The problem is lobbying, or "corruption" as it is called in other parts of the world. It is almost impossible to make disappear but one can at least try to make it illegal.
Support Lawrence Lessig's Change Congress movement.
There are also laws about opt-in and opt-out, about the forced sell of several products in a pack instead of one, etc... I am sure it would be easier and safer in EU to play by the rules...
If MS is going to buy 50% of Yahoo shares to stockholders directly, be sure that at the end the stock price will be far higher than two times the current price. Also you know MS, it would not be friendly if it was not in its best interest.
The article refers to this as a 'Graphics Turing Test': 'a computer can be considered intelligent if it can create an artificial world capable of fooling a person into believing it is the real thing. That's just nonsense. Photorealism => AI ? How so ?
The government is overstepping its Constitutional bounds, and it needs to stop. We have to be careful that we do not lose our identity as a country of freedom via our efforts to protect that freedom. I am making assumptions there but : it could help to attach more importance to a candidate's attachment to individual freedoms than to his/her religiousness and conservativeness.
And in this case, I think it's somewhat unfair to judge Microsoft too harshly for wanting to game the system any way they could- what company wouldn't have done in their position? Any company willing to make a little less bucks to make the world a better place ? I know that cynicism is fashionable nowadays but I feel tiring to see everyone assume that everybody is only acting in his/her self-interest without giving a damn to others. In most companies, there are people with enough influence to make the company bend toward one stance or the other. If these people have an ethical mindset, the company's stances will be more ethical.
Microsoft could have considered that such a corruption was unethical, it was not a life or death situation for them. (No, it was not). They have chosen a course of action, an unethical one that they perceive as a money-making one. Why would it be unfair to judge them on that ? Why would it be unfair to point that Microsoft products come from an unethical company ? Don't you think that it is productive to ask a company (the most powerful software company of the planet) to act toward general good ?
Some structures like governmental bodies are designed to resist such attacks to a certain extent. Contrary to what it seems, it is complicated to tamper with every international ISO committee. Their openness was supposed to be balanced by their number. But Microsoft has devoted hundreds of people in many countries for this operation. Until recently, the cost of such a tampering (both financial and PR cost) would have been too huge for any company to buy a standard. Microsoft however has some particularities : A huge cash amount, an ability to make money out of standards lock-ups and a PR oriented toward final consumers that don't really care about what is happening behind the scene.
I really think this is a first in the ISO history.
China could soon wield on antitrust matters
That's relatively good news. At first I read "China could soon wield on antimatter thrusts". That's a relief...
The timetable I am using is my life expectancy. I compare the pace of this R&D compared to the pace of R&D during the cold war and the fact that Russians have been autonomously docking for ages IIRC. It costs too much compared to what an industrial effort could bring (totally subjective, I admit, but I doubt the NASA is a champion of cost-effectiveness)
All of this because corporate money controls US politics. It is called corruption in some places, lobbying in US. If you don't like it, spread the word about Lawrence Lessig's Change Congress movements and ask your representative his/her position on this issue.
Politics is the way it is because of fundamental human behavior - greed, ambition, and apathy. No "series of tubes" will change that. Yeah, I mean it doesn't change anything that an information takes 100 ms to cross the country or 10 days. It doesn't change anything that anyone can search in news archives freely and in the blink of an eye.
The former makes it possible to have a less centralized government, the latter makes a transparency policy possible and cost-effective. Lobbyism is called corruption in other countries. It is not an inevitable flaw of any political system, it is a correctable flaw of the US political system. Lessig tries to debug that, using technologies that could dramatically reduce the costs of such a campaign. I, for one, welcome our overlords' cleaning effort.
How can scientists avoid talking about political agendas when most research funding comes from the political arena?
Here, corrected. A scientist is a person like any one else, s/he can talk about politics, religion, s/he wants to get money and honors. But when a scientist talks about science s/he must not mix it with other stuff. When Einstein talks about relativity, he talked about particles and space-time, he was not trying to make a case about Aryan physics or Jewish physics (I'm not trying to be provocative, the theory of relativity was really despised by some German physicists because it came from a Jew). But when he talks about world politics (in The World as I See It), he doesn't try to make believe that his opinions have a scientific ground and there he talks about all that he thinks of militarism and nationalism.
A mix of science and politics should only be viewed as politics. That's what the audience needs to be educated about.
While I agree with you, I just have to point out that it's not all that hard...after all, the recent presidential election in Mexico was stolen the old-fashioned way. And we know this. In US, no one can know for sure.
I think it is fair game. It is not fraudulent in that the goal is a fair use. The day tracking becomes optional, this fraudulent input won't be necessary any more.
Slashdot Mirror
They'll get better. They always do.
The problem is lobbying, or "corruption" as it is called in other parts of the world. It is almost impossible to make disappear but one can at least try to make it illegal.
Support Lawrence Lessig's Change Congress movement.
There are also laws about opt-in and opt-out, about the forced sell of several products in a pack instead of one, etc... I am sure it would be easier and safer in EU to play by the rules...
If MS is going to buy 50% of Yahoo shares to stockholders directly, be sure that at the end the stock price will be far higher than two times the current price. Also you know MS, it would not be friendly if it was not in its best interest.
You mean that gaining money through blogging means it has to be stressful like a real work ? really I'm shocked, I thought it was free money !
... whatever. Give me my dose.
Microsoft could have considered that such a corruption was unethical, it was not a life or death situation for them. (No, it was not). They have chosen a course of action, an unethical one that they perceive as a money-making one. Why would it be unfair to judge them on that ? Why would it be unfair to point that Microsoft products come from an unethical company ? Don't you think that it is productive to ask a company (the most powerful software company of the planet) to act toward general good ?
Don't click this link, it is malicious.
Now that Tor exists, is popular and quite fast, what do we need freenet for ?
Some structures like governmental bodies are designed to resist such attacks to a certain extent. Contrary to what it seems, it is complicated to tamper with every international ISO committee. Their openness was supposed to be balanced by their number. But Microsoft has devoted hundreds of people in many countries for this operation. Until recently, the cost of such a tampering (both financial and PR cost) would have been too huge for any company to buy a standard. Microsoft however has some particularities : A huge cash amount, an ability to make money out of standards lock-ups and a PR oriented toward final consumers that don't really care about what is happening behind the scene.
I really think this is a first in the ISO history.
That's relatively good news. At first I read "China could soon wield on antimatter thrusts". That's a relief...
The timetable I am using is my life expectancy. I compare the pace of this R&D compared to the pace of R&D during the cold war and the fact that Russians have been autonomously docking for ages IIRC. It costs too much compared to what an industrial effort could bring (totally subjective, I admit, but I doubt the NASA is a champion of cost-effectiveness)
... I feel like it happens quite late, quite slowly, costs too much and still is underfunded.
All of this because corporate money controls US politics. It is called corruption in some places, lobbying in US. If you don't like it, spread the word about Lawrence Lessig's Change Congress movements and ask your representative his/her position on this issue.
All of this would not happen if Apple fanboys had a country of their own...
The former makes it possible to have a less centralized government, the latter makes a transparency policy possible and cost-effective. Lobbyism is called corruption in other countries. It is not an inevitable flaw of any political system, it is a correctable flaw of the US political system. Lessig tries to debug that, using technologies that could dramatically reduce the costs of such a campaign. I, for one, welcome our overlords' cleaning effort.
In Soviet Russia they say that because Americans were so poor mathematicians, they had to invent the computer...
It was eight months ago. The crowd he delivered his statement to doesn't have that kind of attention span.
Here, corrected. A scientist is a person like any one else, s/he can talk about politics, religion, s/he wants to get money and honors. But when a scientist talks about science s/he must not mix it with other stuff. When Einstein talks about relativity, he talked about particles and space-time, he was not trying to make a case about Aryan physics or Jewish physics (I'm not trying to be provocative, the theory of relativity was really despised by some German physicists because it came from a Jew). But when he talks about world politics (in The World as I See It), he doesn't try to make believe that his opinions have a scientific ground and there he talks about all that he thinks of militarism and nationalism.
A mix of science and politics should only be viewed as politics. That's what the audience needs to be educated about.
The observer is a lie !
It is bad.
I think it is fair game. It is not fraudulent in that the goal is a fair use. The day tracking becomes optional, this fraudulent input won't be necessary any more.