An interesting supposition, but that doesn't really account for counter-culture which I'd say is perhaps part rebellion against the very thing you talk about and perhaps part people developing their own tastes.
You are correct though that there is a certain emotional/base urge behind all this, but I doubt highly that these urges could ever rival our more primal ones which we resist or at least veil all the time. I did use the example of sex earlier, but there are certainly others. Not eating when there's food in front of us and we're starving happens often enough too. At least to me.
That said, I have no doubt that as marketing becomes more 'sophisticated', more and more people will find themselves sucked in - not necessarily against their will, but because they have been conditioned to like this and dislike that. Some people are sheep and take things at face value. They will be the ones affected, but that has little to do with marketing and everything to do with them.
This is hardly a new thing. Marketing firms have been using psychology as a tool for developing more effective ads since the stone age. Neuroscience is just an extension of what they know about what people respond to, I don't think it's any reason to be concerned.
In the end, you either have control over your urges, wants, and needs, or you don't. You either are in control of yourself or you're not. If you're not, then you've probably accrued all sorts of gadgets, toys, and things you don't really need. And doubtless you have/had sex with anyone that got you remotely excited. Actually, that doesn't sound so bad...
Really, though, we are either in control of our faculties or we are not. If we're not, then we're just animals with no will. If we are, then this is no more concerning then someone plucking your heart strings to sell insurance. I highly doubt there is some subversive way they can force us to buy against our will using some sort of deep-seated neurological button. A shopping spree isn't exactly a survival mechanism.
With SSO's victory all but assured, what's the next step for X-prize? Will there be another one? Seems like we just scratched the surface with getting people into LEO.
Some have suggested getting them to orbit, which is great (and as a space-tourist, I'd love to see the earth from a little further up where I can see both poles at once), but I'd rather see this:
The next X-prize is for a privately funded trans-Atlantic (I guess the Pacific is equally viable) flight capable of carrying 10 passengers across the ocean through LEO, probably within a certain amount of time (say 2 hours?) and not exceeding 3 or 4 g's.
I'd say this is the inevitable destination of civilian space travel in the short term, so it makes sense to push people towards doing more than just going straight up and down.
The question is not about whether he's paid his dues to society or is talented/not talented. The question is, does hiring a worm writer set a bad precedent and make worm writing as a means of attaining a dream tech job with loads of pay worth the risk of being caught? Are we saying to other would-be writers that if you're good enough at disrupting information flow and computer/network use that you will be given cushy jobs that most geeks could only dream of being offered?
I say that there are plenty of people equally smart out there with the ability to have created and/or exploited a security vulnerability who instead report the potential and by that action itself have proven to be better, more trustworthy and honest people right there. This kid's got a lot of life ahead of him and plenty of time to mend his ways, but I think rewarding him right out the door is a bad idea.
Further, I would be skeptical at best about installing _any_ software that this kid has been involved with, much less software that is supposed to protect me.
So should they hire him? Absolutely not.
PS Hire me!
Agreed. It's also important to note they only ask him to remove trademarked images and data collection stuff related to the Accessible Odeon site. While they should be questioning why their site only works with IE, etc, these are still perfectly reasonable requests, and I think it's also worth noting that as far as the letter goes, they were fine with him continuing to run the site.
Yeah, the David & Goliath stories are a lot more interesting and get people excited/upset at Goliath, but just 'cause he's big and (arguably) stupid, doesn't mean he's not a nice guy.
Since we see many examples of light behaving as a wave and as a particle, I have to agree that treating it as two separate models is not the way to go.
Now, I admit I know little/nothing aside from a few Physics classes while studying engineering, but these are things I think about when I consider the duality of light, even if they might be so ludicrous to some that they are correct.
I do, however, find it difficult (at best) to believe in parallel universes/multiple worlds. So, alternatives that seem more plausible in my mind:
Possibilities:
1) A photon is a particle that travels in a wave instead of in a straight line. This doesn't explain the results of the 4-hole 1-photon experiment.
2) The result of a photon travelling at relativistic velocities is a distortion much like a shockwave, except obviously not a physical wave as in sound. We already know that the detectable part of light is this wave phenomenon, so if there truly was a ripple from behind the photon, the wave would travel to the two or four holes and interfere.
Slashdot Mirror
You are correct though that there is a certain emotional/base urge behind all this, but I doubt highly that these urges could ever rival our more primal ones which we resist or at least veil all the time. I did use the example of sex earlier, but there are certainly others. Not eating when there's food in front of us and we're starving happens often enough too. At least to me.
That said, I have no doubt that as marketing becomes more 'sophisticated', more and more people will find themselves sucked in - not necessarily against their will, but because they have been conditioned to like this and dislike that. Some people are sheep and take things at face value. They will be the ones affected, but that has little to do with marketing and everything to do with them.
In the end, you either have control over your urges, wants, and needs, or you don't. You either are in control of yourself or you're not. If you're not, then you've probably accrued all sorts of gadgets, toys, and things you don't really need. And doubtless you have/had sex with anyone that got you remotely excited. Actually, that doesn't sound so bad...
Really, though, we are either in control of our faculties or we are not. If we're not, then we're just animals with no will. If we are, then this is no more concerning then someone plucking your heart strings to sell insurance. I highly doubt there is some subversive way they can force us to buy against our will using some sort of deep-seated neurological button. A shopping spree isn't exactly a survival mechanism.
I didn't realize that up and down were different in metric than the imperial system.
The Daintiest Dynamos
Alternate Post:
By the time they release this, these batteries will be for sale at your local gas station.
Soa what?
Some have suggested getting them to orbit, which is great (and as a space-tourist, I'd love to see the earth from a little further up where I can see both poles at once), but I'd rather see this:
The next X-prize is for a privately funded trans-Atlantic (I guess the Pacific is equally viable) flight capable of carrying 10 passengers across the ocean through LEO, probably within a certain amount of time (say 2 hours?) and not exceeding 3 or 4 g's.
I'd say this is the inevitable destination of civilian space travel in the short term, so it makes sense to push people towards doing more than just going straight up and down.
The question is not about whether he's paid his dues to society or is talented/not talented. The question is, does hiring a worm writer set a bad precedent and make worm writing as a means of attaining a dream tech job with loads of pay worth the risk of being caught? Are we saying to other would-be writers that if you're good enough at disrupting information flow and computer/network use that you will be given cushy jobs that most geeks could only dream of being offered? I say that there are plenty of people equally smart out there with the ability to have created and/or exploited a security vulnerability who instead report the potential and by that action itself have proven to be better, more trustworthy and honest people right there. This kid's got a lot of life ahead of him and plenty of time to mend his ways, but I think rewarding him right out the door is a bad idea. Further, I would be skeptical at best about installing _any_ software that this kid has been involved with, much less software that is supposed to protect me. So should they hire him? Absolutely not. PS Hire me!
Agreed. It's also important to note they only ask him to remove trademarked images and data collection stuff related to the Accessible Odeon site. While they should be questioning why their site only works with IE, etc, these are still perfectly reasonable requests, and I think it's also worth noting that as far as the letter goes, they were fine with him continuing to run the site. Yeah, the David & Goliath stories are a lot more interesting and get people excited/upset at Goliath, but just 'cause he's big and (arguably) stupid, doesn't mean he's not a nice guy.
Someone should make a movie about this.
Since we see many examples of light behaving as a wave and as a particle, I have to agree that treating it as two separate models is not the way to go. Now, I admit I know little/nothing aside from a few Physics classes while studying engineering, but these are things I think about when I consider the duality of light, even if they might be so ludicrous to some that they are correct. I do, however, find it difficult (at best) to believe in parallel universes/multiple worlds. So, alternatives that seem more plausible in my mind: Possibilities: 1) A photon is a particle that travels in a wave instead of in a straight line. This doesn't explain the results of the 4-hole 1-photon experiment. 2) The result of a photon travelling at relativistic velocities is a distortion much like a shockwave, except obviously not a physical wave as in sound. We already know that the detectable part of light is this wave phenomenon, so if there truly was a ripple from behind the photon, the wave would travel to the two or four holes and interfere.