The problem is that creativity can't be quantified. Pretty much by definition.
You can copy someone else's creative idea and that can even work for a while, until all the creativity has been wrung out of it making it old and tired. But there is no formula to create something new.
Measuring the quality of a a creative work is like the story of the blind men and the elephant. You can look at all the parts but it won't tell you a damn thing about the work as a whole. And if you try to build another one just by sticking the same parts together you won't get an elephant, you'll just get a mess.
The main fear for nuclear terrorism is not that they build their own bomb, but rather that they get one thru stealing/corruption/or jsut plain buying from the soviet or other state with nuclear weapon.
That is what I was talking about. Those nukes are not designed for shipping-container delivery. So buying one on the black market isn't going to do them any good. They might get all the pieces but they won't be able to make it go boom. This isn't the kind of thing they can just MacGyver up, especially without test runs.
My expectations are simpler than all out war. At some point a terrorist group will manage to get their hands on a nuke. The easiest delivery method is cargo container. One day, one of our ports is going to disappear. I hope I'm wrong...
You are wrong. The worst a terrorist is ever going to be able to do is a dirty bomb - basically a bunch of C4 next to the radioactive material. The bomb will spread radiation across one or two city blocks and that's about it.
The reason that they will never actually detonate a real nuke is that they are complicated and extremely delicate. The shape of the bomb must be absolutely perfect and the timing of the charge detonations must be accurate to within microseconds, else nothing happens. Getting the shape right is so important that people working on at least one major nuclear programat Los Alamos had to classify all spheres, including oranges.
It will take the resources of a nation-state to blow up a nuke on US soil and no matter what any war-mongering politicians have said, no actual nation-state is stupid enough to do that because it means the end of that country. Not Iran, not North Korea. Not going to happen.
The purpose of the raids is not to deter violent crime, but future revolutionary violence.
I completely disagree. It is the result of tough-on-crime and terror-mongering politicians over-funding SWAT programs because they make for easy sound-bites. It is as simple as once you've got a hammer, every problem looks like a nail.
No one is thinking about "revolutionary violence" - you are just doing that conspiracy theory thing where you pick one result and work backwards assuming every step of the way was intentional.
That's the problem right there. Violent crime rates are on par with the 1950s and they had no where near as many raids as we do now, even on a per capita basis.
It didn't at the time. But nuking it prompted one hacker to figure out the ultimate key (or whatever it is called) for the PS3 so he could put put the OtherOS option back, thus making blu-ray, and more importantly SACD, ripping easy.
The reason SACD ripping is more important, despite being an obscure audio format is because there are plenty of other blu-ray rippers but there aren't any other SACD rippers that get you access to the original bits on the disc. SACD is still about as alive as it ever was with 10-20 new titles each year and thanks to Sony nuking the OtherOS option there are lots of multi-channel rips floating around.
Randomized screening may allow a single terrorist through, but something like 9/11 which required 19 guys means almost certainly one of them will be caught. If one is caught, you know to look for others.
Orthogonal point: Except for the fact that the worst thing they had on them were boxcutters. Nowadays they'd just confiscate them and let you board anyway, they wouldn't even notice that 19 guys across 3 planes had tried to board with boxcutters.
So 50% get through with boxcutters (75% if they only screen 1 out of 4) versus 100% getting through if they can arrange to avoid fitting the profile. Either way the danger is essentially the same.
FYI, Seiki also has a 39" version of their 4K monitor/tv for only $700 MSRP. It is limited to 30Hz at 4K but will do faster at lower resolutions. You might even be able to convince it to do passive 3D, I haven't paid close attention to the people hacking at that on the 50" version.
Ignoring the human dignity issues, my question is what did they get in exchange for going NSA on their own asses?
Did it reduce the rate of crimes related to the wiretap investigations? I don't mean just raw numbers, I mean trendwise before and after the massive increase wiretapping what (if anything) changed?
To be classified as porn, two opinions have to be met: provokes a sexual response, and has no artistic merit.
Who says? Because that really sounds like the legal definition of obscenity according to the ruling in Miller v California:
The Miller test for obscenity includes the following criteria: (1) whether âthe average person, applying contemporary community standardsâ(TM) would find that the work, âtaken as a whole,â(TM) appeals to âprurient interestâ(TM) (2) whether the work depicts or describes, in a patently offensive way, sexual conduct specifically defined by the applicable state law, and (3) whether the work, âtaken as a whole,â(TM) lacks serious literary, artistic, political, or scientific value.
If you've seen Clooney's movie, "The Men Who Stare at Goats" you know about Project MKUltra -- in which the CIA did things like dose people with LSD without their consent and try to develop psychic powers for remote viewing and other sci-fi stuff.
That's just utterly naive. The law is organic it has to be because it is intended to model human behavior. The idea that you could devise a programmatic way to detect unfairness is laughable - different people have different ideas of unfairness all the time. If people can't uniformly decide on what constitutes "fair" there is no way a computer could without alienating a whole range of people.
The law will always be full of short-comings and automated tools can help to reduce them, but anything beyond that is a recipe for a level of tyranny like the human race has never seen.
Of course they are going to say that, else they would have to admit they broke the rules which there is absolutely no way they would do given how stupid they already look with the 4am wake-up call to everybody.
This was just another case of a non-custodial parent running off with the kid. The child was not in any imminent danger. She lost custody because of violence in her home (none of which was ever directed at the child).
... piracy had a "technical meaning" in the seventeenth century: "a pirate was someone who indulged in the unauthorized reprinting of a title recognized to belong to someone else by the formal conventions of the printing and bookselling community." Beyond this technical meaning, piracy "soon came to stand for a wide range of perceived transgressions of civility emanating from print's practitioners."
This is what you got when a nation-wide filtering system is created in the first place. Not satisfied with merely blocking the pedo-porn they went after the pirates and now they want to go after everything not whitelisted. It only gets worse from here guys, kill the national filter system dead before it grows, kill it before it grows.
If you look at the timeline it seems they started fighting the NSA after they fucked up with the chinese dissidents. Seems like they made the best out of a bad situation and learned their lesson. They deserve credit for that - it seems like no one, other than perhaps twitter, learned the lesson from watching Yahoo screw up since basically everybody else rolled over for the NSA.
As for risking jail - they already risked jail doing what they did.
The CEO of QWEST resisted warrantless wiretapping and they found a way to send him to jail for shareholder fraud - by canceling all of QWEST's classified contracts and thus making him into an inside trader for having sold shares when he thought the contracts were still good.
Thanks for your reply. I see that you want to be principled and retain the moral high ground. Thus, you feel that you cannot condemn others aside from your own Government
Nope I don't. I just find you irritating. You've got a bug up your ass about something and you want to make this thread that has practically nothing to do with your bug into your ass. I don't feell like playing that game.
Now we've dealt with the US torture of three men (where I agree with you is disgusting), can we get a comment from you about the *thousands* of people tortured by jihadis
They don't represent me. They are not my elected government. I didn't hire them and I have zero input into how they behave.
My country, right or wrong. If right to be kept right. If wrong to be set right.
For every ticket that was questionable, I went down to the city building, waited a short amount of time to have my story heard, and the tickets were nullified.
It really couldn't be any easier.
Taking time off during the workday to go to court to fight a ticket that shouldn't have been issued in the first place is easy?
Slashdot Mirror
The problem is that creativity can't be quantified. Pretty much by definition.
You can copy someone else's creative idea and that can even work for a while, until all the creativity has been wrung out of it making it old and tired. But there is no formula to create something new.
Measuring the quality of a a creative work is like the story of the blind men and the elephant. You can look at all the parts but it won't tell you a damn thing about the work as a whole. And if you try to build another one just by sticking the same parts together you won't get an elephant, you'll just get a mess.
The main fear for nuclear terrorism is not that they build their own bomb, but rather that they get one thru stealing/corruption/or jsut plain buying from the soviet or other state with nuclear weapon.
That is what I was talking about. Those nukes are not designed for shipping-container delivery. So buying one on the black market isn't going to do them any good. They might get all the pieces but they won't be able to make it go boom. This isn't the kind of thing they can just MacGyver up, especially without test runs.
My expectations are simpler than all out war. At some point a terrorist group will manage to get their hands on a nuke. The easiest delivery method is cargo container. One day, one of our ports is going to disappear. I hope I'm wrong...
You are wrong. The worst a terrorist is ever going to be able to do is a dirty bomb - basically a bunch of C4 next to the radioactive material. The bomb will spread radiation across one or two city blocks and that's about it.
The reason that they will never actually detonate a real nuke is that they are complicated and extremely delicate. The shape of the bomb must be absolutely perfect and the timing of the charge detonations must be accurate to within microseconds, else nothing happens. Getting the shape right is so important that people working on at least one major nuclear programat Los Alamos had to classify all spheres, including oranges.
It will take the resources of a nation-state to blow up a nuke on US soil and no matter what any war-mongering politicians have said, no actual nation-state is stupid enough to do that because it means the end of that country. Not Iran, not North Korea. Not going to happen.
The purpose of the raids is not to deter violent crime, but future revolutionary violence.
I completely disagree. It is the result of tough-on-crime and terror-mongering politicians over-funding SWAT programs because they make for easy sound-bites. It is as simple as once you've got a hammer, every problem looks like a nail.
No one is thinking about "revolutionary violence" - you are just doing that conspiracy theory thing where you pick one result and work backwards assuming every step of the way was intentional.
When you have 50,000 raids a year
That's the problem right there. Violent crime rates are on par with the 1950s and they had no where near as many raids as we do now, even on a per capita basis.
It didn't at the time. But nuking it prompted one hacker to figure out the ultimate key (or whatever it is called) for the PS3 so he could put put the OtherOS option back, thus making blu-ray, and more importantly SACD, ripping easy.
The reason SACD ripping is more important, despite being an obscure audio format is because there are plenty of other blu-ray rippers but there aren't any other SACD rippers that get you access to the original bits on the disc. SACD is still about as alive as it ever was with 10-20 new titles each year and thanks to Sony nuking the OtherOS option there are lots of multi-channel rips floating around.
It may be passable as a TV but not as a monitor.
Are you speaking from experience?
Randomized screening may allow a single terrorist through, but something like 9/11 which required 19 guys means almost certainly one of them will be caught. If one is caught, you know to look for others.
Orthogonal point:
Except for the fact that the worst thing they had on them were boxcutters. Nowadays they'd just confiscate them and let you board anyway, they wouldn't even notice that 19 guys across 3 planes had tried to board with boxcutters.
So 50% get through with boxcutters (75% if they only screen 1 out of 4) versus 100% getting through if they can arrange to avoid fitting the profile. Either way the danger is essentially the same.
Plus the 30" panel forces the user to pan his head around.
That's baloney.
I am typing this on a 30" 2560x1600 panel right now. No panning needed.
16x9... pass.
You holding out for 4:3?
FYI, Seiki also has a 39" version of their 4K monitor/tv for only $700 MSRP. It is limited to 30Hz at 4K but will do faster at lower resolutions. You might even be able to convince it to do passive 3D, I haven't paid close attention to the people hacking at that on the 50" version.
http://www.amazon.com/dp/B00DOPGO2G/
Ignoring the human dignity issues, my question is what did they get in exchange for going NSA on their own asses?
Did it reduce the rate of crimes related to the wiretap investigations? I don't mean just raw numbers, I mean trendwise before and after the massive increase wiretapping what (if anything) changed?
> obscenity != porn
That was my entire point. He was using the definition of one narrow thing to define something much more nebulous.
Was I really that unclear?
To be classified as porn, two opinions have to be met: provokes a sexual response, and has no artistic merit.
Who says? Because that really sounds like the legal definition of obscenity according to the ruling in Miller v California:
The Miller test for obscenity includes the following criteria: (1) whether âthe average person, applying contemporary community standardsâ(TM) would find that the work, âtaken as a whole,â(TM) appeals to âprurient interestâ(TM) (2) whether the work depicts or describes, in a patently offensive way, sexual conduct specifically defined by the applicable state law, and (3) whether the work, âtaken as a whole,â(TM) lacks serious literary, artistic, political, or scientific value.
http://www.law.cornell.edu/wex/obscenity
If you've seen Clooney's movie, "The Men Who Stare at Goats" you know about Project MKUltra -- in which the CIA did things like dose people with LSD without their consent and try to develop psychic powers for remote viewing and other sci-fi stuff.
That's just utterly naive. The law is organic it has to be because it is intended to model human behavior. The idea that you could devise a programmatic way to detect unfairness is laughable - different people have different ideas of unfairness all the time. If people can't uniformly decide on what constitutes "fair" there is no way a computer could without alienating a whole range of people.
The law will always be full of short-comings and automated tools can help to reduce them, but anything beyond that is a recipe for a level of tyranny like the human race has never seen.
Of course they are going to say that, else they would have to admit they broke the rules which there is absolutely no way they would do given how stupid they already look with the 4am wake-up call to everybody.
The woman lost custody because she was fighting ("brawling") in front of the child.
Simply being bipolar doesn't make someone a risk for killing their kid.
Not only was it stupid to send this alert to everyone's phones, it was yet another example of Amber Alert scope creep.
Amber Alerts are meant to be restricted to cases where "the child is in imminent danger of serious bodily injury or death."
This was just another case of a non-custodial parent running off with the kid. The child was not in any imminent danger. She lost custody because of violence in her home (none of which was ever directed at the child).
Get the fuck over it.
Right back at you.
-- Copyright and Incomplete Historiographies: Of Piracy, Propertization, and Thomas Jefferson
This is what you got when a nation-wide filtering system is created in the first place. Not satisfied with merely blocking the pedo-porn they went after the pirates and now they want to go after everything not whitelisted. It only gets worse from here guys, kill the national filter system dead before it grows, kill it before it grows.
If you look at the timeline it seems they started fighting the NSA after they fucked up with the chinese dissidents. Seems like they made the best out of a bad situation and learned their lesson. They deserve credit for that - it seems like no one, other than perhaps twitter, learned the lesson from watching Yahoo screw up since basically everybody else rolled over for the NSA.
It isn't a "show trial" if is entirely secret.
As for risking jail - they already risked jail doing what they did.
The CEO of QWEST resisted warrantless wiretapping and they found a way to send him to jail for shareholder fraud - by canceling all of QWEST's classified contracts and thus making him into an inside trader for having sold shares when he thought the contracts were still good.
Thanks for your reply. I see that you want to be principled and retain the moral high ground. Thus, you feel that you cannot condemn others aside from your own Government
Nope I don't. I just find you irritating. You've got a bug up your ass about something and you want to make this thread that has practically nothing to do with your bug into your ass. I don't feell like playing that game.
Now we've dealt with the US torture of three men (where I agree with you is disgusting), can we get a comment from you about the *thousands* of people tortured by jihadis
They don't represent me. They are not my elected government. I didn't hire them and I have zero input into how they behave.
My country, right or wrong.
If right to be kept right.
If wrong to be set right.
For every ticket that was questionable, I went down to the city building, waited a short amount of time to have my story heard, and the tickets were nullified.
It really couldn't be any easier.
Taking time off during the workday to go to court to fight a ticket that shouldn't have been issued in the first place is easy?
Sounds like Stockholm syndrome to me.