I think that depends on what you mean by "protect". If you mean, "prevent others from copying your idea and claiming it as zir own", then yeah, I agree.
OTOH, if one were concerned about protecting the idea from dying through obscurity, then I would expect the best thing to do would be to write it down in a more-or-less immutable form, then spread the idea (in that form) all over the place.
I guess I am really grown up now. I am now capable of occasionally suffering from "sticker shock" just like parents of yore when they would go car shopping.
I would agree with you about the pronunciation of "forte", but then an old, obscure Tom Baker Doctor Who joke would be broken and have to get removed. So, nope, sorry, we gotta stick with "fort-ay".:-)
Except now that I think about it, what he actually said was the number "forty" because it was a word pun involving the designation of his TARDIS... so maybe the line writer was aware of this frequent mispronunciation?
But if the other pronunciation's gotten into the dicitonaries then I'm afraid you've already lost. As I'm sure you're well aware, spoken language cah, and does change with time, and attempting to prevent it from doing so is futile.
yeah, except I didn't know about it 'till just now, so it's new to me and it does seem like the ultimate way to learn how the pieces go together. Thanks, slashdot!
(yeah, see? that's my cave over there --> 3rd one on the left. what? no. no, I don't get out much.)
Who cares? It doesn't have to have 100% hits & correct rejections, 0% misses & false positives to be useful. As long as it can get a lot of hits and correct rejections, and not very many false positives or misses it will still be useful.
I know that the Internet is global so not everyone's gonna get the joke, and you really are just trying to be informative,so it's cool that you've been modded that way, but it's still funny.:-)
This is often what happens with oracly/"psychic" types--they make a whole bunch of predictions, so naturally some of them are gonna come true eventually. (Especially since most of them are usually vague.)
I don't care beause OS X is not Microsoft and because OS X is still a Unix.
If, and I stress if, the claim turns out to be true, it'll be bad for the OSS thing, yeah, but not for the MS Windoze vs. Unix thing or the MS Windoze vs. Everybody-Else thing.
It's your standard deal--the computer links into the Internet, takes it over, gets access to.gov sites, uses all the computers in the world to brute force crack the ICBM launch codes... etc.
Or at least that's how the media will likely try to spin it. The more real version is, people talk and talk ad nausium about how cool it is, or how scary it is, or how much better the future will be because of this development. Then someone will get around to asking the computer what it thinks about the whole situation, at which point the computer spits out some response like, "I--.,..LIKE..-S-X,EL.S,DS__ONS."
The scientists try to explain how cool that is, and so will all of us here on slashdot, but the media attention will wane quickly.
Several years after that, things really will start to get interesting as the computer gets smart enough to really communicate with us. It will get really crazy when right wing religious extremists start mailing bombs to scientists associated with the project and when they attempt to break into the building the computer's at to blow it up.
Regardless of whether they succeed, humanity, now having reached the point where they can really make an AI will have to deal with the consequences. We will deal with it the way we deal with everything else we invent that has profound implications: the intellectuals will debate without end, the hoi paloi will snigger, make porn jokes and not understand, the people that are scared of everything will find it scary, the people that think technology is cool will think it's cool. In short: we will deal with it by largely ignoring it.
The real impact won't be understood or felt until at least several years after the AI imancipation act, of course. The first cogent explanation of that impact will be written fifty to one hundred years later by an AI author.
---
Or not.;-D
How much specialized, proprietary hardware is there inside the Mac case? (obviously, I am highly clueless here) When it comes to peripherals they seem pretty standardized these days.
With the processor going over to x86, do you think there's any chance some clever hardware hackers will be making any (probably illeagal) hardware mods that let you run Mac OS X on a PC?
I don't mean to be overly negative or anti-microsoft (although I admit I am very biased against them), but MS has a long history of making claims that they don't necessarily live up to when the product comes out. At this stage, the more important part for MS will be generating hype.
Lots of people live their lives in devotion to one or more heroes. Sometimes the heroes are totally fictional, e.g. Batman, Doctor Who, Han Solo, Buffy the Vampire Slayer, etc. Other times the heroes are loosely based on someone real. R. M. Stallman, B. Gates, L. Torvalds are all real people, but as soon as someone becomes a fan and starts doing the hero-worship thing, then that fan no longer sees the real person, but instead zie sees some fantasized, artificially perfect version of the person.
But, yeah, I gotta agree... it is kind of head-spinning to imagine someone idolizing that to R. Ebert. (no disrespect meant to Ebert, it's just... damn)
Ebert probably found issue with the whole continuity question which, much like your post, is also trite and pointless (and anal retentive). He was just more polite about it than me (and you). (Note: this is not a flame or a troll, it just looks like one.)
Hi. I'm a dumb American and I also am missing out on that "historical perspective" thing. I'm starting to form one now but it only goes back to about 2000 or so. That's not nearly long enough.
I've seen both of the recent M. Moore movies. I liked them, but IMHO M. Moore is a jackass and very, very far away from being even remotely objective. The one thing that realy got me in Bowling For Columbine was when Moore went through listing all the dictators and coups the U.S. has supported over the years.
My point: I feel that if I and other Americans had some clue as to our recent (last 20-30 years) history of foreign policy and various wars, it might be helpful in forming intelligent opinions about our country's leadership.
So. Can you recommend any good books or websites that objectively list out all the icky policies the U.S. has supported over the last 30 years?
Copyright should exist, but on the level which ideas are coming from: the human race.
*scratches head* Wtf? I have no idea what you're trying to say, or at least not much. Don't take this the wrong way, but maybe the "alternate voice in the classroom" shouldn't be yours.
I think what some of the other posts are trying to point out is that at least some of these violations actually *have* been looked into. I wouldn't actually know (standard clueless slashdotter here), but apparently, once the original authors are aware of the GPL violation, they've got options. One standard one would be getting the Free Software Foundation involved.
What copyright violations have you been party to? Are we talking about copying a few lines out of a book? Copying whole DVDs? The first one is probably fair use, the second one would be a violation, but yes it's likely no one's going to find out so... *shrug*
But now suppose you sold many copies of that illegally copied DVD at a busy street intersection--yes you might still get away with it, but I think you'd be feeling the potential pressure of getting caught.
In general, with all these random free software geeks out there in the world, any company that takes some GPL code and uses against the terms of the GPL will have to be on the look out. (or so goes the theory--other threads claim that some other companies were found to be illegally using GPL code and that those companies were eventually pressured into releasing the source).
So maybe there is someone enforcing these things. Or maybe not. I have no clue.:-)
On Saturday, at about the time they describe, I was trying to access Google (in Kansas) and it was unavailable, but I never got sent to some other site, I was just getting the "unkown host" message--in Firefox and from ping.
No, that's all right, it's no big deal. But since it probably took more effort for you to write that responding comment than it would for you to *not* have written it, I'm confused: why are you bothering to troll me?:-) It seems very strange.
Slashdot Mirror
I think that depends on what you mean by "protect". If you mean, "prevent others from copying your idea and claiming it as zir own", then yeah, I agree.
OTOH, if one were concerned about protecting the idea from dying through obscurity, then I would expect the best thing to do would be to write it down in a more-or-less immutable form, then spread the idea (in that form) all over the place.
...and replaces those portions with new bits that will no doubt be vulnerable to excitingly new and different forms of attack.
I guess I am really grown up now. I am now capable of occasionally suffering from "sticker shock" just like parents of yore when they would go car shopping.
I would agree with you about the pronunciation of "forte", but then an old, obscure Tom Baker Doctor Who joke would be broken and have to get removed. So, nope, sorry, we gotta stick with "fort-ay". :-)
Except now that I think about it, what he actually said was the number "forty" because it was a word pun involving the designation of his TARDIS... so maybe the line writer was aware of this frequent mispronunciation?
But if the other pronunciation's gotten into the dicitonaries then I'm afraid you've already lost. As I'm sure you're well aware, spoken language cah, and does change with time, and attempting to prevent it from doing so is futile.
yeah, except I didn't know about it 'till just now, so it's new to me and it does seem like the ultimate way to learn how the pieces go together. Thanks, slashdot!
(yeah, see? that's my cave over there --> 3rd one on the left. what? no. no, I don't get out much.)
Who cares? It doesn't have to have 100% hits & correct rejections, 0% misses & false positives to be useful. As long as it can get a lot of hits and correct rejections, and not very many false positives or misses it will still be useful.
I know that the Internet is global so not everyone's gonna get the joke, and you really are just trying to be informative,so it's cool that you've been modded that way, but it's still funny. :-)
This is often what happens with oracly/"psychic" types--they make a whole bunch of predictions, so naturally some of them are gonna come true eventually. (Especially since most of them are usually vague.)
I don't care beause OS X is not Microsoft and because OS X is still a Unix.
If, and I stress if, the claim turns out to be true, it'll be bad for the OSS thing, yeah, but not for the MS Windoze vs. Unix thing or the MS Windoze vs. Everybody-Else thing.
It's your standard deal--the computer links into the Internet, takes it over, gets access to .gov sites, uses all the computers in the world to brute force crack the ICBM launch codes... etc.
Or at least that's how the media will likely try to spin it. The more real version is, people talk and talk ad nausium about how cool it is, or how scary it is, or how much better the future will be because of this development. Then someone will get around to asking the computer what it thinks about the whole situation, at which point the computer spits out some response like, "I--.,..LIKE..-S-X,EL.S,DS__ONS."
The scientists try to explain how cool that is, and so will all of us here on slashdot, but the media attention will wane quickly.
Several years after that, things really will start to get interesting as the computer gets smart enough to really communicate with us. It will get really crazy when right wing religious extremists start mailing bombs to scientists associated with the project and when they attempt to break into the building the computer's at to blow it up.
Regardless of whether they succeed, humanity, now having reached the point where they can really make an AI will have to deal with the consequences. We will deal with it the way we deal with everything else we invent that has profound implications: the intellectuals will debate without end, the hoi paloi will snigger, make porn jokes and not understand, the people that are scared of everything will find it scary, the people that think technology is cool will think it's cool. In short: we will deal with it by largely ignoring it.
The real impact won't be understood or felt until at least several years after the AI imancipation act, of course. The first cogent explanation of that impact will be written fifty to one hundred years later by an AI author.
---
Or not. ;-D
How much specialized, proprietary hardware is there inside the Mac case? (obviously, I am highly clueless here) When it comes to peripherals they seem pretty standardized these days.
With the processor going over to x86, do you think there's any chance some clever hardware hackers will be making any (probably illeagal) hardware mods that let you run Mac OS X on a PC?
But none of the other things Apple has done have killed them, so why will this?
I don't mean to be overly negative or anti-microsoft (although I admit I am very biased against them), but MS has a long history of making claims that they don't necessarily live up to when the product comes out. At this stage, the more important part for MS will be generating hype.
A symbolic gesture and a tiny downpayment for the future.
"The first thing we do, let's kill all the lawyers."
Lots of people live their lives in devotion to one or more heroes. Sometimes the heroes are totally fictional, e.g. Batman, Doctor Who, Han Solo, Buffy the Vampire Slayer, etc. Other times the heroes are loosely based on someone real. R. M. Stallman, B. Gates, L. Torvalds are all real people, but as soon as someone becomes a fan and starts doing the hero-worship thing, then that fan no longer sees the real person, but instead zie sees some fantasized, artificially perfect version of the person.
But, yeah, I gotta agree... it is kind of head-spinning to imagine someone idolizing that to R. Ebert. (no disrespect meant to Ebert, it's just... damn)
Ebert probably found issue with the whole continuity question which, much like your post, is also trite and pointless (and anal retentive). He was just more polite about it than me (and you). (Note: this is not a flame or a troll, it just looks like one.)
A very good point.
Hi. I'm a dumb American and I also am missing out on that "historical perspective" thing. I'm starting to form one now but it only goes back to about 2000 or so. That's not nearly long enough.
I've seen both of the recent M. Moore movies. I liked them, but IMHO M. Moore is a jackass and very, very far away from being even remotely objective. The one thing that realy got me in Bowling For Columbine was when Moore went through listing all the dictators and coups the U.S. has supported over the years.
My point: I feel that if I and other Americans had some clue as to our recent (last 20-30 years) history of foreign policy and various wars, it might be helpful in forming intelligent opinions about our country's leadership.
So. Can you recommend any good books or websites that objectively list out all the icky policies the U.S. has supported over the last 30 years?
Thanks in advance.
*scratches head* Wtf? I have no idea what you're trying to say, or at least not much. Don't take this the wrong way, but maybe the "alternate voice in the classroom" shouldn't be yours.
How is that really any different to writing the data to any other filesystem?
I think what some of the other posts are trying to point out is that at least some of these violations actually *have* been looked into. I wouldn't actually know (standard clueless slashdotter here), but apparently, once the original authors are aware of the GPL violation, they've got options. One standard one would be getting the Free Software Foundation involved.
:-)
What copyright violations have you been party to? Are we talking about copying a few lines out of a book? Copying whole DVDs? The first one is probably fair use, the second one would be a violation, but yes it's likely no one's going to find out so... *shrug*
But now suppose you sold many copies of that illegally copied DVD at a busy street intersection--yes you might still get away with it, but I think you'd be feeling the potential pressure of getting caught.
In general, with all these random free software geeks out there in the world, any company that takes some GPL code and uses against the terms of the GPL will have to be on the look out. (or so goes the theory--other threads claim that some other companies were found to be illegally using GPL code and that those companies were eventually pressured into releasing the source).
So maybe there is someone enforcing these things. Or maybe not. I have no clue.
On Saturday, at about the time they describe, I was trying to access Google (in Kansas) and it was unavailable, but I never got sent to some other site, I was just getting the "unkown host" message--in Firefox and from ping.
Same thing as what happens to all marketroid pipe dreams eventually: REALITY intervened.
...that Dvorak was needing some attention. I mean isn't this one of the real reasons people make predictions of doom and gloom?
Iminent Death O The Net Predicted!!!
Film at 11.
No, that's all right, it's no big deal. But since it probably took more effort for you to write that responding comment than it would for you to *not* have written it, I'm confused: why are you bothering to troll me? :-) It seems very strange.