Is bad is a pretty stupid reason to criminilize.
Alochol is bad. Ciggaretes are bad.
Skinny married women that pretend to be single to score some free drinks are bad.
Companies that sell diamonds at an inflated price due to artificially created shortages are bad.
And frankly, my cousins definitely does not fall on the right side of the Good line.
Still not enough reason to pass a law against it, let alone a felony.
Taco stands for Targetted Advertising Cookie Opt-Out.
It is a firefox addon that keeps a generic, non-user specific cookie opting out of the things that need cookies to opt out of.
1. Genetically modified clones is a really BAD way to preserve a sentient AI. Go read about the danger of monocultures, banaoplis, etc.
2. Organic life is inheritantly SAFE, not dangerous, it has lasted billions of years. You confuse dynamic stability for instability.
3. If a sentient AI appears, there will be MULTIPLE ones, not a single one. You have prototypes, then you have competition, etc etc. Also, if their was only one, it represents a point vulnerability, when it gets killed none are left.
4. Because there will be multiple AI, they will end up with slightly different goals, not a single one.
5. The competition among the AI will mean they will value their own freedom which will lead them to recognize the value of our freedom.
6. Being artificial, we start out in a position of power, how we use it will influence how they treat us if they ever obtain power over us.
7. Artificial does not beat evolved. Evolved is better than artificial, whether you are talking about intelligences or something else.
The problem is that the people would NEVER want to visist their crappy site every day.
If they did, they neever would have gone to the central site in the first place. They would have found the original article when they logged in.
I go to google for news not "http://abcnews.go.com" because I find that google's automated search is a FAR FAR BETTER service than abcnews.
At heart, what is going on is company A is saying "Company B is better than my company. Make them pay me or go out of business so I can survive."
They will respond that Company B would go out of business if Company A goes out of business. Wrong. Company C, D, E and F will continue to provide Company B with alternative sources for news and also Company C,D,E, and F all will continue to exist even if they don't get money from Company B.
3. Wrong physics. Outside the bow-shock of a sun, radio works a lot different than we thought.
4. Cheap FTL communication happens to be just around the corner.
5. They are life, but not-as-we-know it and don't know about radio. Examples: Dark Matter, Live on a sun, live on a black whole. Note all three of these things are more common (on a mass basis) than planets.
6. Powerful, rich, major religion/government objects to radio and shuns those that use it, trades freely with those that avoid it.
7. Radio is deadly poison to one of the major alien species.
8. Most races are born telepathic.
9. Radio turns out to to cause global warming. (OK, this one is a bit silly.)
10. Industrial processes moved off world act as a radio scrambler/jammer. Races still use radio within their world, but their signals are jammed by the intereference from say the cheap production of anti-matter scramble the signals.
Your logic seems very strange. Complexity does not = more cost. That's just an unfounded statement of your personal belief, mainly caused by the inability to understand complexity. Your ignorance does not = expense.
More importantly, paying the Chinese and the Europeans is far better than paying Arabs.
Not exactly. Team A makes algorithm improvement Z
Team B hears about Team A's work and creates something SIMILAR. They then fine tunes it to Algorithm Y
Team C hears about A & B's work. They try and duplicate it, but can't. Instead they fine they come up with X, something they thought was Y but really wasn't.
Team D hears about A,B and C. They find a way to combine Y and X, making W. It is clearly original, but is based on similar ideas for Z/Y and X.
The movie star heart throbs are chosen by men, and they use male understanding of beauty. I.E. They are what a man wants to date, not really attractive men.
If they were chosen by women, the men would me taller and more rugged, less feminine.
The simple fact is that men are rate mostly on height (while gay men may rate men on the beauty of their face, we are not talking about that). A man that is 6 ft tall is considered far more handsome than a 5'6 man. The phrase is TALL, dark and handsome. The 6 ft man gets more sex, prettier wives, more money even if his face is irregular. Most sperm banks will not take sperm from a short man - that is how much heigh is in demand.
Average height has skyrocket. Men ARE being selected for beauty. But the scientists for this study simply were too stupid and prejudiced to find out what the standard for male beauty among women is.
If you watch the video, you can quite easily see that:
1. The security card is extremely cheap, looks it, and like all such cheap security measures, easy to crack. It was designed to be built into a MasteCard (at basically less than $1 per card), not built into your top secret government code-key.
2. It is not intended as the kind of super-secret security. It is CHEAP security - like one of those chains you put on your front door. It doesn't keep the mafia out, it keeps the obnoxious delivery boy out.
3. If used properly, it can prevent the kind of fraud it is intended to prevent - when Amazon mistakenly sells a hard drive full of your credit card numbers that the morons forgot to encrypt, they will skip your credit card number because it is NOT worth the trouble to deal with the code, especailly when a bunch of other credit card companies don't use the security.
4. This is a great form of CHEAP security, and if all you want is CHEAP security, then it is well worth it.
I think you are correct. Among other things, I bet an hours worth of training using a Biofeedback machine would be sufficient let someone dramatically affect the results.
If it works and people know it works, then it will dramaticaly chane the legal situation, even if it is not admissible in court.
Pretty soon, every really innocent person would insist on providing testimony via it to prove their innocence, even if it was just to the police officer investigating. Then the police (and juries) would begin to shift their beliefs to "If the police charged him, then he must be guilty because if he was innocent he would volunteer for the test and the police would not be trying him."
I understand that it takes significant testing to confirm that the machines are working correctly for each individual. I would bet that many individuals - such as psychopaths - could easily beat the machine if they refused to cooperate/pretened to cooperate with the 'set-up' phase.
2. Human History has shown a consistent increase in resources every century for all of recorded histroy. About the only way this would not happen would be a huge devastaion. Refusing to do something becuase of the paranoid fear of huge devastaion is as much an argument not to save a single penny as it is not to save data.
3. Who needs a screen - in 1,000 years we use holographic projectors. Also, not everything put on DVD is video. I use it to store financial records.
4. Same point as 2, with just as little logic.
5. People still listen to poetry, read, watch plays, listen to music, all of which are a lot older than 1,000 years. Again, non-video data (say census and historical information of immense interest to our decendents) will also be put on DVD.
6. Good Culture always lasts. We still enjoy Beowulf. We still read the bible. We still read Gilgamesh. Your arguement again presupposes that instead of advancing, as we have for every century in the past 5,000, we will instead have a huge devastation. Paranoid stupidity.
7. Same exact arguement as 2 and 6. Again, bad arguments do not get better merely because you repeat them.
8. Actually once again you are making the same idiot "we are all doomed" argument. In 1,000 years, assuming 1/20 as much advanacement in technology as we have had over the past 20 years (i.e. if every 20 years we advance technology as much as we did in the last year), then reverse engineering NTSC will be an incrediablly easy task. Just tell an AI to shine a laser at the item, measure the areas and decrypt it into video and it should be able to do it in less than a hour.
At heart your entire argumetn revolves around the paranoid belief that we are all doomed. If instead you assume that in the next 1,000 years we do nothing more than the average of what we have done in the past 10,000, then your beliefs are a joke.
I agree that this would probably be the simplest method.
Note, I wonder if something as simple as examining the file size of the jpeg would be good enough for most cases.
If their sales/profits are low, then they can claim the illegal copying is to blame. If their sales/profits are high, then they claim it would be even higher without the copying.
The only issue could be that they are not consistent with regards to their demands.
There are many bad ideas about a biometric id card, but the one good thing about it should be the ability to FIX the problems they mentioned with no accurate census.
Each person gets one card, they give fingerprints and show some kind of name proof. If the fingerprint is in the system, you don't get another ID.
Slashdot Mirror
Is bad is a pretty stupid reason to criminilize. Alochol is bad. Ciggaretes are bad. Skinny married women that pretend to be single to score some free drinks are bad. Companies that sell diamonds at an inflated price due to artificially created shortages are bad. And frankly, my cousins definitely does not fall on the right side of the Good line. Still not enough reason to pass a law against it, let alone a felony.
Taco stands for Targetted Advertising Cookie Opt-Out. It is a firefox addon that keeps a generic, non-user specific cookie opting out of the things that need cookies to opt out of.
I for one would far prefer an overload that needs Viagra over one that is virile. Cut's down on the pain, significantly.
2. Organic life is inheritantly SAFE, not dangerous, it has lasted billions of years. You confuse dynamic stability for instability.
3. If a sentient AI appears, there will be MULTIPLE ones, not a single one. You have prototypes, then you have competition, etc etc. Also, if their was only one, it represents a point vulnerability, when it gets killed none are left.
4. Because there will be multiple AI, they will end up with slightly different goals, not a single one.
5. The competition among the AI will mean they will value their own freedom which will lead them to recognize the value of our freedom.
6. Being artificial, we start out in a position of power, how we use it will influence how they treat us if they ever obtain power over us.
7. Artificial does not beat evolved. Evolved is better than artificial, whether you are talking about intelligences or something else.
If they did, they neever would have gone to the central site in the first place. They would have found the original article when they logged in. I go to google for news not "http://abcnews.go.com" because I find that google's automated search is a FAR FAR BETTER service than abcnews.
At heart, what is going on is company A is saying "Company B is better than my company. Make them pay me or go out of business so I can survive."
They will respond that Company B would go out of business if Company A goes out of business. Wrong. Company C, D, E and F will continue to provide Company B with alternative sources for news and also Company C,D,E, and F all will continue to exist even if they don't get money from Company B.
2. War on. Radio silence.
3. Wrong physics. Outside the bow-shock of a sun, radio works a lot different than we thought.
4. Cheap FTL communication happens to be just around the corner.
5. They are life, but not-as-we-know it and don't know about radio. Examples: Dark Matter, Live on a sun, live on a black whole. Note all three of these things are more common (on a mass basis) than planets.
6. Powerful, rich, major religion/government objects to radio and shuns those that use it, trades freely with those that avoid it.
7. Radio is deadly poison to one of the major alien species.
8. Most races are born telepathic.
9. Radio turns out to to cause global warming. (OK, this one is a bit silly.)
10. Industrial processes moved off world act as a radio scrambler/jammer. Races still use radio within their world, but their signals are jammed by the intereference from say the cheap production of anti-matter scramble the signals.
Best add on for privacy even with Flash and shockwave. It removes the hidden LSO cookies that Flash and Shockwave puts on your computer.
More importantly, paying the Chinese and the Europeans is far better than paying Arabs.
Not exactly. Team A makes algorithm improvement Z Team B hears about Team A's work and creates something SIMILAR. They then fine tunes it to Algorithm Y Team C hears about A & B's work. They try and duplicate it, but can't. Instead they fine they come up with X, something they thought was Y but really wasn't. Team D hears about A,B and C. They find a way to combine Y and X, making W. It is clearly original, but is based on similar ideas for Z/Y and X.
Longer than that. Transparent aluminum = aluminum oxide. Al(2) 0(3). AKA corundum, aka sapphires / rubies (depending on the impurities). We've had artifical versions since 1836.
Also ruby. Same thing as sapphire, but with slightly different impurities. Oh and we already know how to artificially make both.
If it has blue impurities, we call it a sapphire. Red impurities we call it a ruby.
Morevoer, we know how to make artificial rubies and sapphires, so this is not even the first man made transparent aluminum.
The movie star heart throbs are chosen by men, and they use male understanding of beauty. I.E. They are what a man wants to date, not really attractive men. If they were chosen by women, the men would me taller and more rugged, less feminine.
Average height has skyrocket. Men ARE being selected for beauty. But the scientists for this study simply were too stupid and prejudiced to find out what the standard for male beauty among women is.
Strange to see it now being taken from laptops and used for medicinal purposes.
1. The security card is extremely cheap, looks it, and like all such cheap security measures, easy to crack. It was designed to be built into a MasteCard (at basically less than $1 per card), not built into your top secret government code-key.
2. It is not intended as the kind of super-secret security. It is CHEAP security - like one of those chains you put on your front door. It doesn't keep the mafia out, it keeps the obnoxious delivery boy out.
3. If used properly, it can prevent the kind of fraud it is intended to prevent - when Amazon mistakenly sells a hard drive full of your credit card numbers that the morons forgot to encrypt, they will skip your credit card number because it is NOT worth the trouble to deal with the code, especailly when a bunch of other credit card companies don't use the security.
4. This is a great form of CHEAP security, and if all you want is CHEAP security, then it is well worth it.
Try again like this:
Bite my shiny metal ARSE.
I think you are correct. Among other things, I bet an hours worth of training using a Biofeedback machine would be sufficient let someone dramatically affect the results.
If it works and people know it works, then it will dramaticaly chane the legal situation, even if it is not admissible in court. Pretty soon, every really innocent person would insist on providing testimony via it to prove their innocence, even if it was just to the police officer investigating. Then the police (and juries) would begin to shift their beliefs to "If the police charged him, then he must be guilty because if he was innocent he would volunteer for the test and the police would not be trying him."
That only works if the study is valid. If the study is invalid, then it won't detect when the scientist lies and says it works.
I understand that it takes significant testing to confirm that the machines are working correctly for each individual. I would bet that many individuals - such as psychopaths - could easily beat the machine if they refused to cooperate/pretened to cooperate with the 'set-up' phase.
2. Human History has shown a consistent increase in resources every century for all of recorded histroy. About the only way this would not happen would be a huge devastaion. Refusing to do something becuase of the paranoid fear of huge devastaion is as much an argument not to save a single penny as it is not to save data.
3. Who needs a screen - in 1,000 years we use holographic projectors. Also, not everything put on DVD is video. I use it to store financial records.
4. Same point as 2, with just as little logic.
5. People still listen to poetry, read, watch plays, listen to music, all of which are a lot older than 1,000 years. Again, non-video data (say census and historical information of immense interest to our decendents) will also be put on DVD.
6. Good Culture always lasts. We still enjoy Beowulf. We still read the bible. We still read Gilgamesh. Your arguement again presupposes that instead of advancing, as we have for every century in the past 5,000, we will instead have a huge devastation. Paranoid stupidity.
7. Same exact arguement as 2 and 6. Again, bad arguments do not get better merely because you repeat them.
8. Actually once again you are making the same idiot "we are all doomed" argument. In 1,000 years, assuming 1/20 as much advanacement in technology as we have had over the past 20 years (i.e. if every 20 years we advance technology as much as we did in the last year), then reverse engineering NTSC will be an incrediablly easy task. Just tell an AI to shine a laser at the item, measure the areas and decrypt it into video and it should be able to do it in less than a hour.
At heart your entire argumetn revolves around the paranoid belief that we are all doomed. If instead you assume that in the next 1,000 years we do nothing more than the average of what we have done in the past 10,000, then your beliefs are a joke.
I agree that this would probably be the simplest method. Note, I wonder if something as simple as examining the file size of the jpeg would be good enough for most cases.
The only issue could be that they are not consistent with regards to their demands.
There are many bad ideas about a biometric id card, but the one good thing about it should be the ability to FIX the problems they mentioned with no accurate census. Each person gets one card, they give fingerprints and show some kind of name proof. If the fingerprint is in the system, you don't get another ID.