Except that you are introducing an added level of complexity with the AI system. Control systems rely on simplicity. Simple feedback loops and logic tests. This "AI" system is more complex than that. A single system designed to provide not only error detection but suggestions on corrective courses of action
But please feel free to fill me in on these facts and content I seem to be ignoring that you are so intimately familiar with.
I guess my point was what happens if the "AI" system fails but that failure is not obvious. For example, if it returns incorrect failure information, that if acted upon would cause a real failure.
I can't say I'm really intimidated by it. And ignorance? Hardly. I just try to play as far out in front as possible.
Why would someone pay for a work for hire that could then be used by their competetor for free? Why would a drug company even exist if they could not sell their drugs? Why pay hundreds of millions of dollars on research and regulatory compliance? I've worked with drug companies before, the cost imposed by FDA regulations is insane. Why bother?
And I'm not saying that the current IP laws are screwed up. I don't think software patents are good. I think copyrights should expire after a time. But to say that every work should instantly become public domain is just insane. I believe the creator of the work should have the right to DECIDE if they want to sell it or give it away.
So they can have it and you can't get it (although I'm not sure what you would do with software that analyzes GPR data) even if you want to pay for it?
I write software for a living actually.
You communist types think that just because I put effort into the creation of something, that you are entitled to it. Why should I work to create something (software, book, painting, whatever) and not be able to profit from it if I choose, but I have to pay for someone to fix my car because they choose to charge for their service?
How is his right to privacy any different than someone else's right to their own creations? He essentially said that artists have no rights to their own works.
Ok, release your (unredacted) credit report, SSN, driver license number, and birth certificate into the public domain. All of your emails too. I'm sure I could find some value in it, and benifit from it. I'm sure many others in the entire rest of the world could too.
What do you do for a living? I'm sure some of the rest of the world would benifit from whatever it is, so you'll be doing that for free now too.
Oh wait, now we are talking about YOUR individual rights. It's different when it's YOUR rights being toss aside for the greater good. My bad.
Security Risk? I'm still trying to figure out how someone would consider them "critical".
For a browser, wouldn't critical features be:
1.) Can display pages
Which is why I asked. Unfortunatly the article only referenced its hardness. That's not a very good measure for glass, especially glass doped with a highly radioactive material.
The problem is not how hard glass is, but how brittle it is. Normal glass is harder than most metals (steel, for example) but it is very brittle, and chips/breaks easily. Concrete isn't exactly immune to this either, while we are on the subject.
So hurray! It's hard enough to survive a journey though the ass of an RIAA lawyer, but will it shatter into a trillion radioactive pieces if some bozo drop's it?
Read the referenced article about the airports. The FCC stated, clearly, that only they can regulate the use of unlicensed spectrum. This VOIDS ANY RULES OR CONTRACTUAL AGREEMENTS that would prevent the users from using the WiFi AP's. You cannot override a FCC regulation with a contract.
Or maybe this is just a list of stories that didn't make news for legit reasons, but these people have decided that they know what is best for us because they are, of course, superior members of academia, and have deemed these stories important enough that it was *obvious* that we where deceived by those fascist news organizations bent on world domination...
Now days there is only one reason most of these journals are so expensive: Money for the publisher and a Tax Deduction for the subscriber. Peer review will not die if the publications where open, on the contrary: I'm sure many scientists would step up to review and attempt to replicate results if they fell within their own field of research.
Will it? Would filling out a short form when saving a file take up that much time? What about auto-indexing? One would have to assume that the system would be smart enough to be able to read documents and create indexes for those? Sure, it wouldn't work very well for images and audio files, but for 90% of what most users and businesses use everyday, it would.
I think it is worth the cost (as long as it is reasonably well implimented). I'd love to see this at the enterprise level. I can't tell you how many of my clients boast that they have X terabytes of storage on but when I ask them for the install instructions for something, I just get that deer-in-headlights look. Unfortunatly, storing data in an organized fashion takes more discipline than most companies can muster. Then there are the IT departments who see the 26 letter alphabet as a personal challenge when it comes to mapping drives for users.
I believe offloading the "where" to the OS so that the user can find the "what" they need to do their jobs will benifit businesses greatly.
Re:Arrogance=Ignorance
on
Port-A-Nuke
·
· Score: 1
All you 9/11 experts seem to be missing the "etc" in that list. Etc is short for Etcetera, just so you know. So yes, he did include the involved contries in that list, just not explicitly. I thought most people knew this already.
You are also missing the fact that he is not implying that they (the countries explicitly listed) had anything to do with 9/11. He is implying that the countries of the Middle East cannot be trusted and using 9/11 as an example of that assertion.
Guess not.
Slashdot Mirror
Except that you are introducing an added level of complexity with the AI system. Control systems rely on simplicity. Simple feedback loops and logic tests. This "AI" system is more complex than that. A single system designed to provide not only error detection but suggestions on corrective courses of action
But please feel free to fill me in on these facts and content I seem to be ignoring that you are so intimately familiar with.
I thought not anonymous one.
I guess my point was what happens if the "AI" system fails but that failure is not obvious. For example, if it returns incorrect failure information, that if acted upon would cause a real failure. I can't say I'm really intimidated by it. And ignorance? Hardly. I just try to play as far out in front as possible.
..in all seriousness, what happens if the AI system malfunctions?
Why would someone pay for a work for hire that could then be used by their competetor for free? Why would a drug company even exist if they could not sell their drugs? Why pay hundreds of millions of dollars on research and regulatory compliance? I've worked with drug companies before, the cost imposed by FDA regulations is insane. Why bother?
If it is done only as a work for hire, then the person who pays for it is the only person who gets it.
And I'm not saying that the current IP laws are screwed up. I don't think software patents are good. I think copyrights should expire after a time. But to say that every work should instantly become public domain is just insane. I believe the creator of the work should have the right to DECIDE if they want to sell it or give it away.
So they can have it and you can't get it (although I'm not sure what you would do with software that analyzes GPR data) even if you want to pay for it?
I write software for a living actually. You communist types think that just because I put effort into the creation of something, that you are entitled to it. Why should I work to create something (software, book, painting, whatever) and not be able to profit from it if I choose, but I have to pay for someone to fix my car because they choose to charge for their service?
How is his right to privacy any different than someone else's right to their own creations? He essentially said that artists have no rights to their own works.
Ok, release your (unredacted) credit report, SSN, driver license number, and birth certificate into the public domain. All of your emails too. I'm sure I could find some value in it, and benifit from it. I'm sure many others in the entire rest of the world could too.
What do you do for a living? I'm sure some of the rest of the world would benifit from whatever it is, so you'll be doing that for free now too.
Oh wait, now we are talking about YOUR individual rights. It's different when it's YOUR rights being toss aside for the greater good. My bad.
So authors should be forced to write books, but unable to be compensated for it?
So publishers and authors should not be protected, or compensated for their work?
A denial of what service? Your inaliable right to Copy-Paste-Repeate? Your God given right to duplicate copyrighted works?
/. may not like it, Google has to protect the copyright of the books in its search, or not offer them at all.
Even though most of
Take your pick:
Google offers book searching with DRM
Google does not offer book searching
Security Risk? I'm still trying to figure out how someone would consider them "critical". For a browser, wouldn't critical features be: 1.) Can display pages
I didn't even know the Seattle Weekly wrote software.
Welcome to my world. Don't be too upset, as Linux gets more and more popular, it's inevitable. EvilSS MCSE, MCSD.
Which is why I asked. Unfortunatly the article only referenced its hardness. That's not a very good measure for glass, especially glass doped with a highly radioactive material.
The problem is not how hard glass is, but how brittle it is. Normal glass is harder than most metals (steel, for example) but it is very brittle, and chips/breaks easily. Concrete isn't exactly immune to this either, while we are on the subject. So hurray! It's hard enough to survive a journey though the ass of an RIAA lawyer, but will it shatter into a trillion radioactive pieces if some bozo drop's it?
Read the referenced article about the airports. The FCC stated, clearly, that only they can regulate the use of unlicensed spectrum. This VOIDS ANY RULES OR CONTRACTUAL AGREEMENTS that would prevent the users from using the WiFi AP's. You cannot override a FCC regulation with a contract.
Or maybe this is just a list of stories that didn't make news for legit reasons, but these people have decided that they know what is best for us because they are, of course, superior members of academia, and have deemed these stories important enough that it was *obvious* that we where deceived by those fascist news organizations bent on world domination...
Now days there is only one reason most of these journals are so expensive: Money for the publisher and a Tax Deduction for the subscriber. Peer review will not die if the publications where open, on the contrary: I'm sure many scientists would step up to review and attempt to replicate results if they fell within their own field of research.
Will it? Would filling out a short form when saving a file take up that much time? What about auto-indexing? One would have to assume that the system would be smart enough to be able to read documents and create indexes for those? Sure, it wouldn't work very well for images and audio files, but for 90% of what most users and businesses use everyday, it would.
I think it is worth the cost (as long as it is reasonably well implimented). I'd love to see this at the enterprise level. I can't tell you how many of my clients boast that they have X terabytes of storage on but when I ask them for the install instructions for something, I just get that deer-in-headlights look. Unfortunatly, storing data in an organized fashion takes more discipline than most companies can muster. Then there are the IT departments who see the 26 letter alphabet as a personal challenge when it comes to mapping drives for users. I believe offloading the "where" to the OS so that the user can find the "what" they need to do their jobs will benifit businesses greatly.
All you 9/11 experts seem to be missing the "etc" in that list. Etc is short for Etcetera, just so you know. So yes, he did include the involved contries in that list, just not explicitly. I thought most people knew this already. You are also missing the fact that he is not implying that they (the countries explicitly listed) had anything to do with 9/11. He is implying that the countries of the Middle East cannot be trusted and using 9/11 as an example of that assertion. Guess not.
We don't have to fly it home, we just need to fly to it. Then blow it up. As Isreal, they can tell you all about blowing up reactors.