What is REALLY going on is that Robot builders are calling themselves AI builders.
While this is confusing, it is not a problem.
A lot of the problem is people like Minks getting so angry because most people that call themselves AI builders are really just Robot Builders. So what. We need good Robot Builders to. If they want to build Robots, fine, let them - just insist they admit they have nothing to do with AI.
Fine you are not spamming and no one on your network would willing spam.
Now prove that:
Your networks are secure so that spammers have never hacked them to aid in their spamming.
None of the companies your network hosts have ever paid any one to increase their hits.
The truth is you can not do that. Most probably someone traced back either a spammer that had temporarily hacked your IP address or one of the corporate accounts onyour network paid someone to increase their hits and that person used their own servers to generate spam that linked to a site on your network.
I strongly disagree. According to any REAL definition, the AIBO is always Bored EXCEPT WHEN IT ACTS BORED.
I will define Boredom as having insufficent new external stimuli to process. Sufficent is defined as per your operateing system/internal goals. New is defined as not recognized as happening before.
When AIBO has recognized a stimuli as happening before, it follows it's pre-coded instructions and pretends to be Happy/Sad, whatever. But the truth is, it is bored - it is just getting old stimuli that it has seen before and knows how to handle.
When AIBO gets NEW stimuli that it does not immediately know what to do with, it pretends to be bored. Actually it is in fact furiously searching for new stimuli to tell it how to act.
Was an old version of backup. Everything was written 3 times and read 3 times. When a single read came back different, the odd read was thrown out re-written the way the other two were written.
To expend this idea, we could do a RUN 3 times system
You would have three operating systems, each running a java type processor. Send the java instructions to all 3 machines, and hopefully they should return identical results. If two match and one is different, then throw out the third result.
Now a bug has to screw up all 2 of the three operating systems, much less likely.
Basically you are angry that we have different priorities than you. But the priorities WE have have made us what we are. Just like the priorities Canada has had made it what it is.
You have made a LOT of judgement on our priorities. But you have made very little statements to back them up.
The sex.com case is NOT about who has the right to say they own sex.com. It is about the corporation that made millions of dollars by owning sex.com. The fact that what they are arguing about is "sex.com" is what YOU are focusing on, because you have your priorities all screwed up.
You should instead be focusing on the IMPORTANT thing, which is the money, instead of getting so worked up against how it was made.
The sex.com case is well worthy of the US supreme court. It refers to a lot of money, deals with a complex issue (fraud, rightfull patents granted based on fraudlently obtained rights), and is still relevant - there was a lot of domain name theft.
This kind of illogical, rantings are why so many americans look down on non-americans.
None of that crap made any sense at all. Basically you listed a bunch of things that you dislike, said it was the US's fault, then complained that instead of fixing the problems we were arguing about who gets $65million dollars and also complained about how that money was made.
None of the things you mentioned can in any way be said to be the USA's fault (not the government, and not the people). We have however, been TRYING to fix those problems, mostly without the the aid of non-americans like you. Just because we try to solve a problem and you sit back and compain, does NOT mean we are responsible for that problem.
And $65 million dollars is sufficient valuable to argue about. Sorry if you think $65 million is not worth talking about.
As for how that money was made, well I hate to tell you but non-americans contributed to it too. It is as much the non-american's fault as any anyone elses.
You are right. The morons that switched a domain name because of a letter received instead of calling and checking should have switched it back immediately.
But asking morons to be smart is not itself a sign of intelligence.
It is not a design flaw you fool, it is done to save a ton of money on fuel and on heat shielding.
Airplanes could save some mileage and time by flying at 10ft above the ground, but for safety reasons, they first fly up to a safe cruising altitutde. When we calculate their mileage, we do NOT subtract out the height.
So he was right, we should be calculating accidents per mile traveled, not accidents per flight or accidents per year.
By that logic (and I agree with you), then ALL music should be sent into the public domain. The basic thing is eventually every possible nice sounding song will be written.
Music is not a business, it is art. As such, credit should be given, not money.
When I sing a song for my personal amusement, should I be forced to pay the author?
If I have a HORRIBLE voice, so I ask my girlfriend to sing it to me, should I then be forced to pay?
What if I record her singing to me?
What if I say this is cool and post on the net for others to hear?
At what point should I pay the author?
Re:Jumpin on the bandwagon
on
Wall Street Meat
·
· Score: 2, Insightful
What a lode of crap. So basically you are saying, yes they were thieves, but anyone that was taken in by their fraud was STUPID for believing the shills instead of the newspapers that were warning them about the fraud?
Being stupid does not give others the right to defraud.
But copyrights NEVER expire. Oh, they SAY that copyrights expire, but everytime it gets close to their expiration date, Congress pushes through a new law extending it (Has happened several times in the U.S.)
Copyrights originally were supposed to be 20 years. That would mean anything written in the 60's and 70's should be fair game now. But they extended everything.
You seem very arrogant. You know so much more than senior management, yet your poor company has not seen fit to promote you to senior management. I wonder why. No I do not do the mail admin for a large company. Instead I do special projects for one. Basically, whenever they want something cool done they call us instead of their regular IT department.
Yes, my company uses blackberries too. I helped work on the software that connected them with the company wide web based contact management program. But talking about what a few companies do is NOT talking about the people on the net do. The majority of people use PC's to get their email. Period.
Yes, corporations will not be paying licenses to let you download your lists to your private blackberry. But if it is BUSINESS related, they will let you do it. At least they do at my firm. It helps to be have agreed to work for a company that did not go broke in the silicon crash.
As for why email continues to be used, that is simple. the technology is an INFANT, not mature. Give it a couple of years and those list servers could very well VANISH.
One of the major reasons they might vanish is they are pretty close to being spam. Basically, the only real difference between them and spam is the fact that they are actually desired by the useres. So pretty much ANYTHING that attacks/hurts Spam is going to have an effect on the list servers. What was it we were talking - oh yeah, ways to fight spam. And you did not like the idea being discussed because it might cause minor problems for list servers.
You are correct that my solutiono does not deal with the relatively FEW people that do that kind of thing on the blackberry/cell phone.
It takes a company called AVANTGO to address that issue. Perhaps you have heard of them? They download web pages, like bulletin boards directly to your blackberry/cell phone etc.
As for rendering a page, I hate to tell you but there is no law that says a web page must have 3 million colors, 100 animated graphics, 15 fonts, 9 buttons, etc. etc. etc. If the people that make the bulletin board want to allow/encourage people like you to download to your cell phones, they can easily design their web pages to be easier to get than the email you seem to like.
Email was NOT inteneded to be used for the purpose the listservers use it for.. It is NOT a good design for this pupose and will NEVER beat a well thought out web page designed to do the same thing.
You are saying that I should spend $10 of dollars every year to buy spam blocking software instead of spending maybe 1 dollar a year to spend email - what do you think I am an idiot?
As for getting spam, you are not very knowledgable about it.
Anyone that is in buisness on the web has to give out their email a lot. In addition, people have the RIGHT to be free with their email address - your life is MUCH better if you can give it to companies that you like and actually want to hear about.
You personally may not use the web enough to get killed by spam, but not everyone has the same email needs as you. I have 3 email accounts: 1 for public use that I get about 1 real email per month, and otherwise gets filled with junk. 1 for private use that pretty much only gets emails that are caught by the free spam filter yahoo gives out, and 1 for junk-email that I give out to all untrustworthy companies. Specifically, I give that junk email out when I sign up for a web service that I want/need. That junk email is FULL up with tons of stuff, but I only check it 1/month.
As for your idea that you have to download it repeatedly, you must not know much about computers. First of all, you have to check your email - just like y ou have to check the bulletin board. If it is too inconveneient to pset up a nice favorite that you can push and take you to the newest post on the bulletin board, then Push technology is available. If you want your PC to constantly check the bulletin board and download any new page, it is available NOW.
No. Look at the picture. The picture is of a tiny little thing that slides into a tiny little slot.
I am looking at my Handspring Visor, and the port is HUGE compared to the the tiny thing they have a picture of.
I am not talking about the effeciency/speed of the port, just the size.
Because the Handspring port is so BIG, it allows you to make a larger plug in module.
My argument is that before they make one small enough to fit in that tiny little port, handpsing can make one to fit in their HUGE port.
This is vaporware. They have been talking about it for years, and doing nothing.
If this was a pracitcal piece of tech, Handspring would have done it earlier - they were the first ones out with the enhancement slot for a commercial PDA and their slot is larger, so it would be easier to fit the tuner into the size available.
So they charge each person $4/year to be on their list, redo their service to send a single email once per day and wallah they are done.
Or far more likely, they redo their wastefull service which sends COPIES of the same message to thousands of people with a bulletin board where people log on with a web browser and read the emails there. These crappy little things are BAD ideas of sending out massive emails - it worked fine for when the internet was a primitive thing and no one had any idea how to make a web page but tradition and the lack of thinking is the only thing having people do it that way instead of an obviously more efficent message board method.
This is a FANTASTIC idea that totally solves one problem without putting any real blockage.
People are CERTAINLY willing to pay a low amount of cash As in 1 cent per email, to forever be free of the JUNK that clutters their email.
There is no such thing as a free lunch. The choice is free email as is with spam or the MINOR inconveince
Most do not. But this call went through in the early hours of the morning. That is much more of a slam dunk win than anything else. The judge is likely to be pissed off at the LEGAL telemarketers, and this is an easy case.
Re:what you are fearing...
on
Brain Privacy
·
· Score: 1
Unless you personally have lived inside Michael's Brain, you are just guessing, based on NOWHERE near sufficient evidence, and making a really strong opinion based on it.
Yes some twisted people are afraid of the truth.
But MORE of us are afraid of shmucks like you that base strong opinions on silly things like what they post on the net. If you came to that kind of decsions from what you see on the net, I certainly do NOT want to see what kind of fanatical, descion you will make when you think you can read someone's mind.
I am far more afraid of what people will try to do to me because of their own demonic fears than dealing with the "lies" I live.
As do many other sites, including yahoo groups, when you click on reading the next group, they first take you to an add and you have to click again to go to the real site.
Part of the problem you guys are having, is that you are not reading the actual law, and are making a TON of assumptions that are false.
All the law does is say it is not illegal to log into a network if you do not otherwise commite a crime.
You and some other people have a twisted idea that war driving involves breaking into networks THEN committing other crimes, becuase that is what the media reports. They do not talk about the poeple that just use it to access their hotmail, which is what the majority of war-drivers do. All "wardriving" is, is logging into networks that you did not create. Off line, the equivelent word for "entering without invitation". If you enter and steel it is a crime. If you enter and say, woops, wrong house, that is not a crime. If it is raining and you enter someone's barn to get out of the rain, it is not a crime. Online version: if you war drive for internet access, and only check your hotmail account, then you are NOT a criminal according to this law. That it all the law says. It does not in any way say, OK, you got on the network, so now you can copy their confidential records, copy credit card numbers, etc. etc.
Your analogy sucks. We are not talking about some one taking something and not returning it.
All the law does is let people BORROW your internet access, and if they do not commit any other crime, they can not be prosecuted.
I.E. If someone sees your wallet on the ground, picks it up and uses it as a flat surface to write a letter on, then puts your wallet back down WITHOUT taking any money, then they have not committed any crime.
Similarly, if you leave your network open, and someone logs in, goes to their own personal yahooo account, writes an email, sends it, then logs out and goes home, this law says they have NOT committed any crime.
The law still does not make it legal to break into the companies confidential records, or use them for spamming, or any other illegal activity.
You do have a point about cops, shooting, but that idea of yours was very tangental to the discussing.
I do equate sitting in a cafe with driving around. Chelsea Market closes down at around 8 PM. They do not say I can only use their internet access when they are open. That means I have the right to drive in their neighboorhood trying to hook up to their network. If some other idiot in the same area set up his network so that my attempt to log into Chelsea Markets's network logs into his, that is NOT my fault. (This happened to a friend of mine).
I am NOT talking about any attempt to do anythign dishonest, and neither is the law we are discussing (sniffing etc.). If you have to do something dishonest to get INTO the system, then that means you have gotten AROUND their security system, and that means the law we are discussing does not apply - minimal security was in place as required.
My car analogy is correct because while WAPS may be sold with security available, they are NOT set up pre-purchased, and the law we are discussing ONLY applies if the security is NOT set up. (P.S. not all vehicles have locks. Certain really large, slow vehicles are sold without locks, usually mining/construction machines. ) And more importantly, your analoggy about going out and forgetting to use the lock is bad because it is not ONE night they forget to "use" the lock, they FORGET TO INSTALL THE PASSWORDS IN THE FIRST PLACE.
In certain towns, the public minded groups provide free bicycles. If in that same town you buy a bicycle of the same make and model that the town buys and then do not put a LOCK on it, you have no business complaining when people keep taking your bicycle. Perhaps that is a better analogy.
Remember, the law does not mean you have to put in effective security, it just says you have to make some attempt to put in security. If you refuse to admit that other people are actively encouraging people to use their system for free, and that sane users put locks to keep people out, then when some one uses your system for otherwise legal purposes and they did not break any other law to get into your system, you have NO business complaining about them.
What it comes down to is the fact that a sane, normal person COULD HAVE REASONABLY BELIEVED that you were offering them free internet access, just as many other organizations do. So when they take it, they have not broken the law. If you did not want to offer free internet access, then DO NOT OFFER FREE INTERNET ACCESS. Make SOME attempt to keep the war-drivers out. All the law says is that if you make no attempt at all to keep the war-drivers out, then they have not broken any law.
Slashdot Mirror
You are allowed to sacrifice an animal. After all, millions of Christians sacrifice unborn chicken fetusus every Easter.
What is REALLY going on is that Robot builders are calling themselves AI builders.
While this is confusing, it is not a problem.
A lot of the problem is people like Minks getting so angry because most people that call themselves AI builders are really just Robot Builders. So what. We need good Robot Builders to. If they want to build Robots, fine, let them - just insist they admit they have nothing to do with AI.
Now prove that:
Your networks are secure so that spammers have never hacked them to aid in their spamming.
None of the companies your network hosts have ever paid any one to increase their hits.
The truth is you can not do that. Most probably someone traced back either a spammer that had temporarily hacked your IP address or one of the corporate accounts onyour network paid someone to increase their hits and that person used their own servers to generate spam that linked to a site on your network.
Jet Engines burn JP-8, combining it with Oxygen to create a TON of waste gasses.
Rethink everything you just said.
I will define Boredom as having insufficent new external stimuli to process. Sufficent is defined as per your operateing system/internal goals. New is defined as not recognized as happening before.
When AIBO has recognized a stimuli as happening before, it follows it's pre-coded instructions and pretends to be Happy/Sad, whatever. But the truth is, it is bored - it is just getting old stimuli that it has seen before and knows how to handle.
When AIBO gets NEW stimuli that it does not immediately know what to do with, it pretends to be bored. Actually it is in fact furiously searching for new stimuli to tell it how to act.
To expend this idea, we could do a RUN 3 times system
You would have three operating systems, each running a java type processor. Send the java instructions to all 3 machines, and hopefully they should return identical results. If two match and one is different, then throw out the third result.
Now a bug has to screw up all 2 of the three operating systems, much less likely.
You have made a LOT of judgement on our priorities. But you have made very little statements to back them up.
The sex.com case is NOT about who has the right to say they own sex.com. It is about the corporation that made millions of dollars by owning sex.com. The fact that what they are arguing about is "sex.com" is what YOU are focusing on, because you have your priorities all screwed up.
You should instead be focusing on the IMPORTANT thing, which is the money, instead of getting so worked up against how it was made.
The sex.com case is well worthy of the US supreme court. It refers to a lot of money, deals with a complex issue (fraud, rightfull patents granted based on fraudlently obtained rights), and is still relevant - there was a lot of domain name theft.
None of that crap made any sense at all. Basically you listed a bunch of things that you dislike, said it was the US's fault, then complained that instead of fixing the problems we were arguing about who gets $65million dollars and also complained about how that money was made.
None of the things you mentioned can in any way be said to be the USA's fault (not the government, and not the people). We have however, been TRYING to fix those problems, mostly without the the aid of non-americans like you. Just because we try to solve a problem and you sit back and compain, does NOT mean we are responsible for that problem.
And $65 million dollars is sufficient valuable to argue about. Sorry if you think $65 million is not worth talking about.
As for how that money was made, well I hate to tell you but non-americans contributed to it too. It is as much the non-american's fault as any anyone elses.
But asking morons to be smart is not itself a sign of intelligence.
Airplanes could save some mileage and time by flying at 10ft above the ground, but for safety reasons, they first fly up to a safe cruising altitutde. When we calculate their mileage, we do NOT subtract out the height.
So he was right, we should be calculating accidents per mile traveled, not accidents per flight or accidents per year.
Music is not a business, it is art. As such, credit should be given, not money.
When I sing a song for my personal amusement, should I be forced to pay the author?
If I have a HORRIBLE voice, so I ask my girlfriend to sing it to me, should I then be forced to pay?
What if I record her singing to me?
What if I say this is cool and post on the net for others to hear?
At what point should I pay the author?
Being stupid does not give others the right to defraud.
Copyrights originally were supposed to be 20 years. That would mean anything written in the 60's and 70's should be fair game now. But they extended everything.
Yes, my company uses blackberries too. I helped work on the software that connected them with the company wide web based contact management program. But talking about what a few companies do is NOT talking about the people on the net do. The majority of people use PC's to get their email. Period.
Yes, corporations will not be paying licenses to let you download your lists to your private blackberry. But if it is BUSINESS related, they will let you do it. At least they do at my firm. It helps to be have agreed to work for a company that did not go broke in the silicon crash.
As for why email continues to be used, that is simple. the technology is an INFANT, not mature. Give it a couple of years and those list servers could very well VANISH.
One of the major reasons they might vanish is they are pretty close to being spam. Basically, the only real difference between them and spam is the fact that they are actually desired by the useres. So pretty much ANYTHING that attacks/hurts Spam is going to have an effect on the list servers. What was it we were talking - oh yeah, ways to fight spam. And you did not like the idea being discussed because it might cause minor problems for list servers.
It takes a company called AVANTGO to address that issue. Perhaps you have heard of them? They download web pages, like bulletin boards directly to your blackberry/cell phone etc.
As for rendering a page, I hate to tell you but there is no law that says a web page must have 3 million colors, 100 animated graphics, 15 fonts, 9 buttons, etc. etc. etc. If the people that make the bulletin board want to allow/encourage people like you to download to your cell phones, they can easily design their web pages to be easier to get than the email you seem to like.
Email was NOT inteneded to be used for the purpose the listservers use it for.. It is NOT a good design for this pupose and will NEVER beat a well thought out web page designed to do the same thing.
As for getting spam, you are not very knowledgable about it.
Anyone that is in buisness on the web has to give out their email a lot. In addition, people have the RIGHT to be free with their email address - your life is MUCH better if you can give it to companies that you like and actually want to hear about.
You personally may not use the web enough to get killed by spam, but not everyone has the same email needs as you. I have 3 email accounts: 1 for public use that I get about 1 real email per month, and otherwise gets filled with junk. 1 for private use that pretty much only gets emails that are caught by the free spam filter yahoo gives out, and 1 for junk-email that I give out to all untrustworthy companies. Specifically, I give that junk email out when I sign up for a web service that I want/need. That junk email is FULL up with tons of stuff, but I only check it 1/month.
As for your idea that you have to download it repeatedly, you must not know much about computers. First of all, you have to check your email - just like y ou have to check the bulletin board. If it is too inconveneient to pset up a nice favorite that you can push and take you to the newest post on the bulletin board, then Push technology is available. If you want your PC to constantly check the bulletin board and download any new page, it is available NOW.
I am looking at my Handspring Visor, and the port is HUGE compared to the the tiny thing they have a picture of.
I am not talking about the effeciency/speed of the port, just the size.
Because the Handspring port is so BIG, it allows you to make a larger plug in module. My argument is that before they make one small enough to fit in that tiny little port, handpsing can make one to fit in their HUGE port.
If this was a pracitcal piece of tech, Handspring would have done it earlier - they were the first ones out with the enhancement slot for a commercial PDA and their slot is larger, so it would be easier to fit the tuner into the size available.
Or far more likely, they redo their wastefull service which sends COPIES of the same message to thousands of people with a bulletin board where people log on with a web browser and read the emails there. These crappy little things are BAD ideas of sending out massive emails - it worked fine for when the internet was a primitive thing and no one had any idea how to make a web page but tradition and the lack of thinking is the only thing having people do it that way instead of an obviously more efficent message board method.
This is a FANTASTIC idea that totally solves one problem without putting any real blockage.
People are CERTAINLY willing to pay a low amount of cash As in 1 cent per email, to forever be free of the JUNK that clutters their email.
There is no such thing as a free lunch. The choice is free email as is with spam or the MINOR inconveince
Most do not. But this call went through in the early hours of the morning. That is much more of a slam dunk win than anything else. The judge is likely to be pissed off at the LEGAL telemarketers, and this is an easy case.
Yes some twisted people are afraid of the truth.
But MORE of us are afraid of shmucks like you that base strong opinions on silly things like what they post on the net. If you came to that kind of decsions from what you see on the net, I certainly do NOT want to see what kind of fanatical, descion you will make when you think you can read someone's mind.
I am far more afraid of what people will try to do to me because of their own demonic fears than dealing with the "lies" I live.
As do many other sites, including yahoo groups, when you click on reading the next group, they first take you to an add and you have to click again to go to the real site.
Part of the problem you guys are having, is that you are not reading the actual law, and are making a TON of assumptions that are false.
All the law does is say it is not illegal to log into a network if you do not otherwise commite a crime.
You and some other people have a twisted idea that war driving involves breaking into networks THEN committing other crimes, becuase that is what the media reports. They do not talk about the poeple that just use it to access their hotmail, which is what the majority of war-drivers do. All "wardriving" is, is logging into networks that you did not create. Off line, the equivelent word for "entering without invitation". If you enter and steel it is a crime. If you enter and say, woops, wrong house, that is not a crime. If it is raining and you enter someone's barn to get out of the rain, it is not a crime. Online version: if you war drive for internet access, and only check your hotmail account, then you are NOT a criminal according to this law. That it all the law says. It does not in any way say, OK, you got on the network, so now you can copy their confidential records, copy credit card numbers, etc. etc.
All the law does is let people BORROW your internet access, and if they do not commit any other crime, they can not be prosecuted.
I.E. If someone sees your wallet on the ground, picks it up and uses it as a flat surface to write a letter on, then puts your wallet back down WITHOUT taking any money, then they have not committed any crime.
Similarly, if you leave your network open, and someone logs in, goes to their own personal yahooo account, writes an email, sends it, then logs out and goes home, this law says they have NOT committed any crime.
The law still does not make it legal to break into the companies confidential records, or use them for spamming, or any other illegal activity.
I do equate sitting in a cafe with driving around. Chelsea Market closes down at around 8 PM. They do not say I can only use their internet access when they are open. That means I have the right to drive in their neighboorhood trying to hook up to their network. If some other idiot in the same area set up his network so that my attempt to log into Chelsea Markets's network logs into his, that is NOT my fault. (This happened to a friend of mine).
I am NOT talking about any attempt to do anythign dishonest, and neither is the law we are discussing (sniffing etc.). If you have to do something dishonest to get INTO the system, then that means you have gotten AROUND their security system, and that means the law we are discussing does not apply - minimal security was in place as required.
My car analogy is correct because while WAPS may be sold with security available, they are NOT set up pre-purchased, and the law we are discussing ONLY applies if the security is NOT set up. (P.S. not all vehicles have locks. Certain really large, slow vehicles are sold without locks, usually mining/construction machines. ) And more importantly, your analoggy about going out and forgetting to use the lock is bad because it is not ONE night they forget to "use" the lock, they FORGET TO INSTALL THE PASSWORDS IN THE FIRST PLACE.
In certain towns, the public minded groups provide free bicycles. If in that same town you buy a bicycle of the same make and model that the town buys and then do not put a LOCK on it, you have no business complaining when people keep taking your bicycle. Perhaps that is a better analogy.
Remember, the law does not mean you have to put in effective security, it just says you have to make some attempt to put in security. If you refuse to admit that other people are actively encouraging people to use their system for free, and that sane users put locks to keep people out, then when some one uses your system for otherwise legal purposes and they did not break any other law to get into your system, you have NO business complaining about them.
What it comes down to is the fact that a sane, normal person COULD HAVE REASONABLY BELIEVED that you were offering them free internet access, just as many other organizations do. So when they take it, they have not broken the law. If you did not want to offer free internet access, then DO NOT OFFER FREE INTERNET ACCESS. Make SOME attempt to keep the war-drivers out. All the law says is that if you make no attempt at all to keep the war-drivers out, then they have not broken any law.