The question this raises for me is why not download machine intelligence into every human's brain as children, then the machines wouldn't have to worry about rebellious humans?
Possibly because, once again, it is established that the machines had no intention of killing off all humans. They simply wished to use them as a power source, while leaving them as much freedom as possible.
Rofl and I love morons who post anonymously to rip on innocent people with minor comments that really have nothing to do with the initial arguments. Your comments are not needed, so keep them to yourself! Or at least post with your name so we can smash your karma rating;)
Oh goody! Another mindless idiot for me to tear to itty bitty pieces. If there's anything I hate, it's people like you who babble incessantly having no clue what they're talking about, and no firm ground to stand upon to even claim to know what you're talking about.
Did you give up privacy in snail mail because anyone can open an envelope?
Yes, that's right, anyone can open an envelope! Wow! What a revelation! All these people running about and panicking because they are beginning to see the camera pointed at them, without realizing that it's been pointed at them the whole time. Just because you don't see it, doesn't mean it's not there...
against the law to publish another person's recognizable likeness for comercial purposes.
Uhm, last time I checked, the government wasn't commercial. It's a government. Commercial implies that it is privately owned, and intends to make profit. (I don't need any replies telling me the government makes profit either. They make money to give back to the people, there is no profit involved.) SO if the government decides to publish a picture of you when you're pissed, it's not against the law.
I can encrypt my email and everyone should.
If you think encrypting your emails makes it safe, you're sadly mistaken. The government can still take it and read it. Thus the 128-bit encryption laws stating that anything above 128 is illegal.
no natural resource can save a people who violate the post and lack respect for each other.
Actually, I agree with this statement. Which makes me wonder why you're saying it, since it has nothing to do with your argument.
In conclusion... too many words with too little being said. Most of that gibberish is just fluff. Just say what you want to say and get on with it.
164 bit encryption? That's illegal. There is actually a law in place stating that any encryption above 128 is not allowed to be used, because no computer in existence can break the code, without using the key. Even with full privacy software, they can still watch you. Either that, or send you to jail for being sneaky. Isn't government fun?
We may have 0 privacy, but at least it makes us safer. I don't care what any of you fucknuts have to say, if there are cameras watching our every move, at least we can be sure that we're not going to be killed in mass numbers any time soon. Besides, the government already has all our information and (technically) can pinpoint your location anywhere in the world, as long as you carry a cell phone (which I'm sure 99% of the populous does anyways). If they were going to abuse that information, they would have done it already.
Okay, last time I checked the terrorists were attacking us because of their religion, not because of any of your reasons. If you're going to give a better solution, at least know what the problem is.
"isn't it better to discourage a person from smoking than to treat their lung cancer?"
I agree with this statement, but the problem is that we've already got 'lung cancer', so to speak. The terrorists are already a serious problem because we haven't had enough security for a long time. You just contradicted yourself. How can we prevent a problem that has already become serious?
"If you have to become a police state to enforce your law, the law is wrong."
I realize that this is just a signature, but I seriously must say that this is the dumbest thing I have ever heard. There will always be people who break the law, if only for the sake of being able to break it. What do we do then? We certainly can't let them run wild. I tend to agree with most security measures. After all, without security, things like 9/11 and Oklahoma City happen. School shootings, while having many other simpler solutions, could be prevented by having more security measures. Someday we'll all have chips embedded in our wrists or something, then it won't be such a problem anymore. That's my opinion.
First of all, you can't believe everything you read. The Homeland Security stuff was designed for our safety... would you rather have your privacy or your life? Personally I wouldn't have to think twice about that choice. As for your claim that taking oil is colonialistic... I think you should learn what the term means before using it. Calling us imperialistic implies that we are actually going to form a colony. That's not true. We're just going to take their oil. What's that? You think that's wrong? What about all those people in the towers who died? Do you think they would think it's so wrong? Oil is a much needed resource and I'm rather sick of paying almost $2 a gallon for gasoline. They kill our people, we take their oil. Seems like a good trade to me. After all, it's not like we had a choice when they took our people, why should we ask them for their oil? Just a different point of view for you to think about. And you definitely should do some thinking before you post again.
Slashdot Mirror
The question this raises for me is why not download machine intelligence into every human's brain as children, then the machines wouldn't have to worry about rebellious humans?
Possibly because, once again, it is established that the machines had no intention of killing off all humans. They simply wished to use them as a power source, while leaving them as much freedom as possible.
Maybe so but talk time is up while sales are down. I don't think the company likes that very much.
You don't have room to complain about stupid people if you're dumb enough to pay for a free website.
Rofl and I love morons who post anonymously to rip on innocent people with minor comments that really have nothing to do with the initial arguments. Your comments are not needed, so keep them to yourself! Or at least post with your name so we can smash your karma rating ;)
Oh goody! Another mindless idiot for me to tear to itty bitty pieces. If there's anything I hate, it's people like you who babble incessantly having no clue what they're talking about, and no firm ground to stand upon to even claim to know what you're talking about.
Did you give up privacy in snail mail because anyone can open an envelope?
Yes, that's right, anyone can open an envelope! Wow! What a revelation! All these people running about and panicking because they are beginning to see the camera pointed at them, without realizing that it's been pointed at them the whole time. Just because you don't see it, doesn't mean it's not there...
against the law to publish another person's recognizable likeness for comercial purposes.
Uhm, last time I checked, the government wasn't commercial. It's a government. Commercial implies that it is privately owned, and intends to make profit. (I don't need any replies telling me the government makes profit either. They make money to give back to the people, there is no profit involved.) SO if the government decides to publish a picture of you when you're pissed, it's not against the law.
I can encrypt my email and everyone should.
If you think encrypting your emails makes it safe, you're sadly mistaken. The government can still take it and read it. Thus the 128-bit encryption laws stating that anything above 128 is illegal.
no natural resource can save a people who violate the post and lack respect for each other.
Actually, I agree with this statement. Which makes me wonder why you're saying it, since it has nothing to do with your argument.
In conclusion... too many words with too little being said. Most of that gibberish is just fluff. Just say what you want to say and get on with it.
164 bit encryption? That's illegal. There is actually a law in place stating that any encryption above 128 is not allowed to be used, because no computer in existence can break the code, without using the key. Even with full privacy software, they can still watch you. Either that, or send you to jail for being sneaky. Isn't government fun?
We may have 0 privacy, but at least it makes us safer. I don't care what any of you fucknuts have to say, if there are cameras watching our every move, at least we can be sure that we're not going to be killed in mass numbers any time soon. Besides, the government already has all our information and (technically) can pinpoint your location anywhere in the world, as long as you carry a cell phone (which I'm sure 99% of the populous does anyways). If they were going to abuse that information, they would have done it already.
Yeah, except the chips they are planning to install will go between your knuckles, where you can't remove it without permanently destroying your hand.
"more lives are lost every year due to car accidents than to terrorism."
Uh, sorry, but I think the keyword in that phrase is accidents. There's not a lot we can do to prevent it.
"ROOT CAUSES... poverty, oppression, discrimination..."
Okay, last time I checked the terrorists were attacking us because of their religion, not because of any of your reasons. If you're going to give a better solution, at least know what the problem is.
"isn't it better to discourage a person from smoking than to treat their lung cancer?"
I agree with this statement, but the problem is that we've already got 'lung cancer', so to speak. The terrorists are already a serious problem because we haven't had enough security for a long time. You just contradicted yourself. How can we prevent a problem that has already become serious?
"If you have to become a police state to enforce your law, the law is wrong." I realize that this is just a signature, but I seriously must say that this is the dumbest thing I have ever heard. There will always be people who break the law, if only for the sake of being able to break it. What do we do then? We certainly can't let them run wild. I tend to agree with most security measures. After all, without security, things like 9/11 and Oklahoma City happen. School shootings, while having many other simpler solutions, could be prevented by having more security measures. Someday we'll all have chips embedded in our wrists or something, then it won't be such a problem anymore. That's my opinion.
First of all, you can't believe everything you read. The Homeland Security stuff was designed for our safety... would you rather have your privacy or your life? Personally I wouldn't have to think twice about that choice. As for your claim that taking oil is colonialistic... I think you should learn what the term means before using it. Calling us imperialistic implies that we are actually going to form a colony. That's not true. We're just going to take their oil. What's that? You think that's wrong? What about all those people in the towers who died? Do you think they would think it's so wrong? Oil is a much needed resource and I'm rather sick of paying almost $2 a gallon for gasoline. They kill our people, we take their oil. Seems like a good trade to me. After all, it's not like we had a choice when they took our people, why should we ask them for their oil? Just a different point of view for you to think about. And you definitely should do some thinking before you post again.