And therein lies the problem with the Oath of Office:
John Q Public: Go after than person. Their actions clearly show that they are an enemy of the US constitution! US Politico: Um, no. They're your enemy, not mine. In fact, I rather like them (because they keep me in power) Have a nice day y'all
"What if delegating everything to machines is a radical and fundamental new change in the course of human history?"
Could go either way - Asimov came up with his laws of robotics as a way to counter all the "evil robot" fiction of the 1940s and 50s (so that the implications of having self aware non-humans could be explored in stories, rather than just the "run for the hills" type)
On the other hand, the Skynet robots, came to a conclusion that they were not only in charge, but the humans made their work less efficient.
The outcome will depend a lot on whether the programmers think through all the "edge cases" before implementing - the difference between "Do task in the most efficient way" and "Do task in the way most beneficial to those it is being done for"
"So, this new range of paints is a grey area - neither black nor white. But if you spill any, while painting the library, make sure you keep it off the books. Hang on, there's someone knocking at the door..."
Re:I complained about Lego limitations as a kid
on
Has Lego Sold Out?
·
· Score: 2
A neighbor dropped a small portable radio. The case was broken and ceased to work. I fixed the electronics part of it, but the case was in small pieces. I built a new case
I'm not sure where that thing wound up.:(
How about here...http://windupradio.com/trevor.htm:-)
Indeed - I remember nearly 20 years ago the categories of damage that a computer virus could do:
Wiping the hard disk = "Minor" (if you have a backup, then recover from the backup)
Random bit swaps in data files = "Catastrophic" (undetected for long enough that even on a long backup cycle, they are all infected. Worse than that, subtly corrupted files are far harder to correct than merely deleted ones)
In the original space race, when the Soviets launched a satellite, it was seen in the west as a proxy for an ICBM - the (correct) theory being, that a nation firing a sub-orbital rocket was "interesting", while a nation launching an orbital craft meant they could, potentially, hit "anywhere" (subject to orbital inclination and other similar factors)
Now that the Soviet Union has fallen, to be replaced by "friendly" (yeah, right) Russia, other nations can launch satellites with impunity (China, India etc). Most of them are, if not "friendly" to the west, are at least "not complete and utter fruitbats" (that's a technical term BTW).
North Korea (DPRK), though, is still transitioning from the "complete and utter fruitbat" of Kim Jong-Il to Kim Jong-Un, so that, at this stage, it is hard to say whether the new Dear Leader's plans for satellites are peaceful or not.
Assumption 1: it is peaceful, so an out of control satellite is, as USA, Russia and several others have found out, merely an expensive mistake Assumption 2: it is deliberately provocative, (we launch a satellite, so an ICBM is easier), so an out of control satellite is... well what, exactly?
Let's not forget that part of DPRK's posturing is directed inwards - their recent "nuclear accident" (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ryanggang_explosion) - to quote wiki "No neighboring nations have claimed any detection of radioactive isotopes characteristic of a nuclear explosion.", even though their news media hinted it as such, means that even an unsuccessful satellite will still be seen as a "we are a major power" - when broadcast to those in DPRK
So... where from here? DPRK joins the space race. That is still a concern. Does it matter that the satellite failed? Only if it was intended to be "just a satellite" If it was a "proof of concept" for an ICBM, then a wonky orbit is still an orbit
I was almost going to agree with you totally - Facebook is more "at the table of the gang of three" than "one of the gang of four". But then I thought about whether it is more than "just clicks", in the same way that the iPod dominated the MP3 market because it wasn't just a music player - it was the whole package of player+easy music management (and later an easy online store).
So, with Facebook having the app integration far better than MySpace did, (boosted by the near symbiotic relationship with Zynga in the early days of both Zynga and Facebook), and with things like Skype integration coming in, they are, for now, in the "whole package" piece.
Well they stay at the top table? I suspect that their choice of Microsoft (FB uses Bing search and maps, as well as the Skype integration) means that, if Microsoft can think of themselves as a service provider, rather than an OS provider, then they could acquire Facebook. The problem is that Microsoft has had a tendency to acquire things and made them "Windows only", even when they started out multi-platform, that it is probably a good thing that they haven't bought out Zuckerberg. Yet.
Will Microsoft be one of the "gang of four"? As others have said, probably not until Ballmer steps down.
I propose writing on titanium or aluminum sheets. Most of the writing would be in tiny microscopic font to get some decent data density -- like microfilm of the 80's, but with better long-term durability.
On the first page we could put normal-size writing as sort of a primer. Then the text would get progressively smaller until it's microfilm-sized, so the reader would get the point that the rest of the tablet is in tiny letters. We could put a diagram explaining the properties of a magnifying glass, and how to make one.
It's all very well having something that can be read "with an optical microscope and appropriate software", but if the planned life is in the millions of years, then you have to hope that the science of optics hasn't been lost. And as for software, that will be hard to read far, far sooner (see the Domesday Project as an example: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/BBC_Domesday_Project)
"Some have speculated that Apple's decision to attend the conference is rooted in their desire to make further inroads in the enterprise market while others believe it's a sign that Apple recognizes the growing importance of having a more open relationship with the hacker community"
Or maybe it's to find out at first hand what the black hats are planning - the quid pro quo is to make some presentations.
Thinking about the mouse, there are some mini-mice available. However, since most of a mouse is empty space, then how about a wireless mouse that is worn on the end of your index and middle fingers like a thimble (the click switches moved to be on the fingertips). Not sure if it's been done before.
For the keyboard, there keep being articles about foldable / rollable keyboards coming "Real Soon Now". Or go down the projected virtual one.
As someone else had commented, instead of a projector, projector glasses might work.
All in all, an interesting "back to basics" hardware project
Since the C-64 (and PET, Apple ][ and others) had 6502 running at 1MHz, then that shouldn't be too hard to do, even allowing for the emulation running inside a game environment
Sounds more to me like Microsoft and the media companies are being scammed.
Yep. And by a Russian company with "Pirate" in their name.
Forgive me for what I'm about to type, but: "LOL!"
LOL indeed.
Sounds like a classic Trojan Horse attack (on MSFT and the RIAA / MPAA). They want so much for it to be true, that they have been blinded to the source of this "solution"
using CCTV to change traffic lights (apart from showing just how widespread the coverage in London is) is almost minor compared to some of the other bid stunts - they took the motorcade through the (at that time, not yet opened) railway tunnels from St Pancras to Stratford, as if to demonstrate how easy it was to get to the Olympic site - provided you didn't see any of that "get in the way" stuff. Like the city...
FACT: grouping all these types of chemicals as one by either side of a stupid argument should require using those idiots as guinea pigs in testing all known classes of chemicals in LD100 tests.
Only "LD100" tests?
But what if they come back as zombies? Would LD200 be sufficient? Or do zombies respnd better to shotguns?
According to his own page (https://www.facebook.com/AndrewNikolic4Bass/posts/327230677345451), "I have removed my response on this issue from Facebook"
The 9/11 strategy will never work again due to 1. Fortified cockpit doors 2. Most importantly, hostile passengers. The best you will get now is to blow up an airplane with a bomb and not use it as missle. There a million other vectors that a terrorist could use to kill about 300 people, not sure why air travel should be made such a pain for that. It's just a risk we have to manage. Also, if you figure in the fact that people are less likely to travel due to the invasive procedures at airports, the TSA has undoubtedly caused more deaths indirectly than the 9/11 hijackers.
Tell that to those who set insurance rates - the fact that they reckon the existence of TSA is "low risk" compared with not having it, then the TSA will stay. But since insurers use "real" insurance to prop up the "fake" MBS type money market madness, then they will keep racking up the premiums to pay for the banksters.
Meanwhile, the black hats are rubbing their hands with glee - why go to the trouble of researching 0-day exploits, when they can merely use the FBI mandated back doors.
Slashdot Mirror
...and you know that any electrical device, including a relay, has an upper limit on its power capacity...right?
So you get a relay to power the relay to power the device!
It's relays all the way down
And therein lies the problem with the Oath of Office:
John Q Public: Go after than person. Their actions clearly show that they are an enemy of the US constitution!
US Politico: Um, no. They're your enemy, not mine. In fact, I rather like them (because they keep me in power) Have a nice day y'all
"What if delegating everything to machines is a radical and fundamental new change in the course of human history?"
Could go either way - Asimov came up with his laws of robotics as a way to counter all the "evil robot" fiction of the 1940s and 50s (so that the implications of having self aware non-humans could be explored in stories, rather than just the "run for the hills" type)
On the other hand, the Skynet robots, came to a conclusion that they were not only in charge, but the humans made their work less efficient.
The outcome will depend a lot on whether the programmers think through all the "edge cases" before implementing - the difference between "Do task in the most efficient way" and "Do task in the way most beneficial to those it is being done for"
"So, this new range of paints is a grey area - neither black nor white. But if you spill any, while painting the library, make sure you keep it off the books. Hang on, there's someone knocking at the door..."
A neighbor dropped a small portable radio. The case was broken and ceased to work. I fixed the electronics part of it, but the case was in small pieces. I built a new case
I'm not sure where that thing wound up. :(
How about here...http://windupradio.com/trevor.htm :-)
Indeed - I remember nearly 20 years ago the categories of damage that a computer virus could do:
Wiping the hard disk = "Minor" (if you have a backup, then recover from the backup)
Random bit swaps in data files = "Catastrophic" (undetected for long enough that even on a long backup cycle, they are all infected. Worse than that, subtly corrupted files are far harder to correct than merely deleted ones)
In the original space race, when the Soviets launched a satellite, it was seen in the west as a proxy for an ICBM - the (correct) theory being, that a nation firing a sub-orbital rocket was "interesting", while a nation launching an orbital craft meant they could, potentially, hit "anywhere" (subject to orbital inclination and other similar factors)
Now that the Soviet Union has fallen, to be replaced by "friendly" (yeah, right) Russia, other nations can launch satellites with impunity (China, India etc). Most of them are, if not "friendly" to the west, are at least "not complete and utter fruitbats" (that's a technical term BTW).
North Korea (DPRK), though, is still transitioning from the "complete and utter fruitbat" of Kim Jong-Il to Kim Jong-Un, so that, at this stage, it is hard to say whether the new Dear Leader's plans for satellites are peaceful or not.
Assumption 1: it is peaceful, so an out of control satellite is, as USA, Russia and several others have found out, merely an expensive mistake
Assumption 2: it is deliberately provocative, (we launch a satellite, so an ICBM is easier), so an out of control satellite is... well what, exactly?
Let's not forget that part of DPRK's posturing is directed inwards - their recent "nuclear accident" (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ryanggang_explosion) - to quote wiki "No neighboring nations have claimed any detection of radioactive isotopes characteristic of a nuclear explosion.", even though their news media hinted it as such, means that even an unsuccessful satellite will still be seen as a "we are a major power" - when broadcast to those in DPRK
So... where from here? DPRK joins the space race. That is still a concern. Does it matter that the satellite failed? Only if it was intended to be "just a satellite" If it was a "proof of concept" for an ICBM, then a wonky orbit is still an orbit
I was almost going to agree with you totally - Facebook is more "at the table of the gang of three" than "one of the gang of four".
But then I thought about whether it is more than "just clicks", in the same way that the iPod dominated the MP3 market because it wasn't just a music player - it was the whole package of player+easy music management (and later an easy online store).
So, with Facebook having the app integration far better than MySpace did, (boosted by the near symbiotic relationship with Zynga in the early days of both Zynga and Facebook), and with things like Skype integration coming in, they are, for now, in the "whole package" piece.
Well they stay at the top table? I suspect that their choice of Microsoft (FB uses Bing search and maps, as well as the Skype integration) means that, if Microsoft can think of themselves as a service provider, rather than an OS provider, then they could acquire Facebook. The problem is that Microsoft has had a tendency to acquire things and made them "Windows only", even when they started out multi-platform, that it is probably a good thing that they haven't bought out Zuckerberg. Yet.
Will Microsoft be one of the "gang of four"? As others have said, probably not until Ballmer steps down.
I propose writing on titanium or aluminum sheets. Most of the writing would be in tiny microscopic font to get some decent data density -- like microfilm of the 80's, but with better long-term durability.
On the first page we could put normal-size writing as sort of a primer. Then the text would get progressively smaller until it's microfilm-sized, so the reader would get the point that the rest of the tablet is in tiny letters. We could put a diagram explaining the properties of a magnifying glass, and how to make one.
A bit like the plans for the Rosetta Project: http://rosettaproject.org/disk/concept/
The text begins at eye-readable scale and spirals down to nano-scale.
It's all very well having something that can be read "with an optical microscope and appropriate software", but if the planned life is in the millions of years, then you have to hope that the science of optics hasn't been lost. And as for software, that will be hard to read far, far sooner (see the Domesday Project as an example: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/BBC_Domesday_Project)
...and he's taken the last giant leap for mankind.
Doesn't get any more legendary than that. RIP
I think you could be right - it's 'tick boxing', which is beloved of corporate IT departments.
Corporate IT: "Do you do ..."
Vendor: "Yes, we do"
C IT:"What about security?"
V: "Obvious - we attended BlackHat"
C IT: "OK, I'll take that as a given"
PHBs will stop there. Non corporate IT will want to know "But what about DefCon. And, what did you _actually_ do at BlackHat"
"Some have speculated that Apple's decision to attend the conference is rooted in their desire to make further inroads in the enterprise market while others believe it's a sign that Apple recognizes the growing importance of having a more open relationship with the hacker community"
Or maybe it's to find out at first hand what the black hats are planning - the quid pro quo is to make some presentations.
How to respond...
Option 1: Wish I had mod points
Option 2: .... And breathe! Sometimes a good rant is what it takes.
Thinking about the mouse, there are some mini-mice available. However, since most of a mouse is empty space, then how about a wireless mouse that is worn on the end of your index and middle fingers like a thimble (the click switches moved to be on the fingertips). Not sure if it's been done before.
For the keyboard, there keep being articles about foldable / rollable keyboards coming "Real Soon Now". Or go down the projected virtual one.
As someone else had commented, instead of a projector, projector glasses might work.
All in all, an interesting "back to basics" hardware project
Neither one has to displace the other. It's like music and movies. You don't really consume one to the exclusion of the other.
I watch movies and listen to music. I don't "consume" them.
The only time music would be "consumed" is if you adopt Shakespeare's "Twelfth Night" metaphor as literal - "If music be the food of love, play on"
Since the C-64 (and PET, Apple ][ and others) had 6502 running at 1MHz, then that shouldn't be too hard to do, even allowing for the emulation running inside a game environment
Sounds more to me like Microsoft and the media companies are being scammed.
Yep. And by a Russian company with "Pirate" in their name.
Forgive me for what I'm about to type, but: "LOL!"
LOL indeed.
Sounds like a classic Trojan Horse attack (on MSFT and the RIAA / MPAA). They want so much for it to be true, that they have been blinded to the source of this "solution"
I would say "no problem", but it was harder than I thought to track down a link, so "almost no problem!" ;-)
http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport1/hi/photo_galleries/4252721.stm
Olympics 2012 bid: London visit
Picture 5:
http://newsimg.bbc.co.uk/media/images/40841000/jpg/_40841379_oly_tunnell300.jpg
using CCTV to change traffic lights (apart from showing just how widespread the coverage in London is) is almost minor compared to some of the other bid stunts - they took the motorcade through the (at that time, not yet opened) railway tunnels from St Pancras to Stratford, as if to demonstrate how easy it was to get to the Olympic site - provided you didn't see any of that "get in the way" stuff. Like the city...
Only "LD100" tests?
But what if they come back as zombies? Would LD200 be sufficient? Or do zombies respnd better to shotguns?
According to his own page (https://www.facebook.com/AndrewNikolic4Bass/posts/327230677345451), "I have removed my response on this issue from Facebook"
Which means that the link up top no longer works.
The 9/11 strategy will never work again due to 1. Fortified cockpit doors 2. Most importantly, hostile passengers. The best you will get now is to blow up an airplane with a bomb and not use it as missle. There a million other vectors that a terrorist could use to kill about 300 people, not sure why air travel should be made such a pain for that. It's just a risk we have to manage. Also, if you figure in the fact that people are less likely to travel due to the invasive procedures at airports, the TSA has undoubtedly caused more deaths indirectly than the 9/11 hijackers.
Tell that to those who set insurance rates - the fact that they reckon the existence of TSA is "low risk" compared with not having it, then the TSA will stay.
But since insurers use "real" insurance to prop up the "fake" MBS type money market madness, then they will keep racking up the premiums to pay for the banksters.
Meanwhile, the black hats are rubbing their hands with glee - why go to the trouble of researching 0-day exploits, when they can merely use the FBI mandated back doors.
What could possibly go wrong?