It's been shown that people are more attracted to people with similar facial features when choosing mates
It has also been shown this this is not true. The way it was proven wrong was by people first predicting who one person would find more attractive and then looking if it was actually the case. It wasn't. The reason that people think this is true is because humans are pretty good in recognizing faces and are also good in remembering things that stand out. So if they see two people who are a couple and look alike, they will remember this better then people who did not look alike.
The same goes for e.g. Friday the 13th. If you break your leg on that day, you will most likely remember the day for a very long time. If it happened on Thursday the 12th, you won't remember the date.
Obviously I have not read the article, but unless they said first who somebody would vote for and then look if they were right, it is completely bogus. So yes, we should jump over it and show why it is not true.
Otherwise you will get people who say about reading tea: "Now I'm not saying that this hypothesis is clearly true, just that we don't have to jump all over it." just because once in a while they get it right.
So the fact that a HD dies because of hardware failure makes a person stupid? Not only that, some people made that insightful? Geeks are not what they used to be.
The problem with censorship is that is can't be foolproof.
You cast aside a lot of things, thinking that it will break down the discussion to the bare essentials of censorship. Unfortunatly the things you cast aside are part of censorship and as why it would be bad.
Censorship is a technical solution to a social problem. Wether this is books, images or the internet. It is a social decison made by emotional beings. There is no technical asnwer to it. There WILL be false positives and false negatives. Even if each item is screened by a commission, there will be falso positives and false negatives. You can not leave that out if the discussion.
The problem is that it is percieved that the false negatives are worse then the false postives. The only way to solve this is highten the treshold. This means less (not 0) false negatives and more false positives. An even higher treshold will make the number closer to 0, but will also filter out much more. At a certain moment you will have nothing left, because everything is filterd.
For that reason people could get arrested to send images of their nekid baby to grandma.
So you have different persons to get data from and the reason why torture is bad. 1) The person who gives you the correct key.Only the idea of torture is enough. 2) he person who gives you the wrong key first and later the correct key. Some amount of torture is needed. 3) The person who does not know the key and wants the pain to stop. They will tell you anything to make the pain stop, including summing up all possible keys from 00000000 to ZZZZZZZZ and everything else. They will confess to things you never heard of and will make up things they never heard of. This data is useless. 4) The person who will never give up the information, no matter what you do. (OK, at some point this will become a '2'
So how do you know if you are dealing with a '2' who needs just a bit more torture or a '3' who has no clue?
So basicaly the brain adapts itself to what it is doing. If you use it, no matter how trivial will 'train' the brain. Who would have thought?
Now what you need to do is if the good that is being done is better then doing it in an alternative way. e.g. instead of searching for something online, getting the knowledge on how to do research with books or in any other way.
Or perhaps even walking to the library and looking thing up there gives you better blood circulation that is more important then what surfing does.
I am sure that then it doesn't look that good anymore.
In reality, it can quite easily mean that most of the IP addresses on the internet are firewalled off, because they're not serving anything to the rest of the internet.
That would mean they are not in use for the desired purpose and should be given back.
openSUSE uses numbering that is based on nothing but marketing for a LONG time. The meaning of the x.0 in openSUSE is pure marketing and has no technical background. If there are any things that could make it any of them an x.0 release, it is purely based on coincidence.
Basicaly it goes a bit like openSUSE x.0 SLE x openSUSE x.1 opensuse x.2 openSUSE x.3 openSUSE x+1.0 SLE x+1...
All of that is not set in stone.
That said, it is a bit disappointing that they choose such almost random numbers and names. The sort of names they had 1.0 2.0 3.1 3.11 95 98 Millenium 2000 2003 XP NT Vista 7
Slashdot Mirror
It has also been shown this this is not true. The way it was proven wrong was by people first predicting who one person would find more attractive and then looking if it was actually the case. It wasn't.
The reason that people think this is true is because humans are pretty good in recognizing faces and are also good in remembering things that stand out.
So if they see two people who are a couple and look alike, they will remember this better then people who did not look alike.
The same goes for e.g. Friday the 13th. If you break your leg on that day, you will most likely remember the day for a very long time. If it happened on Thursday the 12th, you won't remember the date.
Obviously I have not read the article, but unless they said first who somebody would vote for and then look if they were right, it is completely bogus. So yes, we should jump over it and show why it is not true.
Otherwise you will get people who say about reading tea: "Now I'm not saying that this hypothesis is clearly true, just that we don't have to jump all over it." just because once in a while they get it right.
I think you are on to something. Make the trademark public domain.
Trademark infringement.
Anti-anti-piracy-day-day
That'll teach-em
The banks is where most of the gambling takes place and that not even with their own money, but other peoples money.
So Bill Clinton is an alien?
So 1 FTE for 1 protocol. That on top of everything else. Monitoring NNTP? Add 1 FTE? Monitoring web? Add 1 FTE. ...
Do you know how not to spend that money on 1 FTE? By not spending that money on that 1 FTE.
So the fact that a HD dies because of hardware failure makes a person stupid? Not only that, some people made that insightful? Geeks are not what they used to be.
The moment you write it, you have the copyright. If you want to extend your copyright, only then do you need to do something.
Copyright is a default.
In fact, forget about the roadblock and the camera.
You waived them by electing the governement. They just follow the orders of the people who bought^wvoted for them.
And you think that they won't start searching there?
I knew it! Thanks for confirming it.
If there only would be a third option.
Define 'illegal material'. Is a nipple illegle? What if it is a male nipple? What if you can't see if it is male or female? What about a penis? What about this one: http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Image:Penis_Anatomy.gif
The problem with censorship is that is can't be foolproof.
You cast aside a lot of things, thinking that it will break down the discussion to the bare essentials of censorship. Unfortunatly the things you cast aside are part of censorship and as why it would be bad.
Censorship is a technical solution to a social problem. Wether this is books, images or the internet. It is a social decison made by emotional beings. There is no technical asnwer to it. There WILL be false positives and false negatives. Even if each item is screened by a commission, there will be falso positives and false negatives. You can not leave that out if the discussion.
The problem is that it is percieved that the false negatives are worse then the false postives. The only way to solve this is highten the treshold. This means less (not 0) false negatives and more false positives.
An even higher treshold will make the number closer to 0, but will also filter out much more. At a certain moment you will have nothing left, because everything is filterd.
For that reason people could get arrested to send images of their nekid baby to grandma.
Isn't a killswitch a switch to kill? So wouldn't it be better they do NOT have such a switch?
That only works if you are a politician.
What if you hide the device? Then you must tell its location.
So if you do have a device, you go to jail.
If you don't say you have a device, you lie and go to jail.
Basicaly damned if you don't and damned if you do.
So you have different persons to get data from and the reason why torture is bad.
1) The person who gives you the correct key.Only the idea of torture is enough.
2) he person who gives you the wrong key first and later the correct key. Some amount of torture is needed.
3) The person who does not know the key and wants the pain to stop. They will tell you anything to make the pain stop, including summing up all possible keys from 00000000 to ZZZZZZZZ and everything else. They will confess to things you never heard of and will make up things they never heard of. This data is useless.
4) The person who will never give up the information, no matter what you do. (OK, at some point this will become a '2'
So how do you know if you are dealing with a '2' who needs just a bit more torture or a '3' who has no clue?
So basicaly the brain adapts itself to what it is doing. If you use it, no matter how trivial will 'train' the brain. Who would have thought?
Now what you need to do is if the good that is being done is better then doing it in an alternative way. e.g. instead of searching for something online, getting the knowledge on how to do research with books or in any other way.
Or perhaps even walking to the library and looking thing up there gives you better blood circulation that is more important then what surfing does.
I am sure that then it doesn't look that good anymore.
That would mean they are not in use for the desired purpose and should be given back.
So basicay we do not have enough adresses, so you have an easier job.
openSUSE uses numbering that is based on nothing but marketing for a LONG time. The meaning of the x.0 in openSUSE is pure marketing and has no technical background. If there are any things that could make it any of them an x.0 release, it is purely based on coincidence.
Basicaly it goes a bit like ...
openSUSE x.0
SLE x
openSUSE x.1
opensuse x.2
openSUSE x.3
openSUSE x+1.0
SLE x+1
All of that is not set in stone.
That said, it is a bit disappointing that they choose such almost random numbers and names. The sort of names they had
1.0 2.0 3.1 3.11
95 98
Millenium
2000 2003
XP NT Vista
7
Looks like a big mess.
There are also a lot more average people then people with knowledge about AI.
http://wordle.net/gallery/wrdl/246288/slashdot
Did not work in Firefox, but worked in Konqueror