flawed. The sheer number of brilliant minds who attempted to prove it, and the fact that the final proof used such modern techniques, suggests to me that it is unlikely that Fermat had a valid proof.
I know this isn't really related to what you had to say, but I thought it was interesting enough to mention... and maybe someone who knows more about it will have something useful to mention.
---
Brain Malfunction...
Segmentation Fault...
Core Dumped.
Ok, I realised that they actually meant ALL digits odd, as opposed to the actual numbers. That would then rule out 3/11/1999 (march 11, 1999) becuase it's actually 03/11/1999, and 0 is even... well sort of, that's actually mathematically debate-able, but I guess the idea is that all the digits are odd (and even if 0 isn't even, then neither is it odd).
---
It said odd numbers though... I don't quite get that... that would be silly since 21/11/1999 (november 21, 1999) should be the next "odd" day... and even if it's primes... then 23/11/1999 (november 23, 1999) should be the next "prime" day. What's up with this... maybe I missed some significance here... I'm confused about what's so special with today!!
---
That's not the point at all... it's not what you learned in class, it's the notes you take from the lecture. You might argue that these are a "student's interpretation" of the material, but most students I know (myself included), take down pretty much the exact same things that go on the board and/or are said. If the professor does a proof of some theorem, I'm going to copy his/her proof because it's likely the way he/she will want it done on assignments and exams. I'm sure there are exceptions, but there always are.
The problem is with profiting directly from the above described notes... not with using knowledge derived from the material in the notes.
---
Something screwy seems to have happened with my comment format. I don't have hard thresholds set, but that's still how it comes out... I no longer see "X replies below current threshold". It's confused me, sorry.
---
Um... why have you replied to my post ??
Your comment quotes someone else and clearly pertains to a completey different view point than mine... so much for threads!
---
The course was called the Future of Computing. The point is to consider the effects of 'what is' now, on 'what may eventually be'.
I don't think the point of any of the questions was practical applications. I think they were supposed to be theoretical... the questions were intended to make the students THINK. I got the impression that the course was intended to teach the students to think about causes and effects. They were supposed to learn about thinking, not learn about how to do a specific task. The point is that in the future, and now, they will be prepared to think about how to address problems and create solutions. That will be the practical skill... knowing how to think.
---