As we all know, the subconscious is a powerful thing. Of course, this power is what facilitates stimuli becoming a collective dream. However, the subconscious also directs much of our decision-making process during the day. I'm not suggesting that this company would abuse that power, but it's always possible. Even if it wasn't with malicious intent, but a product of unpredictable circumstances in combination with the "life toy", what happens when a person's mind is altered for the worse?
And the only person (hopefully...) that can define inputs in the source code would be the programmer. In other words, the most obvious limitation of this kind of program is that the user must have access to the source, knowledge of how to modify the source, and a means to compile and run the source.
is called "TCP/IP port filtering". I have encountered this experience personally, on my dorm network. When I reinstalled WinXP, I didn't even have time to download SP1 before a virus made its way onto my computer and the IS dept shut off my port. However, I've found that if I leave my network cord unpliugged (card disabled, etc) until I have setup my TCP/IP filtering settings to allow only port 80, I can then download the necessary patches, update, and remove the filter. No problems yet!
Maybe when everyone has their own personal assembler, no one will feel compelled to buy anything anymore. Therefore, the only people in business selling a product will be those selling assemblers. But maybe there will also come a day when the government provides them, too... kinda like phone booths. The phone book could be a directory of things it can make. Anyway, the market would die, but only products. People selling services would still be valued.
Of course, I can imagine that someone would get the idea to copy a person so that they wouldn't even have to pay for services... just make a servant. I think in this case the government would make a law against copying a human- much in the same lines with the cloning issue today- so as not to devalue the human life;). Maybe if everyone had anything they wanted at the touch of a button, we would all shift our new attention to creating new and better things, instead of the pursuit of money. Of course, money would have to be kept track of electronically, if it still existed, since it could easily be copied. True, the serial numbers would be the same, but it could be spent before it was caught as a double.
Well, that's the end of my rant.. tell me what you think. Also, I have a question. Forgive me for not RTFA, but from what the poster said, it seemed to point at the fact that the assemblers simply rearranged matter. On what level does this happen? i.e. would i be able to make an apple if i threw in some raw glucose, pure water, etc.? would i need even that?
In response to this post as well as the parent:
First, to this post:
The error I observe here is that a sound's full purpose is to be heard. Without something to hear, the sound is meaningless, and -some would argue- null. However, the sole purpose of the tree's *existence* is not to be seen. Therefors not seeing the tree does not nullify its existence.
Now, to the parent:
This being a rather anal attention to detail- the use of the phrase 'no one' implies a human being (or perhaps a sentient alien being).. this excludes animals, which are possibly (and actually probably more likely) to be in the middle of a forest when a tree falls. Of course, I'm sure the professor would concede and then point out that animals can be included simply for the purpose of the argument.
... and to *determine* how high he is, we have a formula!
.403a + 20,000f + 1.0d - 93h = gal
A is Alf. Just Alf.
F is, of course, the fuzziness of the sound he heard while writing this equation.
D stand for the 'dankness quality' in the taste of his meal that day.
H is the hardness factor of yesterday.
This all computes to the GAL, or GET A LIFE factor.
While the parent is extremely racist and unappreciated, I agree with his point that the movie is about White, Western European heritage, and that an African would be out of place.
Oddly enough, people are not always as they appear. However, you certainly seem to have completely and utterly judged this girl from one encounter with her. I'd say that qualifies you as:
a. self-righteous
b. jumping to wrong conclusions (perhaps)
c. insulting someone in public (definitely)
I agree. People are accustomed to what they already know.. I suppose that can be restated as "people are afraid of change".
Since everything that has a beginning has an end, an immortal would forever be watching things end. Now, if you were motivated, you could create things yourself, or keep things from ending (like support efforts toward saving endangered species).
EditPlus! I'm using EditPlus v2.11 at work as a student programmer at my school. There are many people around me who work in vi, but I have never felt even remotely motivated to learn the commands for that program. EditPlus is like a hyped-up notepad, with line numbers, etc... all the good functions of a word processor (like ease of use) without all the annoying MS crap.
Uh, close, but let me give you a better example:
14-year-old kid gets a pirated copy from Kazaa or anywhere else, shuts himself up in his room (maybe even with the sound turned down really low) and plays while his parents think he's doing whatever. (Reading/. perhaps)
The family lives just outside of city limits, far enough out in the woods to justify having a rifle to keep those !#@$!@$ (name a predator) away from their (name a prey).
I'm really quite sure that the parents probably didn't know the game existed, much less that their kid was playing it. And the reason I gave for the availability of the firearm isn't exactly definitive, but it's certainly possible.
I showed the/. article to my friend and he mentioned that he remembers an old (1991 I think) Sony arcade game called Hologram Time Travelers. In this game, the characters and landscape all floated in midair, there was no screen. He said he liked poking them while they walked around. Here's a couple links about the game:
first one
second one
I know! Let's sue the gun manufacturers!
Or maybe the gun retailer!
Or someone ELSE would sue the parents for raising their kids wrong!
Or they could sue the car manufacturers for building cars when they KNEW that games like GTA exsited!
Or you could sue the people that parked the cars outside of these kids' home.
Or you could sue the kids for playing the game and being STUPID enough to confuse a game with real life.
Or...
Or..
Or.
It seems to me that this is the way that ultrasonic planes should have been built in the first place. The concept is so simple that I knew what the whole article would be about after I read the title of the summary.
Before I begin, would like to encourage discussion on this post as long as it is constructive. That means no bashing from either side of the debate. I have seen a lot of attacks on persons instead of facts. This is not the way to actually morally resolve an issue.
I say 'morally resolve', because I believe that the public is rather undecided about this matter. We all want our free music, but we know that taking something for free that is supposed to be for sale is called stealing.
So, I am going to present my thoughts about both sides, since I am one of those undecided members of the public community.
First, for the RIAA:
1. What they are selling is the right to listen to the music, not the actual data that defines the music. Therefore, if you have not bought the right to listen to it, having the data on your personal computer is a pretty good clue that you are acting illegaly.
2. The artists who write / perform and ultimately sell their music depend on it for a living (duh). Their music is (mostly) sold via CD. The CD is a container for their data, which we have bought _the right to listen to_. So... if you haven't bought the CD personally, you do not have the legal right to own the mp3 ripped from that CD.
Now, for the public:
(Number 1 is the most convincing point in my mind, as I tend to lean on the side of the people)
1. If I don't have the right to hear the music, why can I legally listen to it when I go to a friend's house, or when I borrow their CD, etc.? How is hearing it on a friend's borrowed CD different from hearing it from my computer's speakers via mp3?
2. Some songs I download and listen to will convince me to buy the CD, even if I wasn't going to before. (This is why I think the sales of CDs have not been inversely proportional to the amount of file-sharing traffic on a whole).
Again, please... I would like to hear some rational, calm, intelligent discussion on this topic.
Slashdot Mirror
As we all know, the subconscious is a powerful thing. Of course, this power is what facilitates stimuli becoming a collective dream. However, the subconscious also directs much of our decision-making process during the day. I'm not suggesting that this company would abuse that power, but it's always possible. Even if it wasn't with malicious intent, but a product of unpredictable circumstances in combination with the "life toy", what happens when a person's mind is altered for the worse?
And the only person (hopefully...) that can define inputs in the source code would be the programmer. In other words, the most obvious limitation of this kind of program is that the user must have access to the source, knowledge of how to modify the source, and a means to compile and run the source.
is called "TCP/IP port filtering". I have encountered this experience personally, on my dorm network. When I reinstalled WinXP, I didn't even have time to download SP1 before a virus made its way onto my computer and the IS dept shut off my port. However, I've found that if I leave my network cord unpliugged (card disabled, etc) until I have setup my TCP/IP filtering settings to allow only port 80, I can then download the necessary patches, update, and remove the filter. No problems yet!
Apparently just enough to still type with 2 hands...
Maybe when everyone has their own personal assembler, no one will feel compelled to buy anything anymore. Therefore, the only people in business selling a product will be those selling assemblers. But maybe there will also come a day when the government provides them, too... kinda like phone booths. The phone book could be a directory of things it can make. Anyway, the market would die, but only products. People selling services would still be valued. ;). Maybe if everyone had anything they wanted at the touch of a button, we would all shift our new attention to creating new and better things, instead of the pursuit of money. Of course, money would have to be kept track of electronically, if it still existed, since it could easily be copied. True, the serial numbers would be the same, but it could be spent before it was caught as a double.
Of course, I can imagine that someone would get the idea to copy a person so that they wouldn't even have to pay for services... just make a servant. I think in this case the government would make a law against copying a human- much in the same lines with the cloning issue today- so as not to devalue the human life
Well, that's the end of my rant.. tell me what you think. Also, I have a question. Forgive me for not RTFA, but from what the poster said, it seemed to point at the fact that the assemblers simply rearranged matter. On what level does this happen? i.e. would i be able to make an apple if i threw in some raw glucose, pure water, etc.? would i need even that?
*droolz*... i want one of those! 10... 11... 12... ...
In response to this post as well as the parent:
First, to this post:
The error I observe here is that a sound's full purpose is to be heard. Without something to hear, the sound is meaningless, and -some would argue- null. However, the sole purpose of the tree's *existence* is not to be seen. Therefors not seeing the tree does not nullify its existence.
Now, to the parent:
This being a rather anal attention to detail- the use of the phrase 'no one' implies a human being (or perhaps a sentient alien being).. this excludes animals, which are possibly (and actually probably more likely) to be in the middle of a forest when a tree falls. Of course, I'm sure the professor would concede and then point out that animals can be included simply for the purpose of the argument.
okay... corrected version:
Any expression
2^n
where n is a positive integer will be even,
and subtracting 1 will make it odd.
*ahem* :)
with one exception
... and to *determine* how high he is, we have a formula!
.403a + 20,000f + 1.0d - 93h = gal
A is Alf. Just Alf.
F is, of course, the fuzziness of the sound he heard while writing this equation.
D stand for the 'dankness quality' in the taste of his meal that day.
H is the hardness factor of yesterday.
This all computes to the GAL, or GET A LIFE factor.
While the parent is extremely racist and unappreciated, I agree with his point that the movie is about White, Western European heritage, and that an African would be out of place.
...Or maybe they don't want to be flooded with emails? ...7...8...9...10...11... oh what the hell, that's long enough
Oddly enough, people are not always as they appear. However, you certainly seem to have completely and utterly judged this girl from one encounter with her. I'd say that qualifies you as:
a. self-righteous
b. jumping to wrong conclusions (perhaps)
c. insulting someone in public (definitely)
Luckily, all guys aren't like you.
I agree. People are accustomed to what they already know.. I suppose that can be restated as "people are afraid of change".
Since everything that has a beginning has an end, an immortal would forever be watching things end. Now, if you were motivated, you could create things yourself, or keep things from ending (like support efforts toward saving endangered species).
EditPlus! I'm using EditPlus v2.11 at work as a student programmer at my school. There are many people around me who work in vi, but I have never felt even remotely motivated to learn the commands for that program. EditPlus is like a hyped-up notepad, with line numbers, etc... all the good functions of a word processor (like ease of use) without all the annoying MS crap.
Uh, close, but let me give you a better example: 14-year-old kid gets a pirated copy from Kazaa or anywhere else, shuts himself up in his room (maybe even with the sound turned down really low) and plays while his parents think he's doing whatever. (Reading /. perhaps)
The family lives just outside of city limits, far enough out in the woods to justify having a rifle to keep those !#@$!@$ (name a predator) away from their (name a prey).
I'm really quite sure that the parents probably didn't know the game existed, much less that their kid was playing it. And the reason I gave for the availability of the firearm isn't exactly definitive, but it's certainly possible.
see my sig.
Hmm links are wrong.
Here are the links:
first link
second one
I showed the /. article to my friend and he mentioned that he remembers an old (1991 I think) Sony arcade game called Hologram Time Travelers.
In this game, the characters and landscape all floated in midair, there was no screen. He said he liked poking them while they walked around. Here's a couple links about the game:
first one
second one
Responsible: You keep saying that word. I do not think it means what you think it means.
I know! Let's sue the gun manufacturers! Or maybe the gun retailer! Or someone ELSE would sue the parents for raising their kids wrong! Or they could sue the car manufacturers for building cars when they KNEW that games like GTA exsited! Or you could sue the people that parked the cars outside of these kids' home. Or you could sue the kids for playing the game and being STUPID enough to confuse a game with real life. Or... Or.. Or.
It seems to me that this is the way that ultrasonic planes should have been built in the first place. The concept is so simple that I knew what the whole article would be about after I read the title of the summary.
In the first article listed in the post, which you can visit here, the subtitle says it's open-source.
Before I begin, would like to encourage discussion on this post as long as it is constructive. That means no bashing from either side of the debate. I have seen a lot of attacks on persons instead of facts. This is not the way to actually morally resolve an issue.
I say 'morally resolve', because I believe that the public is rather undecided about this matter. We all want our free music, but we know that taking something for free that is supposed to be for sale is called stealing.
So, I am going to present my thoughts about both sides, since I am one of those undecided members of the public community.
First, for the RIAA:
1. What they are selling is the right to listen to the music, not the actual data that defines the music.
Therefore, if you have not bought the right to listen to it, having the data on your personal computer is a pretty good clue that you are acting illegaly.
2. The artists who write / perform and ultimately sell their music depend on it for a living (duh). Their music is (mostly) sold via CD.
The CD is a container for their data, which we have bought _the right to listen to_.
So... if you haven't bought the CD personally, you do not have the legal right to own the mp3 ripped from that CD.
Now, for the public:
(Number 1 is the most convincing point in my mind, as I tend to lean on the side of the people)
1. If I don't have the right to hear the music, why can I legally listen to it when I go to a friend's house, or when I borrow their CD, etc.? How is hearing it on a friend's borrowed CD different from hearing it from my computer's speakers via mp3?
2. Some songs I download and listen to will convince me to buy the CD, even if I wasn't going to before. (This is why I think the sales of CDs have not been inversely proportional to the amount of file-sharing traffic on a whole).
Again, please... I would like to hear some rational, calm, intelligent discussion on this topic.
Or perhaps the difference between funny and
// discerned through punctation. //
// If you but a ";-)" //
// to believe your serious //
stupid can be discerned through spelling?
Okay, the last one's a grammar typo, so I guess you were partly right.