If the MPAA isn't allowed to sell DVDs with the privisio that you use their licensed players to watch them, then you're not allowed to give away your source code with the added provisio that I give you my modifications. There's no difference.
Actually there's a vast difference. In the first instance, I'm not copying the disc. I'm not interacting with the media other than reading it. In the second, I'm using my ownership of the copyright to control the circumstances under which you copy the source code. I cannot use this right granted me by the government to control how you read the source code. I can't make you print it out on paper, or tell you that you must only display it on NEC monitors, or that you can only use it on a Mac. Do you get it yet ?
According to the Big Bang theory, all mass, energy, space and time as we know them today were created at one instant by the 'Big Bang.'
Correct. Where's God in this ? He's outside time and space, right ? Why ? Because that's the only way he can interact with the universe at the "moment" of the Big Bang, right ? Why does he even need to be there at all? To satisfy your inherent need for a first cause. But what caused God ? He just is, right? Why can't I say that about the BigBang and the Universe ? (They just are)
My reference to randomness is as a method of accounting for the fact of the existence of our universe, if it was not created by God. If randomness is but a property of the universe, then it could not be the source of its creation and the argument for God as the creator is strenghthened.
Au contraire. You assume that there must be a first cause, and that this is either randomness or God.
By eliminating randomness you say "therefore... god !"
1/ there could be some other cause (other than randomness, or god) 2/ There might be no need for a "first cause" at all. Causation is a wooly concept to begin with.
Bah. It's designated purpose is as a storage format for the movie.
Tacking on this "licensed player" rubbish is just muddying the issue. It's a distraction.
It has nothing to do with linux, that's true. It has everything to do with making something illegal that shouldn't be. It should be legal for me to use any means I desire to watch the movie that I just bought. I am not causing anyone harm just watching a movie that I own. I am not copying the movie and sending it to my friends and depriving the big companies of any cash. I am using the disc for the purpose it was intended : watching the movie. How is that wrong ?
(Nice distraction with the "stolen from Xing" sleight-of-hand there. What if I wrote the decryption myself ? I didn't steal anything from anyone, and I'm still just watching a movie... Seriously, Sister, you better smarten up your Act, cause this sort of tactic just makes you look foolish.)
Say you have 10 neurons in your brain. Lets further say that your neurons only have 2 states (on and off - firing or not firing) and yet each neuron can participate in every memory that you have, and that maybe the order in which they fire is important as well.
That's like 2^10 brain states right there.
With 10 neurons.
When you add in the vast number of neurons you have in your brain, and the fact that each one exhibits a contiuum rather than a binary state, and that memories have been shown to exhibit "bleeding" or reconstruction (rather than pure recall), then it's not hard to accept that the storage capacity of our brains is a lot larger than you might think.
The problem I see is that lots of people seem to equate "physical" with deterministic.
I have no problem with the idea that quantum effects are entirely "physical" evem if they reside in a layer lower than we can detect or interact with (and further, any attempt at interaction, including observation, invalidates the data).
Thus I have no problem with the idea that the brain is a completely physical object, and further, that the mind resides within it, depends on it, and arises from it.
Neither do I have a problem with the concept that one cannot reliably observe the entire state of the brain (and hence the mind) due to quantum effects and therefore the mind is not necessarily completely deterministic in the usual sense.
I don't know that this is true, but the concept doesn't horrify me.
I'm not up with all the arguments in this area, but I have to ask.. if it isn't a purely mechanical process, what is it ? Are you suggesting that there is some mystical/spiritual aspect that cannot be detected that is responsible for the mind ? If so, why do you suggest that ?
Straw man. Each of these examples you give rely on other laws which are designed to prevent harm to others. Furthermore, except for the dialysis machine, your examples are not concerned with the appropriate use of the article in question.
I can make my own dialysis machine for a science project and hook it up to a fake blood flow to demonstrate how it works. Nothing prevents me from doing that. The laws governing licensing of medical equipment for use on people are to protect people from harm.
Similarly, I could design and build my own car from scratch, and I could drive it around my acreage without requiring licensing. Nothing prevents me from doing that. However, I'd need it to be certified for use on the road because an unsafe vehicle is a danger to other motorists. But my right to create the car itself is not impinged. I can't drive it on the sidewalk because that is dangerous to the health of others, not because some company is going to lose money because I do so.
I'm not even going to touch the dog (or beat it either).
In any case, a DVD is designed to contain data that is displayed in an audio-visual medium. The very purpose of the item you just bought is to be seen and experienced. Once you own it, you can microwave it, toss it like a frisbee, smash it with a hammer or a dozen other things that aren't what it was made for. You can sell it. You can use it like a mirror. As long as you don't sharpen it's edge and cut peoples throats with it, you're ok. But if you're running linux, you cannot use it for it's designated purpose because that's wrong ?
Other than the natural right of possession. The thing is in your hand and no one is in front of you stopping you from screwing with it... ultimately, that's the only "right" you possess.
This right is most often modified by living in a society where a common government or other power structure provides you some forms of protections and services in exchange for you giving up some of this right.
These goverments will often grant other "rights" as part of their constitution or other law-stating document. These laws and rights are all artificial, but nonetheless some have higher forms of protection than others do. Some are more fundamental to the society than others.
Most people believe that your right to your life, and liberty is more fundamental than your right to own an SUV for example. In the same way, the right to use an item you own in any manner you see fit is seen as more fundamental than the right of the items' producer to tell you what to do with it after you bought it. The big corporations see it differently, and ergo so does the government.
The acceleration I think he's talking about is the change from free-fall to forward or upward motion. Furthermore, several rollercoasters have higher than 0g at their peaks, as they translate forward motion through the peak and into the downslide.
Well a basic online search of the words demon and devil reveal those words mentioned 81 and 35 times respectively in the New International Version of the bible.
Were there 106 types of these monsters in the Monster Manual ?
As far as the copy is concerned - none. As far as the original is concerned - he's dead and you can't ask him. His sense of conciousness is done with. The fact that there is an identical copy of him with all his memories running around makes no difference to him, as his continuous experience is over.
Ask yourself this - if you go to sleep and wake up in a new body - but the old body wasn't destroyed, would you both be the same person ? No, you'd be two different people with the same memories and who thought they were the same person.
If one of you were then asked to just go and kill yourself so that the other could be "you", would you volunteer?
Exactly correct, and in no way different from what I was suggesting.
However, the original you would be dead. How do you feel about that ? You can't answer - you're dead. Your copy can answer, and he's feeling just fine about it.
Did you see "The Sixth Day" ? Overall a pretty lame movie, but the scene near the end where the bad guy has been mortally wounded and starts his copying process. The copy wakes up and starts taking over. The original (although he was already a copy, but that's not the point) is sidelined and shoved in the corner like he doesn't matter, and he's still alive and concious. I bet if you asked him right then whether he felt great about the prospect of dying and having his copy take over his life, it might occur to him that he really was dying and that the guy over there that looked like him, wasn't really "him".
And to him.. that would pretty much suck.
Sure, if you ask the *copy* if things were sucky right now and he would no doubt say "No way" but he's the COPY... not the original.
The "new" you.. the copy, might not be aware of this and, since it's experiences are identical to yours (assuming perfect copying practice), it will believe itself to be you, and therefore it will believe that "you" have continued.
But it will a nasty surprise for the original "you".
The only time I would consider such a procedure would be if I were already on the verge of death. In which case it's more of a thought to continuing my work, or passing on some sort of legacy. Either way, my expectation is that I would die. Whatever happened after that would be someone else who looked, thought and acted like me. But it wouldn't be me, and damnit - that sucks:)
Re:Takes me back a bit
on
D&D Is 30
·
· Score: 2, Insightful
Aren't there Demons and Devils mentioned in the Bible too ?
Yes absolutely. We should ban all things which might have been experienced by anyone who commits suicide, or homicide, or just feels really really bad.
Because it's obvious that it's caused by their experiences with D&D and TV and "Movies with Violence(tm)" and "Movies with Sex (shhhh)" and... and it's certainly not a chemical imbalance or indifferent parents or being beaten by your 2nd grade teacher within an inch of your life every day after school which has any influence over anyone who looks as the world and thinks "this is a pretty fucked up place" and then maybe actually does something about it (albeit destructively, rather than constructively).
Nooo.. it's the fantasy world which screws people up; the real one ain't got nothing to do with it.
Look ! Over there!
Re:The flagship...
on
D&D Is 30
·
· Score: -1, Flamebait
And spelling (it's "grammar") must have been a bitch for you:)
Train your replacement well. Tell him you're well aware that he is going to replace you, and that the pitfalls in his (new) position will be the foolish managers who've hired him because he is cheaper than you are, but less skilled. Tell him that as soon as he has enough experience he should immediately look for a new job, as you are now, because ultimately, he (and you) are better off working for someone with some fore-sight.
You can sit together, looking at job sites all day looking for a new job. You will be seen as diligently performing this latest job function of "training". You might even earn some extra kudos from the PHB.
It will be a bonding experience. You'll wander onwards into the job market - and he'll climb the corporate ladder at your old job.
In a few years time, you'll have kept in touch, and can call him up to see if the company he's working at is hiring. He might even be your boss:)
Except, of course, that your programming paradigm isn't chaotic either. Not by the mathematical definition, or any less rigorous one. What you're describiing is simply an organized approach which ranges more widely in the solution space. You choose to attack problems "from outside the box", yet you are just operating in a bigger box. Calling this "chaos" is as wrong as calling that long coders approach "chaotic".
Actually, Emeralds and Rubies have a much higher hardness than Opals. Emeralds are a 7.5 to 8 on Mohs Scale, and Rubies (and Sapphires, both forms of Corundum) are a 9. Diamonds are a 10. Opals are a 4.5 to a 6. BTW = It's recommended that you don't facet stones with a hardness less than 7 (quartz) since most abrasion comes from sand, (silica grit is similar to quartz in hardness), and scratches show up readily on faceted stones. This is why Opals are polished into cabochons or beads.
Re:Jury duty
on
Free Culture
·
· Score: 2, Informative
By far the most time you spend when called for Jury Duty is sitting around waiting to be empanelled. Once you're empanelled as a juror, that's when you put the book down and concentrate on the case. If a juror was trying to read a book in the courtroom (and there's no way one could hide such an activity) he'd be cited for contempt. There's no danger that the reviewer was reading during a trial.
How about doing your civic duty and learn some basics of the legal system?
I think that is exactly his point. The technologically challenged masses are the people who are buying things. They are the consumers. They are the market. They are the majority.
Slashdot Mirror
If the MPAA isn't allowed to sell DVDs with the privisio that you use their licensed players to watch them, then you're not allowed to give away your source code with the added provisio that I give you my modifications. There's no difference.
Actually there's a vast difference.
In the first instance, I'm not copying the disc. I'm not interacting with the media other than reading it. In the second, I'm using my ownership of the copyright to control the circumstances under which you copy the source code. I cannot use this right granted me by the government to control how you read the source code. I can't make you print it out on paper, or tell you that you must only display it on NEC monitors, or that you can only use it on a Mac.
Do you get it yet ?
According to the Big Bang theory, all mass, energy, space and time as we know them today were created at one instant by the 'Big Bang.'
... god !"
Correct. Where's God in this ? He's outside time and space, right ? Why ? Because that's the only way he can interact with the universe at the "moment" of the Big Bang, right ? Why does he even need to be there at all? To satisfy your inherent need for a first cause. But what caused God ? He just is, right? Why can't I say that about the BigBang and the Universe ? (They just are)
My reference to randomness is as a method of accounting for the fact of the existence of our universe, if it was not created by God. If randomness is but a property of the universe, then it could not be the source of its creation and the argument for God as the creator is strenghthened.
Au contraire.
You assume that there must be a first cause, and that this is either randomness or God.
By eliminating randomness you say "therefore
1/ there could be some other cause (other than randomness, or god)
2/ There might be no need for a "first cause" at all. Causation is a wooly concept to begin with.
False premise. Bzzzt. Thanks for playing.
Bah. It's designated purpose is as a storage format for the movie.
Tacking on this "licensed player" rubbish is just muddying the issue. It's a distraction.
It has nothing to do with linux, that's true. It has everything to do with making something illegal that shouldn't be. It should be legal for me to use any means I desire to watch the movie that I just bought. I am not causing anyone harm just watching a movie that I own. I am not copying the movie and sending it to my friends and depriving the big companies of any cash. I am using the disc for the purpose it was intended : watching the movie. How is that wrong ?
(Nice distraction with the "stolen from Xing" sleight-of-hand there. What if I wrote the decryption myself ? I didn't steal anything from anyone, and I'm still just watching a movie... Seriously, Sister, you better smarten up your Act, cause this sort of tactic just makes you look foolish.)
Or perhaps you've just gone and fallen for that whole "Creation" thing.
There was nothing before the universe, because the universe defines the concept of time. So there wasn't anything to "create" the universe from.
Any apprarent randomness you experience is a property of the universe, not a cause of it.
That's some pretty strong evidence that consciousness is not entirely brain-based.
Actually, its just evidence that you don't understand how the brain works.
Say you have 10 neurons in your brain.
Lets further say that your neurons only have 2 states (on and off - firing or not firing) and yet each neuron can participate in every memory that you have, and that maybe the order in which they fire is important as well.
That's like 2^10 brain states right there.
With 10 neurons.
When you add in the vast number of neurons you have in your brain, and the fact that each one exhibits a contiuum rather than a binary state, and that memories have been shown to exhibit "bleeding" or reconstruction (rather than pure recall), then it's not hard to accept that the storage capacity of our brains is a lot larger than you might think.
The problem I see is that lots of people seem to equate "physical" with deterministic.
I have no problem with the idea that quantum effects are entirely "physical" evem if they reside in a layer lower than we can detect or interact with (and further, any attempt at interaction, including observation, invalidates the data).
Thus I have no problem with the idea that the brain is a completely physical object, and further, that the mind resides within it, depends on it, and arises from it.
Neither do I have a problem with the concept that one cannot reliably observe the entire state of the brain (and hence the mind) due to quantum effects and therefore the mind is not necessarily completely deterministic in the usual sense.
I don't know that this is true, but the concept doesn't horrify me.
I'm not up with all the arguments in this area, but I have to ask.. if it isn't a purely mechanical process, what is it ? Are you suggesting that there is some mystical/spiritual aspect that cannot be detected that is responsible for the mind ?
If so, why do you suggest that ?
Straw man. Each of these examples you give rely on other laws which are designed to prevent harm to others.
Furthermore, except for the dialysis machine, your examples are not concerned with the appropriate use of the article in question.
I can make my own dialysis machine for a science project and hook it up to a fake blood flow to demonstrate how it works. Nothing prevents me from doing that. The laws governing licensing of medical equipment for use on people are to protect people from harm.
Similarly, I could design and build my own car from scratch, and I could drive it around my acreage without requiring licensing. Nothing prevents me from doing that. However, I'd need it to be certified for use on the road because an unsafe vehicle is a danger to other motorists. But my right to create the car itself is not impinged. I can't drive it on the sidewalk because that is dangerous to the health of others, not because some company is going to lose money because I do so.
I'm not even going to touch the dog (or beat it either).
In any case, a DVD is designed to contain data that is displayed in an audio-visual medium. The very purpose of the item you just bought is to be seen and experienced. Once you own it, you can microwave it, toss it like a frisbee, smash it with a hammer or a dozen other things that aren't what it was made for. You can sell it. You can use it like a mirror. As long as you don't sharpen it's edge and cut peoples throats with it, you're ok.
But if you're running linux, you cannot use it for it's designated purpose because that's wrong ?
Sorry - I'm not convinced.
Other than the natural right of possession. The thing is in your hand and no one is in front of you stopping you from screwing with it ...
ultimately, that's the only "right" you possess.
This right is most often modified by living in a society where a common government or other power structure provides you some forms of protections and services in exchange for you giving up some of this right.
These goverments will often grant other "rights" as part of their constitution or other law-stating document. These laws and rights are all artificial, but nonetheless some have higher forms of protection than others do. Some are more fundamental to the society than others.
Most people believe that your right to your life, and liberty is more fundamental than your right to own an SUV for example.
In the same way, the right to use an item you own in any manner you see fit is seen as more fundamental than the right of the items' producer to tell you what to do with it after you bought it.
The big corporations see it differently, and ergo so does the government.
The acceleration I think he's talking about is the change from free-fall to forward or upward motion. Furthermore, several rollercoasters have higher than 0g at their peaks, as they translate forward motion through the peak and into the downslide.
Alternatively, you could (with sufficiently advanced medicine) do the same for the rest of the body, leaving the brain untouched...
The question really is - would it really work this way ?
I wonder..
Well a basic online search of the words demon and devil reveal those words mentioned 81 and 35 times respectively in the New International Version of the bible.
Were there 106 types of these monsters in the Monster Manual ?
As far as the copy is concerned - none.
As far as the original is concerned - he's dead and you can't ask him. His sense of conciousness is done with. The fact that there is an identical copy of him with all his memories running around makes no difference to him, as his continuous experience is over.
Ask yourself this - if you go to sleep and wake up in a new body - but the old body wasn't destroyed, would you both be the same person ? No, you'd be two different people with the same memories and who thought they were the same person.
If one of you were then asked to just go and kill yourself so that the other could be "you", would you volunteer?
Do you see the problem yet ?
Exactly correct, and in no way different from what I was suggesting.
However, the original you would be dead. How do you feel about that ? You can't answer - you're dead. Your copy can answer, and he's feeling just fine about it.
Did you see "The Sixth Day" ?
Overall a pretty lame movie, but the scene near the end where the bad guy has been mortally wounded and starts his copying process. The copy wakes up and starts taking over. The original (although he was already a copy, but that's not the point) is sidelined and shoved in the corner like he doesn't matter, and he's still alive and concious. I bet if you asked him right then whether he felt great about the prospect of dying and having his copy take over his life, it might occur to him that he really was dying and that the guy over there that looked like him, wasn't really "him".
And to him.. that would pretty much suck.
Sure, if you ask the *copy* if things were sucky right now and he would no doubt say "No way" but he's the COPY... not the original.
The "new" you.. the copy, might not be aware of this and, since it's experiences are identical to yours (assuming perfect copying practice), it will believe itself to be you, and therefore it will believe that "you" have continued.
:)
But it will a nasty surprise for the original "you".
The only time I would consider such a procedure would be if I were already on the verge of death. In which case it's more of a thought to continuing my work, or passing on some sort of legacy. Either way, my expectation is that I would die. Whatever happened after that would be someone else who looked, thought and acted like me. But it wouldn't be me, and damnit - that sucks
Aren't there Demons and Devils mentioned in the Bible too ?
Yes absolutely. We should ban all things which might have been experienced by anyone who commits suicide, or homicide, or just feels really really bad.
Because it's obvious that it's caused by their experiences with D&D and TV and "Movies with Violence(tm)" and "Movies with Sex (shhhh)" and... and it's certainly not a chemical imbalance or indifferent parents or being beaten by your 2nd grade teacher within an inch of your life every day after school which has any influence over anyone who looks as the world and thinks "this is a pretty fucked up place" and then maybe actually does something about it (albeit destructively, rather than constructively).
Nooo.. it's the fantasy world which screws people up; the real one ain't got nothing to do with it.
Look ! Over there!
And spelling (it's "grammar") must have been a bitch for you :)
(one nazi deserves another)
4.) When in doubt, abbreviate. getFormName, should be: getFormName..
I don't get it ?
don't you mean gtFrmNm ?
Train your replacement well. Tell him you're well aware that he is going to replace you, and that the pitfalls in his (new) position will be the foolish managers who've hired him because he is cheaper than you are, but less skilled. Tell him that as soon as he has enough experience he should immediately look for a new job, as you are now, because ultimately, he (and you) are better off working for someone with some fore-sight.
:)
You can sit together, looking at job sites all day looking for a new job. You will be seen as diligently performing this latest job function of "training". You might even earn some extra kudos from the PHB.
It will be a bonding experience. You'll wander onwards into the job market - and he'll climb the corporate ladder at your old job.
In a few years time, you'll have kept in touch, and can call him up to see if the company he's working at is hiring. He might even be your boss
Except, of course, that your programming paradigm isn't chaotic either.
Not by the mathematical definition, or any less rigorous one.
What you're describiing is simply an organized approach which ranges more widely in the solution space. You choose to attack problems "from outside the box", yet you are just operating in a bigger box.
Calling this "chaos" is as wrong as calling that long coders approach "chaotic".
Actually, Emeralds and Rubies have a much higher hardness than Opals. Emeralds are a 7.5 to 8 on Mohs Scale, and Rubies (and Sapphires, both forms of Corundum) are a 9. Diamonds are a 10. Opals are a 4.5 to a 6.
BTW = It's recommended that you don't facet stones with a hardness less than 7 (quartz) since most abrasion comes from sand, (silica grit is similar to quartz in hardness), and scratches show up readily on faceted stones.
This is why Opals are polished into cabochons or beads.
By far the most time you spend when called for Jury Duty is sitting around waiting to be empanelled.
Once you're empanelled as a juror, that's when you put the book down and concentrate on the case. If a juror was trying to read a book in the courtroom (and there's no way one could hide such an activity) he'd be cited for contempt. There's no danger that the reviewer was reading during a trial.
How about doing your civic duty and learn some basics of the legal system?
I think that is exactly his point.
The technologically challenged masses are the people who are buying things. They are the consumers. They are the market.
They are the majority.
D'uh.