Whether gaming or chatting on AIM (or even email), I refuse to converse with people who can't make an effort to speak properly.
Wlcum 2 my fos. Strng to c such aversn 2 leetspk frm an elitist such as urself. lol!!!!one
I should not have to read your sentences three or four times to figure out what you're saying, just because you're too lazy to write propertly.
We shdnt waste time 'n b-w just 'caus ur too slow-witted. !!!! lol1!11!!!
Takes more time, too.
We waste time riting lik that, u waste som time ridin it. k?! OMFG!!!!12eleventy-one!!!1111!!!
It's not an elitist thing, either.
U sayng that dsnt make it so. Dont play gamez, dont use AIM. Dont force ur "proper" Eng on us. k? lol!!!!!omfglolbbq!!!!one!tanstaafl!!!!!!! wow!!!!!!!11!!! cya!!!!!!!!!!hth!
I am currently reading Mapping the Mind by Rita Carter, a great book about our current (1998) knowledge about the brain. The most valuable about this book is its factual nature. Reading about countless experiments, observations and other facts, usually with explanations about underlying neural mechanisms about particular behaviours helps realise the nature of the brain - just a complex modular organ that is not unlike computer programs. When you see how easily certain aspects of consciousness (or intelligence) can be broken in people with a minor brain lesion, you very quickly realise that "sentience" doesn't exist - rather there is a large set of behaviours that together are lumped under this label.
Most people who like to endlessly debate about philosophical aspects of sentience as applied to AI, cryonics, mind uploading, etc., usually have no clue whatsoever about how the brain actually works. The same applies to religious people, who instead of following the time-honoured advice of "Learn thyself" and realising the peculiarities and shortcomings of their mind instead are controlled by these very peculiarities.
In light of this, Hawkins's views appear to be quite reasonable.
But does the average desk jockey need a 3GHz processor, 160Gb hard drive and 19-inch LCD monitor to send email, run Excel and Word, and surf the web?
You take the old tasks and the new technology. Of course, these don't match. The same would happen if you asked if the average office worker needed a 2MHz processor and a 1Mb hard drive in 1970 to dictate letters to his secretary, make phone calls through the exchange and read newspapers.
The point is that new technology can be used to work better. If some business hasn't yet found a use for a 3GHz processor, it doesn't logically follow that 3GHz processors are useless for that company, it follows that that company lacks insight and foresight, and is essentially blind. The same can be said about software developers that haven't yet offered products that take advantage of that immense number-crunching power. I'm talking about your company, Bill...
sure, they will take off there - it's a cost thing
A low-end computer already costs around 200$. At this point it doesn't make much sense to try to save a hundred bucks per employee by going the thin-client route (and you will need expensive servers). As a matter of fact, you can get the best of both worlds by using Linux - use cheap PCs as thin clients, but know that the capacity for real computing is still in every machine whenether you want it.
Ironically, the article in Reuters is shown in a fixed-width design, which forces me to either increase my window size or scroll horisontally. Thanks to Opera, though, it only takes one Alt+F11 press to fit the page to width. Opera, thank you very much! BTW, Opera is available on many mobile devices and in light of its recent partnership with Nokia it may expand even further. And Opera on mobile devices has such great technologies as "small-screen" and "medium-screen" rendering to adapt any page to a smaller screen.
Interestingly, this will happen as more competitors enter the market, the competition intensifies, the costs increase, profits drop and so on. It's very easy to spend millions on everything and declare that only the best (employees, computers, furniture, etc.) will do, but you need to have a temporary monopoly for that.
You prove the parent's point. You can be a great engineer. And practically everybody else can be great at something (assuming they have no lesions in their brain). Everybody deserves an interesting job with a comfortable work environment and if everyone was provided that (together with good education, smart managers, etc.) everyone could be as productive as Pixar's employees.
Once again, don't blame the tool.:) I learned using PowerPoint for lectures from my dad, who is an excellent teacher ([one of] the best in his universities), as rated by practically all students. Of course, it's silly to just read the slides (I once attended a teleconference lecture, where a prof in another city read aloud his Powerpoint slides, which were projected next to the video of his head... Talk about a fucking waste of bandwidth...), but guess what - noone is forcing you to. If you aren't comfortable talking to your kids (or adult students), engaging them in dialog, monitoring their understanding of the material, reacting to that in real time, modifying the course of your lesson, then nothing is going to help you and you better chose another job. Some profs use Powerpoint as a crutch, but before that they would just read aloud their notes, with students writing that down - it's hardly a better use of time...
Powerpoint slides are an excellent way to display digitally prepared materials, to help students keep track of what is happening, to interest them and keep their attention, to organise the lecture and engage both auditory and visual senses of the students. You just need skills in using them. just like with everything else.
cannot answer questions - a good hypertext can answer the FAQs. A search engine can answer most of the remaining ones. An e-mail to tutors can deal with the rest.
tell memorable stories that make information stick in your head - a good book or a good article can do that extremely well. A video film can as well. A computer can show these just fine.
deal with the oddball questions that only a living flesh-and-blood teacher can field - again, the FAQs can be answered once and for all and Google (or a better search) can deal with the rest.
I had a simple calculator of the $5 kind. As a result, I have a better idea of what is going on than if I just simply plugged stuff into Student Maple. To put it another way, when I see an integral, I know about Riemann and know what I'm looking at. - the hard way is not always the most efficient way. I heard about dopamine pathways many times before, but I didn't really understand what these are before I saw a nice illustration and read a few paragraphs of text. It is possible to explain any concept and hard manual exercises are not necessary (although they are one way to deal with the problem).
Bottom line - all your arguments against computers are fallacies or simply untrue. With the right software computers can teach at least as well as an average teacher. And the best thing is that while you can't copy your teacher, you can copy software. Designing one excellent math teaching application solves the problem of math education once and for all. If you don't have that software, computers won't help, of course, but it's silly to blame Maple or the computers themselves.
And to solve these problems, my dear Americans, I propose that we:
1. Continue fighting smoking and other drugs in our widely successful War on Drugs. 2. Spend more money on sports in schools. After all, what bad can happen if we build another 15 million dollar football staduim. 3. Implant kids with RFID tags to better monitor attendancy. 4. Ban computers from school. And ban violent video-games, while we are at it. 5. Ban genetically-modified food to prevent our kids from becoming genetically stupid. 6. Ban abortions and gay marriage (I added these two).
The bolded text doesn't mean what you think it means. Interpreted literally it says that the effects of knowing how to use a PC are same as effects of knowing how to use a pencil. This is essentially the same as saying that the effects of not knowing how to use a PC are same as effects of not knowing how to use a pencil.
The effect of not knowing how to use a pencil or a phone is, obviously, not being accepted to any job. The bolded text says that not knowing how to use a PC will not be worse than not knowing how to use a phone, i.e. you won't be hired anywhere, but nothing worse will happen. This is, no doubt, true, but it doesn't follow that teaching computers is wrong. You see, using a phone or a pencil is a) done before the school b) much easier. If one could learn how to effectively use a computer at 3-5 years by trying it out for a few months, then there would not be any point in teaching PC skills in schools. But one can't do that - it takes a few years at least. Ergo, teaching PC skills in schools is the way to go.
Re:not sure about keeping other creatures captive
on
How To Talk To Aliens
·
· Score: 1
This is actually stupid. Having a pet is not a sign of intelligence. And if you talked to a pet-owner you would realise that very soon. We have pets because it's basically a surrogate child. Parenting love is one of the most basic emotions and we just use a substitute for a child.
Other animals sometimes have "pets". What about a cat that would treat some puppies as kids - that's a typical pet owner. There are many such examples documented and they are not substantially different from you owning a pet.
The intelligence lies in our frontal lobes - the ability to reason, to build models, to use imagination, to reason abstractly, etc. Exhibiting typical preprogrammed behaviour is only a sign of intelligence in stupid sci-fi (BTW, I read that story).
In Soviet Union the textbooks were written by the best scientists/teachers/writers, most capable of creating a great textbook. Since you couldn't make a fortune from that book (just the usual author payment of a few hundred roubles), there wasn't an incentive for corruption. As a result the books selected were usually best of breed. So students in the entire country used the best available books. And of course, noone would complain if you copied the entire textbook and placed it on a P2P if there was Internet back then.
Here is an example of planned economy without monetary incentives working better than a capitalistic free market.
This is actually a design shortcoming. The muscles that hold our arms in the air must be contracted all the time and they are not designed for that. So no matter how fit you are, holding your arms in front of you for a long time can be really hard and painful. In fact, I heard somewhere that it was used as a modern torture method by cops somewhere (no evidence left, but after enough time it is just as painful as a kick in the groin).
There won't be archaeologists. In a thousand years all information from Ourmedia and IA will be instantly available in a well-structured form to any of the posthumans anywhere in the inhabited part of our Galaxy. Every posthuman will be able to instantly "recall" everything he needs to know about 2005, about copyright climate at that time, about Slashdot or about creative artists around the world.
Ourmedia does not exist for archaeologists - it exists for you and me.
You are a customer whore. And a scammer. I can have no respect for a person, who tries to cheat someone (even if it's a corporation) out of money or iPods.
If you want to get money, sell a product for a honest price. If you want to get a product, pay for it. Everything else is just pathetic.
There is a difference between crazy ideas and crackpot ideas. When Roger Penrose says we have consciousness because of quantum effects in our brains, this is a crazy idea, I can I can personally deride it as idiotic, but we can't dismiss it outright, because the author is not a fraud, because he follows the scientific method, because he is likely to change his mind when shown evidence to the contrary, etc.
But when someone says that homeopathy works, we can ignore it, because it clearly is a scam. These guys are scamming innocent people out of money, they knowingly ignore the evidence and they don't really care about scientific method.
Similarly, if you claim you found an ancient city ruins somewhere underwater, that's reasonable (although if you claim it is THE Atlantis, we can call it a crazy idea). But if you claim that there is a hidden spaceport under the Pyramid of Cheops, we call you a crackpot.
And even if they are shown to be statistically significant, they will probably still be practically insignificant (i.e. not a major thing to worry about). I don't smoke and I hate smokers (who smoke near me), but I tend to agree that second-hand smoke is probably not too dangerous to me.
"Our urge to rationalize behaviour probably has considerable survival value. The human species got where it is largely by forming complex social constructs - from the hunting party to the political party - and making them work. To work they require that we have confidence in them and to have confidence we need to believe that the actions of these organizations are based on sound, rational judgements."
Look, it's very easy to go on about "freely elected government", but it doesn't make people happier. Freely elected government is not good by itself. And people can be happier, freer and better off under a monarchy or even a dictatorship. Swedes, Danes, Dutch all have kings and queens and they seem to live much better lives overall than the Americans do.
Iraq is a fiasco, because the whole infrastructure went to hell. Public works, factories, universities, everything was badly shaken as people were forced to jump from a relatively civilized and economically well off (ignoring the US-driven idiotic and inhumane sanctions) to a country with powerful clerics, terrorists and the economy in ruins.
Not to mention the pillage of the Iraqi State Museum, prison torture and everything else.
Free elections are overrated. They are just the means to our goals of better lifes for everyone, not the goal itself.
Given how little we know about the nature of the mind (including our perception of pain).
"In fact, scans show that there is no such thing as a pain centre. Pain springs mainly from the activation of areas associated with attention and emotion." (Mapping the Mind, Rita Carter, 1998). We know a lot to be able to say that there is no dedicated brain part that objectively measures how painful something is, it's a construct of our mind and can be manipulated by a placebo.
It's so obvious that his vision isn't artistic, it's financial. It's technological. Lucas is a film geek and we must be grateful to him for THX sound, ILM, digital film cameras, digital projection systems and other stuff which he either created, helped to create or supported in other ways.
You got it right in the end. We need to spread FUD. The truth is that all new technologies that can be developed, will ultimately be developed. DRM and trusted computing are simply too valuable to be ignored. Same with RFID and its privacy implications.
The best thing we can hope for is responsible use of these. If the customers have at least some opposition, the hardware makers and software developers will likely back off somewhat and limit trusted computing to where it belongs (i.e. confidential materials, some commercially distributed DRMed content, etc.). But the customers are well known for their ignorance and for ignoring the important issues. The best way to get their cooperations is to scare them, by telling them through the media that trusted computing is evil - much worse than even cookies or spyware. Fear, Uncertainty and Doubt. That's what we must instill, not just concern for privacy.
Of course, we must not believe the slippery slope fallacy ourselves. There is a very clear distinction between evil and benign trusted computing - the bad one starts when it's no longer possible to run untrusted code. As long as you can do it (and nothing checks it for "illegal" data or operations), the trusted computing is somewhat justified.
Slashdot Mirror
Whether gaming or chatting on AIM (or even email), I refuse to converse with people who can't make an effort to speak properly.
Wlcum 2 my fos. Strng to c such aversn 2 leetspk frm an elitist such as urself. lol!!!!one
I should not have to read your sentences three or four times to figure out what you're saying, just because you're too lazy to write propertly.
We shdnt waste time 'n b-w just 'caus ur too slow-witted. !!!! lol1!11!!!
Takes more time, too.
We waste time riting lik that, u waste som time ridin it. k?! OMFG!!!!12eleventy-one!!!1111!!!
It's not an elitist thing, either.
U sayng that dsnt make it so. Dont play gamez, dont use AIM. Dont force ur "proper" Eng on us. k? lol!!!!!omfglolbbq!!!!one!tanstaafl!!!!!!! wow!!!!!!!11!!! cya!!!!!!!!!!hth!
And in 10 years you will still be a moron repeating tired old soundbites.
I am currently reading Mapping the Mind by Rita Carter, a great book about our current (1998) knowledge about the brain. The most valuable about this book is its factual nature. Reading about countless experiments, observations and other facts, usually with explanations about underlying neural mechanisms about particular behaviours helps realise the nature of the brain - just a complex modular organ that is not unlike computer programs. When you see how easily certain aspects of consciousness (or intelligence) can be broken in people with a minor brain lesion, you very quickly realise that "sentience" doesn't exist - rather there is a large set of behaviours that together are lumped under this label.
Most people who like to endlessly debate about philosophical aspects of sentience as applied to AI, cryonics, mind uploading, etc., usually have no clue whatsoever about how the brain actually works. The same applies to religious people, who instead of following the time-honoured advice of "Learn thyself" and realising the peculiarities and shortcomings of their mind instead are controlled by these very peculiarities.
In light of this, Hawkins's views appear to be quite reasonable.
But does the average desk jockey need a 3GHz processor, 160Gb hard drive and 19-inch LCD monitor to send email, run Excel and Word, and surf the web?
You take the old tasks and the new technology. Of course, these don't match. The same would happen if you asked if the average office worker needed a 2MHz processor and a 1Mb hard drive in 1970 to dictate letters to his secretary, make phone calls through the exchange and read newspapers.
The point is that new technology can be used to work better. If some business hasn't yet found a use for a 3GHz processor, it doesn't logically follow that 3GHz processors are useless for that company, it follows that that company lacks insight and foresight, and is essentially blind. The same can be said about software developers that haven't yet offered products that take advantage of that immense number-crunching power. I'm talking about your company, Bill...
sure, they will take off there - it's a cost thing
A low-end computer already costs around 200$. At this point it doesn't make much sense to try to save a hundred bucks per employee by going the thin-client route (and you will need expensive servers). As a matter of fact, you can get the best of both worlds by using Linux - use cheap PCs as thin clients, but know that the capacity for real computing is still in every machine whenether you want it.
Ironically, the article in Reuters is shown in a fixed-width design, which forces me to either increase my window size or scroll horisontally. Thanks to Opera, though, it only takes one Alt+F11 press to fit the page to width. Opera, thank you very much! BTW, Opera is available on many mobile devices and in light of its recent partnership with Nokia it may expand even further. And Opera on mobile devices has such great technologies as "small-screen" and "medium-screen" rendering to adapt any page to a smaller screen.
Interestingly, this will happen as more competitors enter the market, the competition intensifies, the costs increase, profits drop and so on. It's very easy to spend millions on everything and declare that only the best (employees, computers, furniture, etc.) will do, but you need to have a temporary monopoly for that.
You prove the parent's point. You can be a great engineer. And practically everybody else can be great at something (assuming they have no lesions in their brain). Everybody deserves an interesting job with a comfortable work environment and if everyone was provided that (together with good education, smart managers, etc.) everyone could be as productive as Pixar's employees.
Once again, don't blame the tool. :) I learned using PowerPoint for lectures from my dad, who is an excellent teacher ([one of] the best in his universities), as rated by practically all students. Of course, it's silly to just read the slides (I once attended a teleconference lecture, where a prof in another city read aloud his Powerpoint slides, which were projected next to the video of his head... Talk about a fucking waste of bandwidth...), but guess what - noone is forcing you to. If you aren't comfortable talking to your kids (or adult students), engaging them in dialog, monitoring their understanding of the material, reacting to that in real time, modifying the course of your lesson, then nothing is going to help you and you better chose another job. Some profs use Powerpoint as a crutch, but before that they would just read aloud their notes, with students writing that down - it's hardly a better use of time...
Powerpoint slides are an excellent way to display digitally prepared materials, to help students keep track of what is happening, to interest them and keep their attention, to organise the lecture and engage both auditory and visual senses of the students. You just need skills in using them. just like with everything else.
cannot answer questions - a good hypertext can answer the FAQs. A search engine can answer most of the remaining ones. An e-mail to tutors can deal with the rest.
tell memorable stories that make information stick in your head - a good book or a good article can do that extremely well. A video film can as well. A computer can show these just fine.
deal with the oddball questions that only a living flesh-and-blood teacher can field - again, the FAQs can be answered once and for all and Google (or a better search) can deal with the rest.
I had a simple calculator of the $5 kind. As a result, I have a better idea of what is going on than if I just simply plugged stuff into Student Maple. To put it another way, when I see an integral, I know about Riemann and know what I'm looking at. - the hard way is not always the most efficient way. I heard about dopamine pathways many times before, but I didn't really understand what these are before I saw a nice illustration and read a few paragraphs of text. It is possible to explain any concept and hard manual exercises are not necessary (although they are one way to deal with the problem).
Bottom line - all your arguments against computers are fallacies or simply untrue. With the right software computers can teach at least as well as an average teacher. And the best thing is that while you can't copy your teacher, you can copy software. Designing one excellent math teaching application solves the problem of math education once and for all. If you don't have that software, computers won't help, of course, but it's silly to blame Maple or the computers themselves.
And to solve these problems, my dear Americans, I propose that we:
1. Continue fighting smoking and other drugs in our widely successful War on Drugs.
2. Spend more money on sports in schools. After all, what bad can happen if we build another 15 million dollar football staduim.
3. Implant kids with RFID tags to better monitor attendancy.
4. Ban computers from school. And ban violent video-games, while we are at it.
5. Ban genetically-modified food to prevent our kids from becoming genetically stupid.
6. Ban abortions and gay marriage (I added these two).
Yours, W.
The bolded text doesn't mean what you think it means. Interpreted literally it says that the effects of knowing how to use a PC are same as effects of knowing how to use a pencil. This is essentially the same as saying that the effects of not knowing how to use a PC are same as effects of not knowing how to use a pencil.
The effect of not knowing how to use a pencil or a phone is, obviously, not being accepted to any job. The bolded text says that not knowing how to use a PC will not be worse than not knowing how to use a phone, i.e. you won't be hired anywhere, but nothing worse will happen. This is, no doubt, true, but it doesn't follow that teaching computers is wrong. You see, using a phone or a pencil is a) done before the school b) much easier. If one could learn how to effectively use a computer at 3-5 years by trying it out for a few months, then there would not be any point in teaching PC skills in schools. But one can't do that - it takes a few years at least. Ergo, teaching PC skills in schools is the way to go.
This is actually stupid. Having a pet is not a sign of intelligence. And if you talked to a pet-owner you would realise that very soon. We have pets because it's basically a surrogate child. Parenting love is one of the most basic emotions and we just use a substitute for a child.
Other animals sometimes have "pets". What about a cat that would treat some puppies as kids - that's a typical pet owner. There are many such examples documented and they are not substantially different from you owning a pet.
The intelligence lies in our frontal lobes - the ability to reason, to build models, to use imagination, to reason abstractly, etc. Exhibiting typical preprogrammed behaviour is only a sign of intelligence in stupid sci-fi (BTW, I read that story).
In Soviet Union the textbooks were written by the best scientists/teachers/writers, most capable of creating a great textbook. Since you couldn't make a fortune from that book (just the usual author payment of a few hundred roubles), there wasn't an incentive for corruption. As a result the books selected were usually best of breed. So students in the entire country used the best available books. And of course, noone would complain if you copied the entire textbook and placed it on a P2P if there was Internet back then.
Here is an example of planned economy without monetary incentives working better than a capitalistic free market.
This is actually a design shortcoming. The muscles that hold our arms in the air must be contracted all the time and they are not designed for that. So no matter how fit you are, holding your arms in front of you for a long time can be really hard and painful. In fact, I heard somewhere that it was used as a modern torture method by cops somewhere (no evidence left, but after enough time it is just as painful as a kick in the groin).
There won't be archaeologists. In a thousand years all information from Ourmedia and IA will be instantly available in a well-structured form to any of the posthumans anywhere in the inhabited part of our Galaxy. Every posthuman will be able to instantly "recall" everything he needs to know about 2005, about copyright climate at that time, about Slashdot or about creative artists around the world.
Ourmedia does not exist for archaeologists - it exists for you and me.
You are a customer whore. And a scammer. I can have no respect for a person, who tries to cheat someone (even if it's a corporation) out of money or iPods.
If you want to get money, sell a product for a honest price. If you want to get a product, pay for it. Everything else is just pathetic.
There is a difference between crazy ideas and crackpot ideas. When Roger Penrose says we have consciousness because of quantum effects in our brains, this is a crazy idea, I can I can personally deride it as idiotic, but we can't dismiss it outright, because the author is not a fraud, because he follows the scientific method, because he is likely to change his mind when shown evidence to the contrary, etc.
But when someone says that homeopathy works, we can ignore it, because it clearly is a scam. These guys are scamming innocent people out of money, they knowingly ignore the evidence and they don't really care about scientific method.
Similarly, if you claim you found an ancient city ruins somewhere underwater, that's reasonable (although if you claim it is THE Atlantis, we can call it a crazy idea). But if you claim that there is a hidden spaceport under the Pyramid of Cheops, we call you a crackpot.
And even if they are shown to be statistically significant, they will probably still be practically insignificant (i.e. not a major thing to worry about). I don't smoke and I hate smokers (who smoke near me), but I tend to agree that second-hand smoke is probably not too dangerous to me.
"Our urge to rationalize behaviour probably has considerable survival value. The human species got where it is largely by forming complex social constructs - from the hunting party to the political party - and making them work. To work they require that we have confidence in them and to have confidence we need to believe that the actions of these organizations are based on sound, rational judgements."
from Mapping the Mind, Rita Carter.
Well, the thing that mattered was the Great Patriotic War, which started on June 22, 1941 and ended on the Victory Day, on May 9, 1945.
Look, it's very easy to go on about "freely elected government", but it doesn't make people happier. Freely elected government is not good by itself. And people can be happier, freer and better off under a monarchy or even a dictatorship. Swedes, Danes, Dutch all have kings and queens and they seem to live much better lives overall than the Americans do.
Iraq is a fiasco, because the whole infrastructure went to hell. Public works, factories, universities, everything was badly shaken as people were forced to jump from a relatively civilized and economically well off (ignoring the US-driven idiotic and inhumane sanctions) to a country with powerful clerics, terrorists and the economy in ruins.
Not to mention the pillage of the Iraqi State Museum, prison torture and everything else.
Free elections are overrated. They are just the means to our goals of better lifes for everyone, not the goal itself.
Given how little we know about the nature of the mind (including our perception of pain).
"In fact, scans show that there is no such thing as a pain centre. Pain springs mainly from the activation of areas associated with attention and emotion." (Mapping the Mind, Rita Carter, 1998). We know a lot to be able to say that there is no dedicated brain part that objectively measures how painful something is, it's a construct of our mind and can be manipulated by a placebo.
It's so obvious that his vision isn't artistic, it's financial.
It's technological. Lucas is a film geek and we must be grateful to him for THX sound, ILM, digital film cameras, digital projection systems and other stuff which he either created, helped to create or supported in other ways.
You got it right in the end. We need to spread FUD. The truth is that all new technologies that can be developed, will ultimately be developed. DRM and trusted computing are simply too valuable to be ignored. Same with RFID and its privacy implications.
The best thing we can hope for is responsible use of these. If the customers have at least some opposition, the hardware makers and software developers will likely back off somewhat and limit trusted computing to where it belongs (i.e. confidential materials, some commercially distributed DRMed content, etc.). But the customers are well known for their ignorance and for ignoring the important issues. The best way to get their cooperations is to scare them, by telling them through the media that trusted computing is evil - much worse than even cookies or spyware. Fear, Uncertainty and Doubt. That's what we must instill, not just concern for privacy.
Of course, we must not believe the slippery slope fallacy ourselves. There is a very clear distinction between evil and benign trusted computing - the bad one starts when it's no longer possible to run untrusted code. As long as you can do it (and nothing checks it for "illegal" data or operations), the trusted computing is somewhat justified.