"...raises questions about whether it is ethical for those with a vested interest in the subject to edit entries about it."
Don't the Wikipedia people always say that the reason Wikipedia is so great is that if there's an error about you, or something you know about, you can change it yourself?
Frames per second (fps) is different from refresh rate (hz). You can have a game rendering 30 frames per second while the monitor is refreshing the screen at 60 hz.
"People by nature are selfish, and that goes for corporations that are run by people."
I fail to see how the solution is to put those same people in charge of a government regulatory machine where they can weild even more power.
Keep in mind that the workers here are, quite rightfully, following their own self-interest as well.
Libertarianism recognizes the fact that individuals will follow their own interests and seeks to balance that through free choice. It also seeks to prevent one individual or group from having the ability to impose their interests on others whether it be through corporate ownership or government power.
To expand on the point, Judge Learned Hand wrote in The Spirit of Liberty:
"I often wonder whether we do not rest our hopes too much upon Constitutions, upon laws and upon courts. These are false hopes; believe me, these are false hopes. Liberty lies in the hearts of men and women; when it dies there, no constitution, no law, no court can save it; no constitution, no law, no court can even do much to help it. While it lies there it needs no constitution, no law, no court to save it."
Murder is not wrong because it is illegal, but illegal because society believes it is wrong.
So long as people believe that the exploitation of other people (workers or otherwise) in society is acceptable no law or regulation will be able to correct it.
They can't even accurately predict the temperature or weather for tomorrow, and we're supposed to believe their predictions for hundreds of years down the road?
True, however a computer has yet to defeat Kasparov in a single match, nevermind a large n.;) (Excluding Deeper Blue which was somewhat of an enigma as Kasparov puts it)
Computers may be getting faster at a greater rate than grandmasters are getting smarter but that has nothing to do with their overall ability to play chess. There is much more to chess than simply calculating and evaluating available options at a faster rate, as Kasparov demonstrated in game 3.
The players alternate white and black pieces each game. White has an advantage in chess (due in part to it making the first move). Having an odd number of games would give one player the white pieces in one extra game thus giving that player an unfair advantage in the match.
Slashdot Mirror
The Study: The Fable of the Keys, By S. J. Liebowitz and Stephen E. Margolis
Some Commentary: Typing Errors, By Stan Liebowitz and Stephen E. Margolis
Frames per second (fps) is different from refresh rate (hz). You can have a game rendering 30 frames per second while the monitor is refreshing the screen at 60 hz.
I fail to see how the solution is to put those same people in charge of a government regulatory machine where they can weild even more power.
Keep in mind that the workers here are, quite rightfully, following their own self-interest as well.
Libertarianism recognizes the fact that individuals will follow their own interests and seeks to balance that through free choice. It also seeks to prevent one individual or group from having the ability to impose their interests on others whether it be through corporate ownership or government power.
To expand on the point, Judge Learned Hand wrote in The Spirit of Liberty:
Murder is not wrong because it is illegal, but illegal because society believes it is wrong.
So long as people believe that the exploitation of other people (workers or otherwise) in society is acceptable no law or regulation will be able to correct it.
They can't even accurately predict the temperature or weather for tomorrow, and we're supposed to believe their predictions for hundreds of years down the road?
True, however a computer has yet to defeat Kasparov in a single match, nevermind a large n. ;) (Excluding Deeper Blue which was somewhat of an enigma as Kasparov puts it)
Computers may be getting faster at a greater rate than grandmasters are getting smarter but that has nothing to do with their overall ability to play chess. There is much more to chess than simply calculating and evaluating available options at a faster rate, as Kasparov demonstrated in game 3.
I remember Kasparov once saying something like "I don't think the time will come when a computer can defeat the best human on his best day."
Statistician Jeff Sonas has an interesting article on chessbase.com discussing the history of man vs. machine chess. As for the defeat of Kasparov by Deep Blue, Kasparov had some interesting comments in the Wall Street Journal on that match.
The players alternate white and black pieces each game. White has an advantage in chess (due in part to it making the first move). Having an odd number of games would give one player the white pieces in one extra game thus giving that player an unfair advantage in the match.