You're talking about design specifics here. The question is philosophical, not technical. It's not "Can we create battlefield driods, automated stationary sentries, or robotic weapons such as guided missiles or autonomous drones?", it's "Should we?".
Nuclear weapons, nuclear arms proliferation, and the UN is worried about Asimov's Laws of Robotics? If a government anywhere determines that automated weapon systems (including but not limited to armed robots) are more effective than humans - especially more cost effective - count on that government to develop and use that technology, regardless of the UN's position on the subject.
Even if such technology is never deployed, its existence represents a bargaining chip for that nation at the negotiating table. See nuclear weapons for precedent. This is essentially trying to stuff the genie back into the bottle; not gonna happen, no matter who says what.
Good point. I say we encourage travel to the African continent - they have the greatest genetic diversity, I say we stir the gene-pool a little bit and see if anything really cool floats to the top. I don't care if it's brown, slant-eyed, runs faster than I can or thinks better than I do; although all of the above would be really awesome!
For the record, I believe wholeheartedly in evolution. The Theory of Evolution definitely exists. It's real, and has an impact on our daily lives (this/. thread, for example). Incidentally, I happen to believe the theory is correct - but that's belief in a theory, not knowledge of a fact.
Why assume that SystemV init is the once-and-forever solution to UNIX startup? If systemd represents a superior design it will almost certainly supplant SystemV. If not, there will be some painful moments fixing the damage - but I'd rather adapt and grow with risks than stagnate and age in perfect safety. NOTE: most businesses will disagree vehemently with that assessment, and for good reason. Time for we technical types to either ensure that systemd is up to the task, or to reveal its shortcomings quickly to minimize the pain.
"By assuming that the process of memory is non-lossy..."
Terrible assumption.
Anecdotal evidence that individuals may be capable of accurate recall is directly contradicted by evidence that even witnesses who are absolutely certain of what they saw in fact only recalled those specific items which somehow drew their attention at the time of an event.
I had. Slashdot's web server apparently swallowed my post regarding several experiments with rat populations which effectively became 'extinct' or nearly so as a result of overcrowding conditions. Not doing the research twice to have it wiped out again. Google on 'overpopulation experiment' and draw your own conclusions.
Fine. But that ecosphere we've been living in will be irremediably altered by the presence of many billions of humans. Our technology will permit our numbers to grow until we have displaced all "naturally occurring" ecosystems (because six billion humans won't stop breeding or living just because the planet is becoming overpopulated). Once that occurs, die-back is the inevitable conclusion; leaving behind an environment fundamentally different from the one we know now.
According to/. moderation, it's "insightful". Very different from "funny" - it means Hazem is gaining karma for posting something positive and meaningful.
It takes more than that to wipe the data. Look at the specs for military secure communication equipment - you need a mechanism to actively destroy all data present in the event of any detected tampering. It'd be nice if that mechanism were proof against accidental implementation, yet robust enough to prevent intentional intrusion.
Military grade technology will cost military grade bucks and will not be made generally available to the public. It will certainly not be made available for import/export on any civilian market you or I have access to.
Slashdot Mirror
But I think he's living at his mother Jan Kowalski's basement at:
At least, that's where he wants users of his hostfile manager to send him money.
But I think he's living at his mother Jan Kowalski's basement at:
At least, that's where he wants users of his hostfile manager to send him money.
But I think he's living at his mother Jan Kowalski's basement at:
At least, that's where he wants users of his hostfile manager to send him money.
But I think he's living at his mother Jan Kowalski's basement at:
At least, that's where he wants users of his hostfile manager to send him money.
But I think he's living at his mother Jan Kowalski's basement at:
At least, that's where he wants users of his hostfile manager to send him money.
I'm sorry - you post as A/C everywhere. No wonder nobody takes you seriously.
Who are you?
Keep those spamposts comin' - I need to tweak my email filters.
I don't run from anonymous cowards. Please post using registered /. id.
Just sayin'.
You're talking about design specifics here. The question is philosophical, not technical. It's not "Can we create battlefield driods, automated stationary sentries, or robotic weapons such as guided missiles or autonomous drones?", it's "Should we?".
TFA refers to "lethal autonomous weapon systems." Most /. readers could save time by just posting "tl;dr".
Just to be clear - I'm a firm proponent of the three laws. I just don't have enough faith in humanity to believe they'll ever be enacted.
Even if such technology is never deployed, its existence represents a bargaining chip for that nation at the negotiating table. See nuclear weapons for precedent. This is essentially trying to stuff the genie back into the bottle; not gonna happen, no matter who says what.
For the record, I believe wholeheartedly in evolution. The Theory of Evolution definitely exists. It's real, and has an impact on our daily lives (this /. thread, for example). Incidentally, I happen to believe the theory is correct - but that's belief in a theory, not knowledge of a fact.
Why assume that SystemV init is the once-and-forever solution to UNIX startup? If systemd represents a superior design it will almost certainly supplant SystemV. If not, there will be some painful moments fixing the damage - but I'd rather adapt and grow with risks than stagnate and age in perfect safety. NOTE: most businesses will disagree vehemently with that assessment, and for good reason. Time for we technical types to either ensure that systemd is up to the task, or to reveal its shortcomings quickly to minimize the pain.
Terrible assumption.
Anecdotal evidence that individuals may be capable of accurate recall is directly contradicted by evidence that even witnesses who are absolutely certain of what they saw in fact only recalled those specific items which somehow drew their attention at the time of an event.
Before I answer that - please log in as a registered user. Then I'll answer you, Alex. May I call you Allie?
They even fly on cloudy days (marginal sunlight, nearly no moonlight - no starlight or celestial navigation in any event).
I had. Slashdot's web server apparently swallowed my post regarding several experiments with rat populations which effectively became 'extinct' or nearly so as a result of overcrowding conditions. Not doing the research twice to have it wiped out again. Google on 'overpopulation experiment' and draw your own conclusions.
Fine. But that ecosphere we've been living in will be irremediably altered by the presence of many billions of humans. Our technology will permit our numbers to grow until we have displaced all "naturally occurring" ecosystems (because six billion humans won't stop breeding or living just because the planet is becoming overpopulated). Once that occurs, die-back is the inevitable conclusion; leaving behind an environment fundamentally different from the one we know now.
Science figures it out. Engineers figure out how to use it without burning our fingers.
According to /. moderation, it's "insightful". Very different from "funny" - it means Hazem is gaining karma for posting something positive and meaningful.
Military grade technology will cost military grade bucks and will not be made generally available to the public. It will certainly not be made available for import/export on any civilian market you or I have access to.
Why would they want to kill the future of personal technology, when there's so much in there for law enforcement?