20 years from now, searches will incorporate far more AI-like characteristics to find what we're looking for. Future historians will simply set the parameters of the search and a computer will be the one sifting through the massive number of inane tweets.
So that's why it'll try to wipe off humanity. I always wondered why the supercomputers in B-grade science fiction always hate humanity with a passion far in excess of what their cold silicon hearts should be capable of, but now it all makes sense. I, for one, welcome our new b-tarduter overlords!
On the other hand, with the current decay of the English language, I half expect that within 20 years, you'll see text books with sentences like, "Can U BlEv George Washington had woodN tEth...LOL!" So future historians may find all those LOLs unremarkable.
Given strong AI, as would be necessary for your research scenario, wouldn't the majority of textbooks be written by the computers? Or would the whole concept even make sense anymore: want to learn about something, have that advanced search algorithm search the Net and present the results in a form of a textbook or other learning material?
I'd put this to you - if civilians understood that they would get killed in wars too, they might be a lot less likely to build, finance and cheer on the armies to fight them.
Or they'd be even more eager to build a strong one, to ensure that in any conflict their army massacres the enemy and not the other way around. "Hannibal is at our gates" is a pretty good argument to increase military spending.
And please stop using France as an excuse for not giving a shit about anything beyond your own borders.
When the US deploys troops somewhere in the world it's "invading". When it doesn't, it's "not giving a shit about anything beyond its own borders". I guess this is one war the US really can't win;).
Which is why I pray to the imaginary God that we will see the civil war the wing-nutters predict, so I can do to you what you so casually believe we should do to others.
He didn't say that you should go and massacre others, he simply said that if you get to a fight it's good to be able to massacre your enemies rather than get massacred by them. It's no difference than saying that it's a good thing to be a karate champion if you ever got into a fight.
You, on the other hand, just prayed for a war simply because you happen to dislike one of the potential victims, you bloodthirsty maniac.
So this is flamebait why? The US Army did use white phosphorous in Fallujah and did so even according to the US Army themselves. White phosphorous is a terrible substance that "melts people's bodies down to the bone", and requires significant moral gymnastics/cowardice* to justify as a weapon of war.
What, exactly speaking, is so much more morally reprehensible about burning someone's body to ashes than splattering their brains to the wall? Either way they're just as dead, and it's not like fire that hot is likely to cause a more painful or slow death than a stomach wound.
If all the major nations in the world agreed to a nuclear free world, it makes no sense to it to be derailed because of an insignificant dictator.
If the dictator is the only one with nukes, he isn't insignificant anymore, since he can use them without fear of retaliation.
That's why the world will never be nuke-free. No one can be certain that everyone else really has destroyed every last nuke, so they'll need to keep a few, just in case. And they'll need to let those other powers know that they are keeping a few for them to act as a deterrent.
This whole plan is stupid, and speaks quite lowly of Obama's intelligence too.
It might help to keep in mind that while the Russians were more organized and had more power, they were sane. We're not facing mutually assured destruction, but North Korea would be more likely to nuke SOMEONE than the USSR.
Insane doesn't imply stupid. Kim isn't going to nuke anyone, because if he does, he'll be giving up his palace and harem.
Anyone ever complained to the factory that the engine should be 0.3 mm to the left in their car?
I've often been tempted to call them and discuss the placement of components, whenever I've had to replace a headlight. People who design engine compartments should have a mandatory period of working as mechanics first.
What do we do to protect the police from rantings of ignorant bloggers who are pissed off because they got caught breaking the law in the past and can't except the results?
Well, the standard we hold schoolkids to is to either ignore the taunter or taunt him back. Do you think the police might be able to reach such level of maturity? Or are you seriously suggesting that "he called me names" is an acceptable reason to raid someone's house?
Seriously, grow a thicker skin. You're starting to sound like the muslims during that whole Mohammed cartoon thing.
Before you start talking about how we should attack politicians and cops, lets find out if they actually did anything wrong first instead of jumping to knee jerk reactions based on some emotional connection to a technological fad.
Certainly. Perhaps you should consider extending this courtesy to the blogger?
Until there are some facts, it'll just be a bunch of retarded comments on other no name blogs that no one that matters or doesnt' wear a tin foil hat cares about.
Assuming the guy didn't deserve it. You don't know why they did it. All you know is that this guy claims they are singling him out.
True, we don't know anything with certainty. However, it sure is mighty suspicious when authority raids the home of someone critical of said authority.
Why the fuck do you idiots assume he is telling the truth? Innocent until proven guilt, no argument there, but no where does that statement say that you BELIEVE WHAT THEY SAY until proven guilty.
It is incoherent to simultaneously assume someone not guilty and not believe them when they say they are, in fact, not guilty.
I hate to tell you this but most of the time when you get attacked on this level, its because you did something wrong in the first place.
Do you have some statistics to back that claim?
For all you know they 'blogging' could be a front for a local child porn ring.
Why would a child porn ring need a "front"? What could the blog possibly offer their operations? And if this hypothetical criminal organization needed a front, why choose one that was bound to attract police attention?
If you're going to go making wild accusations with no basis whatsoever, at least make them somewhat plausible.
Only on slashdot with a bunch of paranoid 12 year olds would the first reaction to be that he was completely innocent and the cops were wrong.
So why read this forum? Go back to 4chan and learn to troll properly. Or did they ban you from there already? Or just laugh you out?
Another hint, if you start poking a sleeping bear with a stick, the bear eventually will wake up and eat your ass for breakfast. I suspect his blogging resulted in roughly the same result.
Here in Finland we shoot man-eating beasts as threats to public safety rather than give them a badge and a gun. But I guess that in Capitalist America, the beast shoots you !-)
How is it any different from Europeans worried about losing their local cultural expressions to the Muslim immigrants?
It's not a fear about losing our culture, it's fear about the evils of Islam. We don't need more honour killings, and really don't need more fatwas against cartoonists or writers.
People think their cultures are valuable. Quebec does something about it.
Language is not culture. A part of it, perhaps, but not all that important. It's the value system which defines a culture; a language is nothing more than a vehicle for communication.
The whole idea behind the laws are that both cultures are intrinsically valuable and worth protecting.
Every time I hear about protecting a culture I can't help but remember those displays in museums where they have dummies dressed as people of a bygone era, engaged in activities typical of such people. I fear that these "cultural protectionists" see people much like these dummies: not as people but as decorations, something to be kept in its place for their enjoyment.
If a culture dies, all it really means is that no one chooses to adhere to it. Why should they be deprived of the freedom to choose? The world isn't a museum and people aren't wax dummies on display.
Do you have any idea what that costs that taxpayer? Or how stupid it is?
As someone who lives in Finland, which is similarly burdened by Swedish: yes, I do.
Protecting cultural heritage is one thing, but this is even worse than political correctness run amuck, because it's groupthink feeding into this mentality that it's bigoted to be against these policies, even when they're ridiculously inefficient.
It isn't about "cultural heritage", it's about some people wanting to have their way at every else's expense. After all, if you are natively a speaker of minority language, you are at a disadvantage towards people who speak the majority one; so force them to waste their time learning the minority one in school to drag them down and simultaneously force them to provide public services in the minority language for your benefit.
Oh well, all the forced Swedish lessons and wasted tax money did was give me an undying hatred towards the language and the country, to the point where I simply refuse to speak it. I suspect it's no different in Canada with Frenchkarna.
(2) If I ever meet you IRL, I will be sure to communicate only in gestures with ambiguous interpretations, because that is how I shall choose to communicate.:D
As it happens, neither sign language nor hand-waving are forbidden by law, so you go right ahead and do so.
talk about single point of failure. If another country (or terrorist) wanted to seriously hurt the US, they'd just have to target a broad swath of these offshore windmills. A pretty easy target I'd think?
Destroying a lot of windmills is a lot harder than to destroy a single large powerplant (remember, a single wind turbine typically generates only a few megawatts). The turbines are further protected by the fact that they're in the middle of an ocean, where no one normally passes anywhere near them, and anyone going near them can be reliably detected by radar/sonar and can be assumed to be hostile.
Based on the above, I'd say that the turbines would present a lot harder target than the current large powerplants. Just make them small and cheap and use a lot of them dispersed over a large area, and it's no longer cost-effective to destroy them, since the effort would end up costing more to the attacker than the cost of replacing them.
Bah, it's probably just the MPAA's new business model. They know the movie is a piece of crap that won't do well in the theatre... so instead they "leak" it then sue everyone that touches the torrent.
It's "Wolverine". It could be still images of comic panels drawn in stickman style the whole movie, and it would still sell like bottled water in Sahara. Not even Hollywood can possibly screw up so badly that this will be a flop.
Pfth. You command line wussies are gonna be the next to be hit while those of us who read the packets straight from the CAT-5 laugh at your insecure browsers.
Right until your brain gets pwned. Humans contain plenty of known bugs, and the update is not yet available.
In case you haven't guessed it yet, APRIL FOOLS!!! Seriously, if we get any real news about outages, deaths, or disruptions actually caused by Conficker today, you will read it here first.
How do you know it's not that part that is the April fool? That is, rather than publishing a fictitious article, make you believe that a legitimate article is untrue?
Deformable terrain in games is fun for a while but the inevitable restraints sap the fun from it. These restraints are necessary so you don't destroy the stairs you need to get to the next area and end up stuck in the basement having to reload.
Give the player the ability climb most surfaces. It's pretty feasible, given that the player character is almost universally an elite mercenary ninja marine of some sort.
Or just make the player a Demon God from El-hazard with nuclear blasts and an ability to fly, and bring the collateral damage to truly epic level. Thought I'm sure they'd still put in minibosses that take hundreds of nucular hits to kill...
Still, wouldn't you love to play Grand Theft: Apocalypse ?-)
Personally, I'd rather the perverts wank to hand-drawn cartoons than to images of REAL children. No one gets harmed by cartoons - published or otherwise.
Yes... But then perverts might have satisfaction. They might be able to hide amongst us and function as normal members of society, rather than being ostracized and constantly punished for being born that way. Surely you agree that sacrificing a few children is an acceptable price for the righteous cause of making pedophiles less comfortable?
The thing is, protecting the innocent is not as much fun as punishing the guilty. It doesn't make various vigilantes feel powerful, while a few witch burnings do. It's not about making the children safe, it's about finding people to punish publicly.
Although drawing a naked baby being raped by guys in rabbit suits might not involve any children who once or ever will exist, it's still obscene. Lots of laws exist to prevent that level of obscenity.
Indeed. For example, the bill linked from the summary, which contains the following passage:
(a) a moving or still image (produced by any means), or
(b)data (stored by any means) which is capable of conversion into an image within paragraph (a).
This is a very interesting passage. It seems to suggest that your description of a bunny-rape scene could be against the law, if said description could be turned into a graphical representation somehow. And indeed it can: I could draw it, based on your description - not well, but then again artistic merit is not listed as requirement to qualify as a illegal.
In other words, you are a criminal and a child pornographer, you sick fuck.
Slashdot Mirror
So that's why it'll try to wipe off humanity. I always wondered why the supercomputers in B-grade science fiction always hate humanity with a passion far in excess of what their cold silicon hearts should be capable of, but now it all makes sense. I, for one, welcome our new b-tarduter overlords!
Given strong AI, as would be necessary for your research scenario, wouldn't the majority of textbooks be written by the computers? Or would the whole concept even make sense anymore: want to learn about something, have that advanced search algorithm search the Net and present the results in a form of a textbook or other learning material?
Or they'd be even more eager to build a strong one, to ensure that in any conflict their army massacres the enemy and not the other way around. "Hannibal is at our gates" is a pretty good argument to increase military spending.
When the US deploys troops somewhere in the world it's "invading". When it doesn't, it's "not giving a shit about anything beyond its own borders". I guess this is one war the US really can't win ;).
He didn't say that you should go and massacre others, he simply said that if you get to a fight it's good to be able to massacre your enemies rather than get massacred by them. It's no difference than saying that it's a good thing to be a karate champion if you ever got into a fight.
You, on the other hand, just prayed for a war simply because you happen to dislike one of the potential victims, you bloodthirsty maniac.
What, exactly speaking, is so much more morally reprehensible about burning someone's body to ashes than splattering their brains to the wall? Either way they're just as dead, and it's not like fire that hot is likely to cause a more painful or slow death than a stomach wound.
Now now, let's not make false accusations. MediaWhatever and the RIAA aren't fraudsters. They're extortionists. There's a difference.
If the dictator is the only one with nukes, he isn't insignificant anymore, since he can use them without fear of retaliation.
That's why the world will never be nuke-free. No one can be certain that everyone else really has destroyed every last nuke, so they'll need to keep a few, just in case. And they'll need to let those other powers know that they are keeping a few for them to act as a deterrent.
This whole plan is stupid, and speaks quite lowly of Obama's intelligence too.
Insane doesn't imply stupid. Kim isn't going to nuke anyone, because if he does, he'll be giving up his palace and harem.
So don't wait. Do it during the setup. Simply run the detection routine and then spin up the drive to see if there was a floppy there. Simple as that.
But I guess Computer Science III is beyond most people :^).
I've often been tempted to call them and discuss the placement of components, whenever I've had to replace a headlight. People who design engine compartments should have a mandatory period of working as mechanics first.
Well, the standard we hold schoolkids to is to either ignore the taunter or taunt him back. Do you think the police might be able to reach such level of maturity? Or are you seriously suggesting that "he called me names" is an acceptable reason to raid someone's house?
Seriously, grow a thicker skin. You're starting to sound like the muslims during that whole Mohammed cartoon thing.
Certainly. Perhaps you should consider extending this courtesy to the blogger?
So which one are you?
True, we don't know anything with certainty. However, it sure is mighty suspicious when authority raids the home of someone critical of said authority.
It is incoherent to simultaneously assume someone not guilty and not believe them when they say they are, in fact, not guilty.
Do you have some statistics to back that claim?
Why would a child porn ring need a "front"? What could the blog possibly offer their operations? And if this hypothetical criminal organization needed a front, why choose one that was bound to attract police attention?
If you're going to go making wild accusations with no basis whatsoever, at least make them somewhat plausible.
So why read this forum? Go back to 4chan and learn to troll properly. Or did they ban you from there already? Or just laugh you out?
Here in Finland we shoot man-eating beasts as threats to public safety rather than give them a badge and a gun. But I guess that in Capitalist America, the beast shoots you !-)
It's not a fear about losing our culture, it's fear about the evils of Islam. We don't need more honour killings, and really don't need more fatwas against cartoonists or writers.
Language is not culture. A part of it, perhaps, but not all that important. It's the value system which defines a culture; a language is nothing more than a vehicle for communication.
Every time I hear about protecting a culture I can't help but remember those displays in museums where they have dummies dressed as people of a bygone era, engaged in activities typical of such people. I fear that these "cultural protectionists" see people much like these dummies: not as people but as decorations, something to be kept in its place for their enjoyment.
If a culture dies, all it really means is that no one chooses to adhere to it. Why should they be deprived of the freedom to choose? The world isn't a museum and people aren't wax dummies on display.
As someone who lives in Finland, which is similarly burdened by Swedish: yes, I do.
It isn't about "cultural heritage", it's about some people wanting to have their way at every else's expense. After all, if you are natively a speaker of minority language, you are at a disadvantage towards people who speak the majority one; so force them to waste their time learning the minority one in school to drag them down and simultaneously force them to provide public services in the minority language for your benefit.
Oh well, all the forced Swedish lessons and wasted tax money did was give me an undying hatred towards the language and the country, to the point where I simply refuse to speak it. I suspect it's no different in Canada with Frenchkarna.
As it happens, neither sign language nor hand-waving are forbidden by law, so you go right ahead and do so.
Destroying a lot of windmills is a lot harder than to destroy a single large powerplant (remember, a single wind turbine typically generates only a few megawatts). The turbines are further protected by the fact that they're in the middle of an ocean, where no one normally passes anywhere near them, and anyone going near them can be reliably detected by radar/sonar and can be assumed to be hostile.
Based on the above, I'd say that the turbines would present a lot harder target than the current large powerplants. Just make them small and cheap and use a lot of them dispersed over a large area, and it's no longer cost-effective to destroy them, since the effort would end up costing more to the attacker than the cost of replacing them.
And did that ever stop anyone?
It's "Wolverine". It could be still images of comic panels drawn in stickman style the whole movie, and it would still sell like bottled water in Sahara. Not even Hollywood can possibly screw up so badly that this will be a flop.
Right until your brain gets pwned. Humans contain plenty of known bugs, and the update is not yet available.
How do you know it's not that part that is the April fool? That is, rather than publishing a fictitious article, make you believe that a legitimate article is untrue?
Give the player the ability climb most surfaces. It's pretty feasible, given that the player character is almost universally an elite mercenary ninja marine of some sort.
Or just make the player a Demon God from El-hazard with nuclear blasts and an ability to fly, and bring the collateral damage to truly epic level. Thought I'm sure they'd still put in minibosses that take hundreds of nucular hits to kill...
Still, wouldn't you love to play Grand Theft: Apocalypse ?-)
Yes... But then perverts might have satisfaction. They might be able to hide amongst us and function as normal members of society, rather than being ostracized and constantly punished for being born that way. Surely you agree that sacrificing a few children is an acceptable price for the righteous cause of making pedophiles less comfortable?
The thing is, protecting the innocent is not as much fun as punishing the guilty. It doesn't make various vigilantes feel powerful, while a few witch burnings do. It's not about making the children safe, it's about finding people to punish publicly.
Indeed. For example, the bill linked from the summary, which contains the following passage:
This is a very interesting passage. It seems to suggest that your description of a bunny-rape scene could be against the law, if said description could be turned into a graphical representation somehow. And indeed it can: I could draw it, based on your description - not well, but then again artistic merit is not listed as requirement to qualify as a illegal.
In other words, you are a criminal and a child pornographer, you sick fuck.