Artificial stupid to compete against actual stupid? We will win OR tie if the A.I. wants to simulate itself...
(Seriously, this is good stuff; especially if they are deeply simulating neurons, in my state we can only do a few hundred down with crazy details like ion flow simulation.)
Make lots of money with a lot less development! Wish list:
Single player (or just call it slashdot player) -Upgraded old engine, still 2D. 3D is a waste of resources for a top-down game. If you watch for variations in character animation then you need help! -double or triple size the map limits -400 unit limits -more units and buildings! fill those empty boxes! -a few new tilesets -1024x768, don't care about graphics enhancement -more unit sounds which play randomly this time (double it, some are dull after 10 years) -don't get stuck walking in between buildings... -larger transports -force fields (warcraft 2 walls) which consume resources when running, especially when hit. -human booster shots are replaced with something better (bloodlust?) -no critters -heroes remain the way they are in SC! please! -herd mode: like patrol but units follow the others who are moving to attack -patrol mode lets you draw a simple path -AI that doesn't give up when I start killing cpus -AI that builds defenses when it gets low on money -AI selectable mode where it can't move everything in parallel. -AI selectable mode where teams of computers fight each other-- so you can fight 8 of them -a way to survive the start of a 1 vs 5+ cpu game (I rarely make it past the 1st few attacks with 4 cpus)
Multiplayer: -10 player games -No fighting until you reach a threshold -Limiting of attack units, no limit on building -Pooled Resource Team mode -limited "bullet time" to slowdown game speed
Unrealistic Wishes: -python scripting of your units loaded from files you created allowing geeks or motivate players to learn programming. Lets you trigger automatic behavior, giving the player the ability to act more like the cpu does. Optional allow for multiplayer. -online contests between players where they submit their scripts and just watch- like computers playing chess against each other (limited market, but educational.) -How about a Java port so I can run it in 50 years?? (emulators will probably become an IP crime and your telescreen will enforce it) -Port it to the Nintendo Wii (will strengthen your arm...) -nice continuation of storyline -use h.263 video (hey some people have old computers just for other players) -charge $100 because I'd pay double that for something as good and long lasting as starcraft -surrender causes mass suicide -no subscription fee -allow open battlenet back -open source the OLD SC (like others do) when the new one comes out (because it will probably mess it up so the rest of us can develop the old one)
University IT staff are almost all dork sysadmins. They handle the unknown almost superstitiously just a bit more advanced than using lucky charms to aid them. When something like this happens they freak and pull out their "lucky" conviction charm.
1) Food labels are not as 'objective' as you may think.
2) Government standards definition is common and has been abused at certain times; however, they can only go so far with definitions. Besides government changes to reflect the public in the larger picture. Privately defined stuff can not be uniform between parties- We can't even get SONY to adhere to the industry defined CD audio standard. Film,TV,Video will be worse. It is FOR THE PUBLIC and the public has ZERO influence on private organizations except when they threaten or attack them using government. Vote with your $ is a false dilemma and over simplification as well as undemocratic and without equality.
3) It is never direct censorship; it could be a form of indirect very weak censorship. We have that today with LAWS in some places to punish vendors for not enforcing the pathetic privately defined ratings we have today. So your kid can't see a R film without an adult and its R because Viacom does not like something about it.
3.5) Notice my focus of outrage. Groups of strangers are deciding the scale and rating "free speech" and I and most the public have ZERO influence. The purpose of publically run organizations is public accountability (which is why the US federal government is severely broken.) Organizations reflect their management -- thats biz 101 -- the ONLY system involved is the process for hiring and firing management, the rest is the long-term responsibility of those who run that system. For government/public run, the system is the voting/election process and the rest is the responsibility of the VOTERS who use that system. The US problem is not only the core system of promotion (voting/election) is in BAD shape but PRIMARILY the voters are to blame. Not voting IS a vote. People get the government they deserve. I don't mean to get too abstract, but that is how it works.
4) NO ENFORCEMENT except on producers for the use of a rating system. The POINT is that busy parents can enforce their custom rules on their kids-- its hard enough to enforce it but to have to preview everything beforehand takes too much time. Often decent films only have 1 or 2 scenes that are objectionable.
Personally, I don't care about "bad" words-- I wish everybody took the power away by using those words. "bad" words is simply childish in itself. Some rated R films are fine except for a few words and yet if my kid tried to see it alone they'd get rejected (its not like everybody doesn't know what those words are by their teens.)
MOST libertarians I meet are actually embarrassed republicans who either "changed" or even refuse to admit they openly professed to being republicans a few years ago.
Microsoft had no presence in D.C. until they were under threat of anti trust action.
Microsoft was screwing the market for years without hardly any government support of that monopoly's unfair, unethical "competition." I'm sure there is plenty of proof around the world of overly deregulated markets doing lots of harm.
The ONLY way to stop this corruption of government is to have economic anarchism, so then the motives don't exist. EXCEPT then other areas that government protects (like stopping slaves labor) become the big problems in the market so then improper influence in government will be still sought. Government will always be having to fight off corruption (which is largely economic in nature) and will not always be victorious against it.
The accrual of power is a MAJOR problem in humans. This is a long long long standing problem with no real solutions as of yet. The solution has to encompass all areas not just government structure; which today should be obvious as corporations have become the dominant institutions of our time.
A centrist is like agreeing that 2+2=5 because one side says its 4 and the other says its 6.
I've dealt with centrists simply by taking the extreme position knowing their vote would be for what I wanted, usually my supporters wouldn't go as far as I do so I'd win majority. Child's play.
The democrats are often cowardly trying to be centrist which is why they lose the big fights that require spine and succeed in winning tiny fights that do not matter Sadly, when they take a centrist position the real centrists then move right of center. Even worse is when the democrats are out smarted by the republicans purposely over shooting their targets, which has been done so much its a normal part of their playbook.
The political diversity in the USA is weak and the representational diversity is almost non-existent. Despotism is far off but its possible it will really suck for a century before consensus forms that despotism has taken over. Despotism is the end point for all governments (see ben franklin.)
Blaming capitalism is just blaming human nature and the failure of government to define the ideal battle field on which the barbaric "survival of the fittest" game is waged. Hey, humans are a pack of almost-rabid animals and that is why capitalism works so well.
The reason corporatism (where the USA is headed) is so evil is because it corrupts the government's job to define and referee the game. Then you have wars for commerce for example... Or you kill foreign leaders who are bad for business..
Perhaps I should have cleverly twisted the wording into slashdot-speak so you people don't irrationally rush to judgment?
An open standard which is mandated by government for content classification allowing for realtime automated filtering based on user defined rules to replace the multiple inconsistent proprietary systems.
That more slash-speak for you?
You make general assumptions that you have no bases to make. I do not even own a TV!
I didn't say the government should tell you what is appropriate! Right NOW we have corporations (or their funded puppets) deciding what is appropriate when they use their meaningless film or TV ratings (ESRB is best but could be better.) I said government should mandate the use of the same ratings scale for all media. I also said government should define it and while I was vague, define can mean almost anything! government DEFINES a great deal of your life. Wake up! you think NGOs, corporations, civilized commerce, etc. exist purely without government??
There is a serious time problem for parents to fully supervise the media consumption of their kids. It is not realistic to just tell people to do some idealistic extreme, because they will not. It is NOT unreasonable to provide summary information to parents in a structured way so that they can leverage technology to save them time (which they may not have.)
Food labels contain MORE than just ingredients that may kill some people. Its still a valid comparison. Yes literal word or nudity isn't the only problem. There is subjective stuff which I think can reasonably be classified; furthermore, who said that subjective things had to follow the same rigid rules and labeling? Wired-TV of the future could tie shows to 3rd party services of your choice which provide subjective ratings. The ratings system would be standard, subjective decisions could be made by any number of sources... Do I have to come up with all the ideas?
I also realize how the moderation system on slashdot works which is why I rarely bother to post things that go against the norm.
Its just a rating system NOT censorship, NOT 1984.
profanity whatever... Yes, I want some rating scale conformity not 3 different ratings systems.
Just WHAT IS "Suggestive Themes"?? Is that sex,drug,murder...? Saying sexual innuendo would be more informative.
Its subjective and debatable and in case YOU didn't know, food labels are also subjective-- Yellow 5 isn't a vitamin and artificial flavors listings could take up a page (and you do not want to know...)
The government need not make the list; although, it shouldn't be that difficult to setup some panel (well maybe when we have less despotism.) The government mandates the system which can be defined by some other group if you are so sure it is so defunct it can't handle such a simple problem. (Me, I think industry largely runs the US government so then you should be largely happy with the results.)
IS NOT using military created tech and not wanting linux used by the military. To be a hypocrite he would have to use linux in a similar way while condemning military use of linux.
If you don't like the position that is one thing but adding to the confusion over what a hypocrite is irresponsible.
Parents are responsible but its not just solely them children are also raised by their environment. Unless your children are isolated from their society in a 'cave' they are also being raised by the society they live in (which includes their peers.)
WE NEED A REAL RATING SYSTEM so parents can realistically exercise their parental rights.
I should be able to set my TV, computer, and consoles with detailed instructions on exactly what I will allow shown. I don't care who applies ratings but I do think federal government is needed to define and require a smarter ratings scale.
A good detailed rating system in some centralized online database would probably work out quite well (probably work better than wikipedia.)
Unfortunately, the FCC didn't take the opportunity to make digital TV support a form of 'bleeping', frame-level blanking or even a standard detailed realistic rating scale for the whole show...
Broad ratings are as stupid as labeling fast food as "healthy","mildly unhealthy", "unhealthy..." There is NO VALID reason we can not label media in a similar way we label our FOOD. We should list the profanity used in an album on the album cover.
Sure, if you label it kids can read it out of context. Big Deal! Kids SEE written profanity and don't know its profane, later they still don't know the meaning, after that they know the profanity and the only point in limiting exposure is to try to prevent them from developing habitual use of it. You have to be an idiot parent to think your kid isn't exposed to written profanity before they can read it.
We don't know most the junk on our food labels but if we have to avoid something we look for it by name on the label.
Until the government imposed a labeling system on food we didn't really have one and it would have totally sucked if the industry was pushed into defining it, taking a never ending string of lawsuits to get each ingredient listed after it hurt some group of people.
Not flawless, but the same universal rating system could be used on film,movie,games and even webpages. Food labels are not perfect either.
I wasn't thinking in terms of chemical honey, I was thinking of impurities in the honey. Could be changes in the hive makeup as well. Depends on what it takes to have it identify as honey or not. Or on the other side, what it takes to make it similar to something that was bred into critters to avoid it.
There is this thing called Specialization... We have multiple sciences which come into the GW theories and they must collaborate and build upon each other to get anywhere at all. The rest of us listen to them or just use the technology which results from others listening to them. Even when they are "wrong" many times they were close enough for results. (E=mc**)
The place for laymen is trying to figure out credibility not the field of expertise. I suspect one PR tactic is exactly this- fool people into trying to think on par with the experts by using oversimplification and/or misinformation (which are easily distorted) so then conclusions can be guided. Similar to making somebody think it was their idea.
I know how researchers manage to circumvent this "censorship" - researchers are not stupid (well some don't learn.) Grant writing is a unique kind of ass kissing. Theories can be attacked without a car bomb approach. A direct assault on a heavily built-up theory always meets with great resistance and looks arrogant as well. Industry shrills love to do largely laymen-level attacks citing a few real bits which may or may not be applied in context. Even if NOT published, if they are even remotely legit they post their rejected papers somewhere. The shrills have no papers just layman-level position papers and out write political hit-pieces.
A academic journals don't accept layman summaries even if they agree with it (that junk is for Popular Science.)
One thing I often see mentioned is the grant money. A lot of money was to determine global warming, a lot was to determine if we impact it. The people who determine if it happened are DONE. A lot say humans caused it and since a global consensus is now building on that issue, funding for further proof will diminish. The people doing it for the money will see their cash cow leaving and have to then employ FUD to keep the money coming in (and they can't just work slowly because then other people will make them look bad and they lose funding that way.)
So, if it is true and is just a large money grabbing cabal of academics THEN we shall see them starting to change sides on the debate and argue for the need for more funding so we can prove humans are the cause of GW. If we don't see that, then we know that wasn't their main motive. Few (none?) are getting rich and retiring on this stuff... They will have to work on other research and to some extent their prestige from this stuff will impact their ability to secure funding when overall funding in the area is in decline.
I see no sign of 'vast' corruption or conspiracy or any cabal - it would have to be the biggest one in the history of science. Besides, there are plenty of other reasons to stop O.I.L.
I suspect your understanding communism is lower than mine.
Colonists "pointed to social injustice and called for a revolution as a cure. But all they really wanted was to run the country." (please read Animal Farm for a proper abstraction)
Government takes every situation as an opportunity to expand its own power, its the nature of all government. The republic of the USA attempted to provide government oversight by a properly informed courageous public (we the people are accountable and our government reflects us.)
Environmental problems HAVE been getting worse ALREADY under your ideal status quo. Its to the point it is finally so bad that people are now taking notice. As often is the case; IMHO, it is too late to repair it by the time the majority even spots the problem (this is why its so important people are 'properly informed' and also a central argument for non-democratic systems.)
Simply because there is a crisis and some want to exploit it does not mean the crisis does not exist.
There is a logical limitation to equal freedom for all: shared resources must be managed to prevent starvation, deadlocks, damage, etc. (CS problems exist outside the computer, wish solutions were that easy..)
Change is life. YOU can't control the world to prevent the need for adaptations. (That is your real problem isn't it?) Sure people create false conditions (Iraq WMD...) but once change happens you cant go back in time; you must eventually adapt.
As far as the usual stupid attacks such as hypocracy, they are simple adhom attacks that only make the people using them look bad (adhom ex: If abortion is bad, then killing abortion Dr.s IS hypocracy but that has zero to do with the abortion issue itself.)
The only solution is a massive change in the world- just changing yourself is not enough nor is it realistically possible. I can't waste time online without power, computer, internet - none are 'green'(please dont insert childish whit here.)
I read a Pentagon study years ago not only saying they believe global warming to be possible but the purpose of the study was to know how it could be used as a geopolitical weapon. Now if say China for example, was purposely trying to create the affect because their people predicted it would eventually send the USA into the ice age- would that be enough to act?
The past rulings indicate and its rather clear that the 5th amendment only applies if you hurt yourself with the information disclosed. There is a "Fisher Test" of requirements to get around the 5th: 1) evidence exists 2) the person has a key for getting/finding the evidence 3) producing the key does not link the evidence to the person (aka authentication) Fisher v US
Its like you have evidence in your safe but so do other people, so they can force you to open the safe despite the 5th- is my understanding of the ruling. Where it gets really tricky is when they offer immunity to get around the 5th as a setup to tie the person into some other crime they trump up from that evidence.
Biometrics are another issue that I'm not sure they have rulings supporting. USA vs Dioniso has "The Fourth Amendment provides no protection for what "a person knowingly exposes to the public, even in his own home or office . . .." 351? They rule that publically available information can not be hidden later on is my understanding and the example given was a persons' face. To me this indicates its possible that biometrics being public (fingerprint) could be taken from you with no 5th amendment protection. Naturally, the police can attack your security any way their please without your help and can lift your biometrics in many ways without going threw the court and I suspect when that situation is raised they possibly will extend the line of thought started on this case.
It depends. I was somewhat like that kid myself. I was finally vindicated with the teacher apologizing to me towards the end of school. While the experience stays with me to this day-- that short moment of vindication doesn't seem to mean that much to me in retrospective... I'm sure it altered my perception of authority figures, but I had determined they were fallible in so many ways yet unknown to me at the time.
I would say it matters that the kid know they are correct, but beyond that it doesn't probably do a whole lot-- as the damage has already been done. It would be better to correct the teacher ASAP so it doesn't amount to a long period of such treatment, which has more impact.
Mine was odd because I had a NUN, who spent the rest of the time treating me the SAME WAY except then it was all about the fact I would not forgive her and I would go to hell if I didn't learn to forgive her. (same treatment except then it was a single issue - and in private - so I was still wrong in the eyes of my peers; she couldn't undermine her infallibility or ability to instill fear in students.)
Good point; however, its also possible that the honey has just past a threshold that its no longer "honey" to other creatures.
If you are correct then there is a virtually infinite number ways it could have been altered in the past which influenced evolution but still could have nothing to do with what happened THIS TIME (.)
If you are NOT correct, then it has nothing to do with evolution and its simply different in a way that other creatures do not sense it as honey any longer.
There is a huge propaganda (AKA PR) machine for microsoft powerful enough to keep most users (>50%) on windows even if microsoft stopped upgrading and kept us at windows 98.
Its understandable that anybody using alternatives has to explain or promote their alternatives because:
A) the ignorant ask them WHY
B) their competence is questioned (it must be the best if everybody uses it right??)
C) little is reported unless its negative(free) except for paying customers (advertisers or large chunk of the readers)
D) a small user base hurts any platform and increases how often they have to put up with A and B
What we should be highlighting is the horrible hardware vendors who give next to no help and often write poor quality drivers in general. This problem is a windows issue as well.
IBM had a team active and working on the computer during the chess game, the exact details of their actions I wasn't able to find other than to know over a dozen engineers were tinkering with the computer during the game. IBM took the good news and ran with it never again having the GUTS to a rematch with fair preconditions; largely because they fear losing. It is like 'winning' a Turing Test; just winning it once doesn't really prove anything (as has been shown already.)
A fair match wouldn't involve a team of humans, who essentially are helping the computer 'think' thru the game. Besides, the computer shouldn't be able to use brute force to aid its low intelligence because its beside the whole point. It shouldn't require any help other than I/O. Simply for the fact its the only way to prove its not just some calculator to aid ibm employees to victory.
Not relevant, but rather than mod you down I decided to forgo my moderator power and reply.
PR is just a nice term for Propaganda and with the money and their adaptation to the net I serious wonder what kind of work they are out there doing today in the 'information age.'
This sounds exactly like what an advertiser friend of mine says with some minor variations. He is 100% behind whatever Bush says. He now accepts the climate is changing (and only that.) Outside of us friends who know better--- he LIES to everybody with a surprisingly similar story to the parent post.
Its like the thing was some talking point memo (oh, he is a rather involved party member as well.) So I'd guess that post was either a pawn like my friend or directly connected to the PR war to stop any meaningful change.
Industry and the military probably are the biggest problem worldwide, not american cars or diet. Over population is the biggest problem nobody wants to address. A decent standard of living for everybody means only about 2 billion people worldwide; just because there are few/no starving down the street doesn't mean that we haven't already overpopulated the earth. Most people have a standard of living that wouldn't be acceptable to 1st world citizens.
Many people think we can terraform mars someday soon (50-100 yrs?) yet we couldn't possibly have impacted earth over the last 100+ years... seems like people need to consider the density of AIR and how small (90% @ 30,000ft) the atmosphere is.
Slashdot Mirror
>I tried, unless my memory is just failing.
Thats ok, my memory failed to contain Vista as well.
Artificial stupid to compete against actual stupid? We will win OR tie if the A.I. wants to simulate itself...
(Seriously, this is good stuff; especially if they are deeply simulating neurons, in my state we can only do a few hundred down with crazy details like ion flow simulation.)
Make lots of money with a lot less development!
Wish list:
Single player (or just call it slashdot player)
-Upgraded old engine, still 2D. 3D is a waste of resources for a top-down game. If you watch for variations in character animation then you need help!
-double or triple size the map limits
-400 unit limits
-more units and buildings! fill those empty boxes!
-a few new tilesets
-1024x768, don't care about graphics enhancement
-more unit sounds which play randomly this time (double it, some are dull after 10 years)
-don't get stuck walking in between buildings...
-larger transports
-force fields (warcraft 2 walls) which consume resources when running, especially when hit.
-human booster shots are replaced with something better (bloodlust?)
-no critters
-heroes remain the way they are in SC! please!
-herd mode: like patrol but units follow the others who are moving to attack
-patrol mode lets you draw a simple path
-AI that doesn't give up when I start killing cpus
-AI that builds defenses when it gets low on money
-AI selectable mode where it can't move everything in parallel.
-AI selectable mode where teams of computers fight each other-- so you can fight 8 of them
-a way to survive the start of a 1 vs 5+ cpu game (I rarely make it past the 1st few attacks with 4 cpus)
Multiplayer:
-10 player games
-No fighting until you reach a threshold
-Limiting of attack units, no limit on building
-Pooled Resource Team mode
-limited "bullet time" to slowdown game speed
Unrealistic Wishes:
-python scripting of your units loaded from files you created allowing geeks or motivate players to learn programming. Lets you trigger automatic behavior, giving the player the ability to act more like the cpu does. Optional allow for multiplayer.
-online contests between players where they submit their scripts and just watch- like computers playing chess against each other (limited market, but educational.)
-How about a Java port so I can run it in 50 years?? (emulators will probably become an IP crime and your telescreen will enforce it)
-Port it to the Nintendo Wii (will strengthen your arm...)
-nice continuation of storyline
-use h.263 video (hey some people have old computers just for other players)
-charge $100 because I'd pay double that for something as good and long lasting as starcraft
-surrender causes mass suicide
-no subscription fee
-allow open battlenet back
-open source the OLD SC (like others do) when the new one comes out (because it will probably mess it up so the rest of us can develop the old one)
University IT staff are almost all dork sysadmins. They handle the unknown almost superstitiously just a bit more advanced than using lucky charms to aid them. When something like this happens they freak and pull out their "lucky" conviction charm.
1) Food labels are not as 'objective' as you may think.
2) Government standards definition is common and has been abused at certain times; however, they can only go so far with definitions. Besides government changes to reflect the public in the larger picture. Privately defined stuff can not be uniform between parties- We can't even get SONY to adhere to the industry defined CD audio standard. Film,TV,Video will be worse. It is FOR THE PUBLIC and the public has ZERO influence on private organizations except when they threaten or attack them using government. Vote with your $ is a false dilemma and over simplification as well as undemocratic and without equality.
3) It is never direct censorship; it could be a form of indirect very weak censorship. We have that today with LAWS in some places to punish vendors for not enforcing the pathetic privately defined ratings we have today. So your kid can't see a R film without an adult and its R because Viacom does not like something about it.
3.5) Notice my focus of outrage. Groups of strangers are deciding the scale and rating "free speech" and I and most the public have ZERO influence. The purpose of publically run organizations is public accountability (which is why the US federal government is severely broken.) Organizations reflect their management -- thats biz 101 -- the ONLY system involved is the process for hiring and firing management, the rest is the long-term responsibility of those who run that system. For government/public run, the system is the voting/election process and the rest is the responsibility of the VOTERS who use that system. The US problem is not only the core system of promotion (voting/election) is in BAD shape but PRIMARILY the voters are to blame. Not voting IS a vote. People get the government they deserve. I don't mean to get too abstract, but that is how it works.
4) NO ENFORCEMENT except on producers for the use of a rating system. The POINT is that busy parents can enforce their custom rules on their kids-- its hard enough to enforce it but to have to preview everything beforehand takes too much time. Often decent films only have 1 or 2 scenes that are objectionable.
Personally, I don't care about "bad" words-- I wish everybody took the power away by using those words. "bad" words is simply childish in itself. Some rated R films are fine except for a few words and yet if my kid tried to see it alone they'd get rejected (its not like everybody doesn't know what those words are by their teens.)
Nice. correction:
Procedure[s] Properly Planned live forever!
MOST libertarians I meet are actually embarrassed republicans who either "changed" or even refuse to admit they openly professed to being republicans a few years ago.
Microsoft had no presence in D.C. until they were under threat of anti trust action.
Microsoft was screwing the market for years without hardly any government support of that monopoly's unfair, unethical "competition." I'm sure there is plenty of proof around the world of overly deregulated markets doing lots of harm.
The ONLY way to stop this corruption of government is to have economic anarchism, so then the motives don't exist. EXCEPT then other areas that government protects (like stopping slaves labor) become the big problems in the market so then improper influence in government will be still sought. Government will always be having to fight off corruption (which is largely economic in nature) and will not always be victorious against it.
The accrual of power is a MAJOR problem in humans. This is a long long long standing problem with no real solutions as of yet. The solution has to encompass all areas not just government structure; which today should be obvious as corporations have become the dominant institutions of our time.
A centrist is like agreeing that 2+2=5 because one side says its 4 and the other says its 6.
I've dealt with centrists simply by taking the extreme position knowing their vote would be for what I wanted, usually my supporters wouldn't go as far as I do so I'd win majority. Child's play.
The democrats are often cowardly trying to be centrist which is why they lose the big fights that require spine and succeed in winning tiny fights that do not matter Sadly, when they take a centrist position the real centrists then move right of center. Even worse is when the democrats are out smarted by the republicans purposely over shooting their targets, which has been done so much its a normal part of their playbook.
The political diversity in the USA is weak and the representational diversity is almost non-existent. Despotism is far off but its possible it will really suck for a century before consensus forms that despotism has taken over. Despotism is the end point for all governments (see ben franklin.)
Expand your political mind:
http://www.politicalcompass.oro/
Blaming capitalism is just blaming human nature and the failure of government to define the ideal battle field on which the barbaric "survival of the fittest" game is waged. Hey, humans are a pack of almost-rabid animals and that is why capitalism works so well.
The reason corporatism (where the USA is headed) is so evil is because it corrupts the government's job to define and referee the game. Then you have wars for commerce for example... Or you kill foreign leaders who are bad for business..
Perhaps I should have cleverly twisted the wording into slashdot-speak so you people don't irrationally rush to judgment?
An open standard which is mandated by government for content classification allowing for realtime automated filtering based on user defined rules to replace the multiple inconsistent proprietary systems.
That more slash-speak for you?
You make general assumptions that you have no bases to make. I do not even own a TV!
I didn't say the government should tell you what is appropriate! Right NOW we have corporations (or their funded puppets) deciding what is appropriate when they use their meaningless film or TV ratings (ESRB is best but could be better.) I said government should mandate the use of the same ratings scale for all media. I also said government should define it and while I was vague, define can mean almost anything! government DEFINES a great deal of your life. Wake up! you think NGOs, corporations, civilized commerce, etc. exist purely without government??
There is a serious time problem for parents to fully supervise the media consumption of their kids. It is not realistic to just tell people to do some idealistic extreme, because they will not. It is NOT unreasonable to provide summary information to parents in a structured way so that they can leverage technology to save them time (which they may not have.)
Food labels contain MORE than just ingredients that may kill some people. Its still a valid comparison. Yes literal word or nudity isn't the only problem. There is subjective stuff which I think can reasonably be classified; furthermore, who said that subjective things had to follow the same rigid rules and labeling? Wired-TV of the future could tie shows to 3rd party services of your choice which provide subjective ratings. The ratings system would be standard, subjective decisions could be made by any number of sources... Do I have to come up with all the ideas?
I also realize how the moderation system on slashdot works which is why I rarely bother to post things that go against the norm.
Its just a rating system NOT censorship, NOT 1984.
profanity whatever... Yes, I want some rating scale conformity not 3 different ratings systems.
Just WHAT IS "Suggestive Themes"??
Is that sex,drug,murder...? Saying sexual innuendo would be more informative.
Its subjective and debatable and in case YOU didn't know, food labels are also subjective-- Yellow 5 isn't a vitamin and artificial flavors listings could take up a page (and you do not want to know...)
The government need not make the list; although, it shouldn't be that difficult to setup some panel (well maybe when we have less despotism.) The government mandates the system which can be defined by some other group if you are so sure it is so defunct it can't handle such a simple problem. (Me, I think industry largely runs the US government so then you should be largely happy with the results.)
ESRB is a start its nothing like TV or film. They should be more like ESRB.
IS NOT using military created tech and not wanting linux used by the military.
To be a hypocrite he would have to use linux in a similar way while condemning military use of linux.
If you don't like the position that is one thing but adding to the confusion over what a hypocrite is irresponsible.
Parents are responsible but its not just solely them children are also raised by their environment. Unless your children are isolated from their society in a 'cave' they are also being raised by the society they live in (which includes their peers.)
WE NEED A REAL RATING SYSTEM so parents can realistically exercise their parental rights.
I should be able to set my TV, computer, and consoles with detailed instructions on exactly what I will allow shown. I don't care who applies ratings but I do think federal government is needed to define and require a smarter ratings scale.
A good detailed rating system in some centralized online database would probably work out quite well (probably work better than wikipedia.)
Unfortunately, the FCC didn't take the opportunity to make digital TV support a form of 'bleeping', frame-level blanking or even a standard detailed realistic rating scale for the whole show...
Broad ratings are as stupid as labeling fast food as "healthy","mildly unhealthy", "unhealthy..." There is NO VALID reason we can not label media in a similar way we label our FOOD. We should list the profanity used in an album on the album cover.
Sure, if you label it kids can read it out of context. Big Deal! Kids SEE written profanity and don't know its profane, later they still don't know the meaning, after that they know the profanity and the only point in limiting exposure is to try to prevent them from developing habitual use of it. You have to be an idiot parent to think your kid isn't exposed to written profanity before they can read it.
We don't know most the junk on our food labels but if we have to avoid something we look for it by name on the label.
Until the government imposed a labeling system on food we didn't really have one and it would have totally sucked if the industry was pushed into defining it, taking a never ending string of lawsuits to get each ingredient listed after it hurt some group of people.
Not flawless, but the same universal rating system could be used on film,movie,games and even webpages. Food labels are not perfect either.
I wasn't thinking in terms of chemical honey, I was thinking of impurities in the honey. Could be changes in the hive makeup as well. Depends on what it takes to have it identify as honey or not. Or on the other side, what it takes to make it similar to something that was bred into critters to avoid it.
There is this thing called Specialization...
We have multiple sciences which come into the GW theories and they must collaborate and build upon each other to get anywhere at all. The rest of us listen to them or just use the technology which results from others listening to them. Even when they are "wrong" many times they were close enough for results. (E=mc**)
The place for laymen is trying to figure out credibility not the field of expertise. I suspect one PR tactic is exactly this- fool people into trying to think on par with the experts by using oversimplification and/or misinformation (which are easily distorted) so then conclusions can be guided. Similar to making somebody think it was their idea.
I know how researchers manage to circumvent this "censorship" - researchers are not stupid (well some don't learn.) Grant writing is a unique kind of ass kissing. Theories can be attacked without a car bomb approach. A direct assault on a heavily built-up theory always meets with great resistance and looks arrogant as well. Industry shrills love to do largely laymen-level attacks citing a few real bits which may or may not be applied in context. Even if NOT published, if they are even remotely legit they post their rejected papers somewhere. The shrills have no papers just layman-level position papers and out write political hit-pieces.
A academic journals don't accept layman summaries even if they agree with it (that junk is for Popular Science.)
One thing I often see mentioned is the grant money. A lot of money was to determine global warming, a lot was to determine if we impact it. The people who determine if it happened are DONE. A lot say humans caused it and since a global consensus is now building on that issue, funding for further proof will diminish.
The people doing it for the money will see their cash cow leaving and have to then employ FUD to keep the money coming in (and they can't just work slowly because then other people will make them look bad and they lose funding that way.)
So, if it is true and is just a large money grabbing cabal of academics THEN we shall see them starting to change sides on the debate and argue for the need for more funding so we can prove humans are the cause of GW. If we don't see that, then we know that wasn't their main motive. Few (none?) are getting rich and retiring on this stuff... They will have to work on other research and to some extent their prestige from this stuff will impact their ability to secure funding when overall funding in the area is in decline.
I see no sign of 'vast' corruption or conspiracy or any cabal - it would have to be the biggest one in the history of science. Besides, there are plenty of other reasons to stop O.I.L.
The past rulings indicate and its rather clear that the 5th amendment only applies if you hurt yourself with the information disclosed. There is a "Fisher Test" of requirements to get around the 5th:
." 351?
1) evidence exists
2) the person has a key for getting/finding the evidence
3) producing the key does not link the evidence to the person (aka authentication)
Fisher v US
Its like you have evidence in your safe but so do other people, so they can force you to open the safe despite the 5th- is my understanding of the ruling. Where it gets really tricky is when they offer immunity to get around the 5th as a setup to tie the person into some other crime they trump up from that evidence.
Biometrics are another issue that I'm not sure they have rulings supporting. USA vs Dioniso has "The Fourth Amendment provides no protection for what "a person knowingly exposes to the public, even in his own home or office . . .
They rule that publically available information can not be hidden later on is my understanding and the example given was a persons' face. To me this indicates its possible that biometrics being public (fingerprint) could be taken from you with no 5th amendment protection. Naturally, the police can attack your security any way their please without your help and can lift your biometrics in many ways without going threw the court and I suspect when that situation is raised they possibly will extend the line of thought started on this case.
I am not a lawyer.
I just don't have time to waste going thru the points made and how they are wrong.
Somebody please point out his errors.
It depends. I was somewhat like that kid myself. I was finally vindicated with the teacher apologizing to me towards the end of school. While the experience stays with me to this day-- that short moment of vindication doesn't seem to mean that much to me in retrospective... I'm sure it altered my perception of authority figures, but I had determined they were fallible in so many ways yet unknown to me at the time.
I would say it matters that the kid know they are correct, but beyond that it doesn't probably do a whole lot-- as the damage has already been done. It would be better to correct the teacher ASAP so it doesn't amount to a long period of such treatment, which has more impact.
Mine was odd because I had a NUN, who spent the rest of the time treating me the SAME WAY except then it was all about the fact I would not forgive her and I would go to hell if I didn't learn to forgive her. (same treatment except then it was a single issue - and in private - so I was still wrong in the eyes of my peers; she couldn't undermine her infallibility or ability to instill fear in students.)
GTA needs to advertise more if they don't want to be the scapegoat.
Good point; however, its also possible that the honey has just past a threshold that its no longer "honey" to other creatures.
If you are correct then there is a virtually infinite number ways it could have been altered in the past which influenced evolution but still could have nothing to do with what happened THIS TIME (.)
If you are NOT correct, then it has nothing to do with evolution and its simply different in a way that other creatures do not sense it as honey any longer.
There is a huge propaganda (AKA PR) machine for microsoft powerful enough to keep most users (>50%) on windows even if microsoft stopped upgrading and kept us at windows 98.
Its understandable that anybody using alternatives has to explain or promote their alternatives because:
A) the ignorant ask them WHY
B) their competence is questioned (it must be the best if everybody uses it right??)
C) little is reported unless its negative(free) except for paying customers (advertisers or large chunk of the readers)
D) a small user base hurts any platform and increases how often they have to put up with A and B
What we should be highlighting is the horrible hardware vendors who give next to no help and often write poor quality drivers in general. This problem is a windows issue as well.
IBM had a team active and working on the computer during the chess game, the exact details of their actions I wasn't able to find other than to know over a dozen engineers were tinkering with the computer during the game. IBM took the good news and ran with it never again having the GUTS to a rematch with fair preconditions; largely because they fear losing. It is like 'winning' a Turing Test; just winning it once doesn't really prove anything (as has been shown already.)
A fair match wouldn't involve a team of humans, who essentially are helping the computer 'think' thru the game. Besides, the computer shouldn't be able to use brute force to aid its low intelligence because its beside the whole point. It shouldn't require any help other than I/O. Simply for the fact its the only way to prove its not just some calculator to aid ibm employees to victory.
Not relevant, but rather than mod you down I decided to forgo my moderator power and reply.
PR is just a nice term for Propaganda and with the money and their adaptation to the net I serious wonder what kind of work they are out there doing today in the 'information age.'
This sounds exactly like what an advertiser friend of mine says with some minor variations. He is 100% behind whatever Bush says. He now accepts the climate is changing (and only that.) Outside of us friends who know better--- he LIES to everybody with a surprisingly similar story to the parent post.
Its like the thing was some talking point memo (oh, he is a rather involved party member as well.) So I'd guess that post was either a pawn like my friend or directly connected to the PR war to stop any meaningful change.
Industry and the military probably are the biggest problem worldwide, not american cars or diet. Over population is the biggest problem nobody wants to address. A decent standard of living for everybody means only about 2 billion people worldwide; just because there are few/no starving down the street doesn't mean that we haven't already overpopulated the earth. Most people have a standard of living that wouldn't be acceptable to 1st world citizens.
Many people think we can terraform mars someday soon (50-100 yrs?) yet we couldn't possibly have impacted earth over the last 100+ years... seems like people need to consider the density of AIR and how small (90% @ 30,000ft) the atmosphere is.
Soylent Green is people!