I don't know what you do with your WAP, but for some weird reason my neighbor stopped leaching after confirgured mine to have DNS entries and IPs to redirect to Goatse.
Just because they are a business doesn't mean they won't exhibit basic human decency. Allowing soomeone to use a restroom in an emergency and allowing someone to suck up your free WiFi are not even in the same boat.
Actually, in Philly and New York most star bucks have their bathrooms locked and refuse to let anyone use them without buying something and this policy is boldly stated in big signs. Since its a bitch to find a decent rest room in Manhatten anyways, you can buy a cheap muffin in Star bucks to take a bath room break.
Secondly, what about people who don't like coffee and happen to be with their friends that do like coffee and bring a laptop?
Also what if the people next door have their Winxp constantly pick the wrong access point (common problem).
I'm growing really tired of the way people are trying to justify what they know is stealing by arguing that because a wireless signal is "intangible" or "encroaches public property", it's somehow public domain.
I'm fine with this, but according to the FCC I can't do certain things with my wireless connection because of public bandwidth. I can't broad cast TV or radio stations without a license nor can I produce anything that interferes with licenses signals and I must accept any interference that these licensed signals cause.
So either wirless is either public and regulated by the government or its not?
Now why do you suppose that the massive amounts of prose that's being churned out by today's bloggers will be any more interesting to future generations than our hypothetical diaries?
The sentient machines may want to figure out a bit more about that funny race of squishy things they just nuked into oblivion.
There are a couple of ways publishers can also loose out: for instance, if a user clicks through but doesn't make a purchase only to return to the advertiser's site the next day or week and make the purchase, will the publisher be compensated appropriately?
Well... You could use cookies that track this or maybe have a unique IP binding, but if the customer deletes his cookies, has a dynamic IP, or just uses another computer at a different location all together you are SOL.
Suffice to say there isn't a technical solution for this issue.
I think having to flick the mouse around is more than enough physical exertion for the average FPS gamer. What makes you think they'll take to this?
Ooooh... I dunno. I really enjoy House of the Dead 3, DDR, Time Crisis, that sniper game, and that 911 police shooter that makes you move around to doge behind objects with the motion sensor.
Although... I'm usually tired as heck with hurting arms and legs but it is better than sitting on a couch all day.
"Ray Kurzweil is the best person I know at predicting the future of artificial intelligence. His intriguing new book envisions a future in which information technologies have advanced so far and fast that they enable humanity to transcend its biological limitations--transforming our lives in ways we can't yet imagine." -Bill Gates
This single quote has made me go "Hrm... Thats odd." If you are a futurist/transhumanist advocate it is understandable why you would advocate the book. However, a straight faced businessman who happens to be one of the most wealthiest men on the planet (next to that guy from ikea) starts to laude and praise this book at the future... Well... It makes me wonder what Gates has planned.
If you haven't read this book, then get it, put some time aside and give it a thorough reading. I'm sure there are something things that we all disagree with in the book (including myself) but it has to be one of the most logical explanations of the Age of GNR (Genetics, Nantotechnology, and Robotics) we are about to embark in 10-40 years.
With that in mind, I believe Robotics is the next big boom (as the internet was in the late 1990's) and within the next 10 years robotics will have affected us more than internet has. Think Roomba, DARPA Urban grand challenge, unnamed flight, and so on...
I wouldn't put it past Bill to know what is going on here (although he did bungle on predicting the importance of the internet back in the early 90's).
So I think this is an attempt to at least be in the game if and when the robotics boom arrives.
And suddenly the professionals who have been using it for quite some time look like they're gouging their clients because some kid in his mom's basement can get the same tools.
1. They get what they pay for. 2. They kid in his mom's basement will be just as good as the professionals (if not better) in 5-10 years. 3. Competition is good.
But I think many times it becomes a crutch that makes people lazy.
Hrm...
So we should go back to using typewriters and white out? Should we throw out Excel and go back to handcranked calculators? Should airforce pilots pull out a map, compass, and manual bombsights instead of using software guided munitions? Should weathermen go back to looking at almanacs and if it will rain tomorrow by looking at the sky?
Software isn't a crutch... It is a tool. Having the tools is one thing, but knowing how to use the tools is key and that often takes effort on part of the user.
If two soccer teams were evenly matched in natural skill and strategic decision making, the side with the software analysis tools will always comeout ahead.
So you either learn to use the tools or you get beat by those who do.... Regardless of it is on the battlefield, sports arenas, or in the business world.
Now, driving your CAR supports mideast oil barons.
Which is kind of strange because 40% of the oil the US consumes is from own our territories and oil rigs. The other 60% is mostly Canada and Venuzela with a fraction going to the mideast. (US is the world's 3rd largest oil producer: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/World_oil_consumption )
Now as to why the oil prices go up everytime there a crisis in the mideast... Well... You got me.
Or will the robot team have to replace the batteries on each robot every 10 minutes, that is what I would like to know. How will these robots be powered?
Of course this is kind of like asking someone in 1906, how one would go about finding a method to fuel a Messerschmitt Me 262 jet fighter so that it will have flight times of more than 20 minutes (which won't exist until 1944).
And in 2001 we are all going to be jetting around space, living in colonies on the moon. Why does everyone persist in making rediculous time-conditional statements about technology?
Well because of decentralization, saftey error, and economics.
The reason we don't colonies on the moon was because it wasn't economical and that the space program was centralized to a government agency. Hence, their funding was at the mercy of politicians and even with billions of dollars per year they aren't going to acheive much.
However, robotics on the other hand is decentralized and has profit and political incentives to be created. Today, more money is being spend on robotics and AI by companies and governments around the world more than our space programs.
What robots and AI you say?
The ones that seem rather mundane and invisible.
DARAP with the grand challenge. Sony and all the factory robots. The Pentagon and all the development on unmaned drones and UAVs (see military robots). France and Sweeden are working on the Dassault Neuron, an unmaned jet fighter set to be put into service in 2015.
Not to mention all the Ai that goes into market forecasting, flight control, GPS satellites, and everything else that we don't see because it is invisible.
Robots and AI will happen soon because it makes better militaries and makes corporations profits without spending trillions of dollars on a single project that won't give us immediate returns in our wallets (aka the space program)
Re:Wrong. StrongAI will still have the advantage
on
10th Annual RoboCup
·
· Score: 2, Interesting
Well think of it logically. With robotics there is no limit to how powerful you can make their sensors and motors without causing harm to anything. It's just a matter of technology. WIth humans you can't just start attaching parts in a slapdash manner. That arm which can lift a couple thousand pounds will rip the socket and pretty much kill you if you use it to the potential. Robots don't have that problem. PS. If you can guess where I learned this Ill give you a cookie.
Actually, you are falling into the fallacy (as Ed at the Singularity institue calls it) anthromorphic assumtion. We assume that we as humans will be the same now as we are then and we assume that robots and humans have the same limitations today.
Lets say in 2050 we have a robot that can rip a regular humans arms of. Chances are that will be a given.
But whats the difference between a robot and a robot with a human brain inside of it that can rip a normal humans arms off? (think Ghost in the Shell)
Well besides the life support system and neural interface, changes are the robot and the cyborg are on equal footing. Heck... You could not even get rid of the human body, but have a neural interface to the humans mind while he sits in a room somewhere and controls the robot remotley.
But... The robot or should we say... AI (if they pull it off) will that the advantage over the human speed and tactical wise.
Lets say the goalie human cyborg being on equal strength of the robot can only guess and predict X amount of moves in X amount of seconds in determine where and where the robot is going to optimally kick the ball (and from which direction). If his mind is still organic without enhancements, he'll have to think at the speed of his synapses (1 to 120 meters per second) even with an electronic interface to robotic eyes or radar or whatever cyborg soccer players use to see in 2050. Then he has to use those neurons to fire off and communicate with his robot body.
The robot, having the disctinct advantage of being electronic through and through can use his computing power at the speed of electrons running from his eyes to his CPU and to his arms (which is near speed of light) and has the speed. Not only that the average human mind can not simply make more than 5 guess on the next best move. (Kasaprov the chess champion can do something like 12 next best moves).
So while the human goalie is trying to guess what the AI is going to do, the AI has already formulated all possible moves and has found the move he can make that will have the highest percentage of scoring a goal. Not only that he communicated this wirelessly to his robotic teammates and they are doing moves together in real time. That would be really hard for humans to do.
However, a cyborg human with AI assistants will have a better chance of finding the next best move.
Now of course you may wonder, how do we interface a human with a machine in the first place? We are doing it today small scale and the human body is fragile, but what is to say that in 45 years that they have figured out safe ways to interface the human mind to a machine and can even build life support systems that no longer needs the human body to keep a brain alive.
We have those kind of life support systems today and could make a complete "brain in a jar" if we really wanted, but it wouldn't be fun for the brain since we don't have thing to interface for communication.
Otherwise think of it like this... Today is 1906.
If we compare all the changes to life that happend from 1906 to 1946... We heavier than air flight, atomic bombs, mass production, radar, trasnatlantic flight and rockets. Who is to say that by 2050 we are going to have the limitations of what we have now when we are dealing with robotics and human interfaces.
I don't. I believe to create life and then to destroy it for the sake of harvesting it's cells is wrong.
Well I suppose it is good then they aren't destroying life. Embryonic cells are obtained from fertility clinics which would have thrown them out anyways.
Secondly, embryos don't have sentient life nor do they have counciousness.
And lastly, if you believe in a kind loving god, then we can be assured no embryos are going to hell for something they have no control over.
Well DRM does not constrain piracy. It only hurts the
Zip. Nadda. Not one bit.
If a pirate wants to copy something or get a copy of something, he already has the tools to bypass whatever DRM you throw at him. Those who end up being hurt all the time is Joe Six packs who buy a copy and then the company that sold him the media goes bankrupt or his drm copy goes bad and he couldn't make fair use backups of it.
The "truth" about DRM is to make people buy media twice when they already own a licence for it.
And guess what happens to DRM when the copyright expires in 100 years from now? You still have DRM and may heaven help you if you are a historian trying to research early 21st century history and can't seem to find tools to read archaic DRM schemes (although I'll give our descendants the benefit of the doubt with computer skills by 2100.)
Not to mention this media is supposed to go into public domain once the DRM expires... But DRM is cheating the spirit of copyright law by making this impossible.
MS to be fair seem to have made reasonable efforts to unify DRM with it's 'plays for sure' thingy (although I've no experience on how restrictive it actually is)
Slashdot Mirror
I don't know what you do with your WAP, but for some weird reason my neighbor stopped leaching after confirgured mine to have DNS entries and IPs to redirect to Goatse.
IANAL, etc, but wouldn't it be illegal for the two 17 year olds to be screwing in the first place?
Not in the states. Also there are other weird laws from state to state.
Just because they are a business doesn't mean they won't exhibit basic human decency. Allowing soomeone to use a restroom in an emergency and allowing someone to suck up your free WiFi are not even in the same boat.
Actually, in Philly and New York most star bucks have their bathrooms locked and refuse to let anyone use them without buying something and this policy is boldly stated in big signs. Since its a bitch to find a decent rest room in Manhatten anyways, you can buy a cheap muffin in Star bucks to take a bath room break.
Secondly, what about people who don't like coffee and happen to be with their friends that do like coffee and bring a laptop?
Also what if the people next door have their Winxp constantly pick the wrong access point (common problem).
I'm growing really tired of the way people are trying to justify what they know is stealing by arguing that because a wireless signal is "intangible" or "encroaches public property", it's somehow public domain.
I'm fine with this, but according to the FCC I can't do certain things with my wireless connection because of public bandwidth. I can't broad cast TV or radio stations without a license nor can I produce anything that interferes with licenses signals and I must accept any interference that these licensed signals cause.
So either wirless is either public and regulated by the government or its not?
So which is it? We can't have it both ways.
Now why do you suppose that the massive amounts of prose that's being churned out by today's bloggers will be any more interesting to future generations than our hypothetical diaries?
The sentient machines may want to figure out a bit more about that funny race of squishy things they just nuked into oblivion.
There are a couple of ways publishers can also loose out: for instance, if a user clicks through but doesn't make a purchase only to return to the advertiser's site the next day or week and make the purchase, will the publisher be compensated appropriately?
Well... You could use cookies that track this or maybe have a unique IP binding, but if the customer deletes his cookies, has a dynamic IP, or just uses another computer at a different location all together you are SOL.
Suffice to say there isn't a technical solution for this issue.
I think having to flick the mouse around is more than enough physical exertion for the average FPS gamer. What makes you think they'll take to this?
Ooooh... I dunno. I really enjoy House of the Dead 3, DDR, Time Crisis, that sniper game, and that 911 police shooter that makes you move around to doge behind objects with the motion sensor.
Although... I'm usually tired as heck with hurting arms and legs but it is better than sitting on a couch all day.
When it comes to robotics, Microsoft need to understand that they are not electromechnical engineers.
To be fair.... Microsoft wasn't a video game console company in 1995. Neither were they an Office Suite product company back in the early 80's.
Heck... From my understanding, before Win3.1 dominated the market, they made most of their money off the Microsoft Mouse sales.
Come to think of it... MS has plenty of hardware experience.
And I quote... Off the back cover of the book, The Singularity is Near by Ray Kurzweil
"Ray Kurzweil is the best person I know at predicting the future of artificial intelligence. His intriguing new book envisions a future in which information technologies have advanced so far and fast that they enable humanity to transcend its biological limitations--transforming our lives in ways we can't yet imagine."
-Bill Gates
This single quote has made me go "Hrm... Thats odd." If you are a futurist/transhumanist advocate it is understandable why you would advocate the book. However, a straight faced businessman who happens to be one of the most wealthiest men on the planet (next to that guy from ikea) starts to laude and praise this book at the future... Well... It makes me wonder what Gates has planned.
If you haven't read this book, then get it, put some time aside and give it a thorough reading. I'm sure there are something things that we all disagree with in the book (including myself) but it has to be one of the most logical explanations of the Age of GNR (Genetics, Nantotechnology, and Robotics) we are about to embark in 10-40 years.
With that in mind, I believe Robotics is the next big boom (as the internet was in the late 1990's) and within the next 10 years robotics will have affected us more than internet has. Think Roomba, DARPA Urban grand challenge, unnamed flight, and so on...
I wouldn't put it past Bill to know what is going on here (although he did bungle on predicting the importance of the internet back in the early 90's).
So I think this is an attempt to at least be in the game if and when the robotics boom arrives.
And suddenly the professionals who have been using it for quite some time look like they're gouging their clients because some kid in his mom's basement can get the same tools.
1. They get what they pay for.
2. They kid in his mom's basement will be just as good as the professionals (if not better) in 5-10 years.
3. Competition is good.
Now go beat the pants those kids.
If it's law enforcement or electrical engineering, they're not off to a good start.
Oh really? Apparently, that didn't stop these guys from wiring my basement when they built my house.
But I think many times it becomes a crutch that makes people lazy.
Hrm...
So we should go back to using typewriters and white out?
Should we throw out Excel and go back to handcranked calculators?
Should airforce pilots pull out a map, compass, and manual bombsights instead of using software guided munitions?
Should weathermen go back to looking at almanacs and if it will rain tomorrow by looking at the sky?
Software isn't a crutch... It is a tool. Having the tools is one thing, but knowing how to use the tools is key and that often takes effort on part of the user.
If two soccer teams were evenly matched in natural skill and strategic decision making, the side with the software analysis tools will always comeout ahead.
So you either learn to use the tools or you get beat by those who do.... Regardless of it is on the battlefield, sports arenas, or in the business world.
If they'd only do this for beer, wine, and liquor.
Now, driving your CAR supports mideast oil barons.
n )
Which is kind of strange because 40% of the oil the US consumes is from own our territories and oil rigs. The other 60% is mostly Canada and Venuzela with a fraction going to the mideast. (US is the world's 3rd largest oil producer: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/World_oil_consumptio
Now as to why the oil prices go up everytime there a crisis in the mideast... Well... You got me.
#include [soul]
//i should add more options laters //really now?
#include [body]
#include [mind]
if (stomach == NULL)
{
findfood ( chips, pizza, burger);
}
elseif(girlfriend == TRUE)
{
havesex(lighton, lightsoff, withmasks);
}
elseif(slashdotreader == TRUE)
{
nothavesex(lookAtPorn, CleanKeyboard, BuyMoreKleenex);
return 0;
}
Or will the robot team have to replace the batteries on each robot every 10 minutes, that is what I would like to know. How will these robots be powered?
Why not fuel cells? Hydogen and elsewise? Perhaps carbon nanotube capacitors?
Of course this is kind of like asking someone in 1906, how one would go about finding a method to fuel a Messerschmitt Me 262 jet fighter so that it will have flight times of more than 20 minutes (which won't exist until 1944).
And in 2001 we are all going to be jetting around space, living in colonies on the moon. Why does everyone persist in making rediculous time-conditional statements about technology?
Well because of decentralization, saftey error, and economics.
The reason we don't colonies on the moon was because it wasn't economical and that the space program was centralized to a government agency. Hence, their funding was at the mercy of politicians and even with billions of dollars per year they aren't going to acheive much.
However, robotics on the other hand is decentralized and has profit and political incentives to be created. Today, more money is being spend on robotics and AI by companies and governments around the world more than our space programs.
What robots and AI you say?
The ones that seem rather mundane and invisible.
DARAP with the grand challenge. Sony and all the factory robots. The Pentagon and all the development on unmaned drones and UAVs (see military robots). France and Sweeden are working on the Dassault Neuron, an unmaned jet fighter set to be put into service in 2015.
Not to mention all the Ai that goes into market forecasting, flight control, GPS satellites, and everything else that we don't see because it is invisible.
Robots and AI will happen soon because it makes better militaries and makes corporations profits without spending trillions of dollars on a single project that won't give us immediate returns in our wallets (aka the space program)
Well think of it logically. With robotics there is no limit to how powerful you can make their sensors and motors without causing harm to anything. It's just a matter of technology. WIth humans you can't just start attaching parts in a slapdash manner. That arm which can lift a couple thousand pounds will rip the socket and pretty much kill you if you use it to the potential. Robots don't have that problem. PS. If you can guess where I learned this Ill give you a cookie.
Actually, you are falling into the fallacy (as Ed at the Singularity institue calls it) anthromorphic assumtion. We assume that we as humans will be the same now as we are then and we assume that robots and humans have the same limitations today.
Lets say in 2050 we have a robot that can rip a regular humans arms of. Chances are that will be a given.
But whats the difference between a robot and a robot with a human brain inside of it that can rip a normal humans arms off? (think Ghost in the Shell)
Well besides the life support system and neural interface, changes are the robot and the cyborg are on equal footing. Heck... You could not even get rid of the human body, but have a neural interface to the humans mind while he sits in a room somewhere and controls the robot remotley.
But... The robot or should we say... AI (if they pull it off) will that the advantage over the human speed and tactical wise.
Lets say the goalie human cyborg being on equal strength of the robot can only guess and predict X amount of moves in X amount of seconds in determine where and where the robot is going to optimally kick the ball (and from which direction). If his mind is still organic without enhancements, he'll have to think at the speed of his synapses (1 to 120 meters per second) even with an electronic interface to robotic eyes or radar or whatever cyborg soccer players use to see in 2050. Then he has to use those neurons to fire off and communicate with his robot body.
The robot, having the disctinct advantage of being electronic through and through can use his computing power at the speed of electrons running from his eyes to his CPU and to his arms (which is near speed of light) and has the speed. Not only that the average human mind can not simply make more than 5 guess on the next best move. (Kasaprov the chess champion can do something like 12 next best moves).
So while the human goalie is trying to guess what the AI is going to do, the AI has already formulated all possible moves and has found the move he can make that will have the highest percentage of scoring a goal. Not only that he communicated this wirelessly to his robotic teammates and they are doing moves together in real time. That would be really hard for humans to do.
However, a cyborg human with AI assistants will have a better chance of finding the next best move.
Now of course you may wonder, how do we interface a human with a machine in the first place? We are doing it today small scale and the human body is fragile, but what is to say that in 45 years that they have figured out safe ways to interface the human mind to a machine and can even build life support systems that no longer needs the human body to keep a brain alive.
We have those kind of life support systems today and could make a complete "brain in a jar" if we really wanted, but it wouldn't be fun for the brain since we don't have thing to interface for communication.
Otherwise think of it like this... Today is 1906.
If we compare all the changes to life that happend from 1906 to 1946... We heavier than air flight, atomic bombs, mass production, radar, trasnatlantic flight and rockets. Who is to say that by 2050 we are going to have the limitations of what we have now when we are dealing with robotics and human interfaces.
I don't. I believe to create life and then to destroy it for the sake of harvesting it's cells is wrong.
Well I suppose it is good then they aren't destroying life. Embryonic cells are obtained from fertility clinics which would have thrown them out anyways.
Secondly, embryos don't have sentient life nor do they have counciousness.
And lastly, if you believe in a kind loving god, then we can be assured no embryos are going to hell for something they have no control over.
OTOH, why would SCO even do this? Any belief that it will give them some cash flow or some other position that benefits them is irrational.
My question would be... Are there any businesses dumb enough to purchase products from SCO willingly and without bribes to the CFO?
But how is this different than a Polic Helicopter?
Because helicopters cost a shit ton of money to keep in the air. Drones don't.
In Philly, they have choppers, but they only bring them out when a crime has been committed and they are searching for that person.
Its kind of creepy sleeping in bed seeing the spot light hit your window... Mostly because you know that someone has been shot in your neighborhood.
Drones would be 24/7 surveilance... They don't keep chopper up for more than an hour or so.
DRM to constrain piracy = Good
Well DRM does not constrain piracy. It only hurts the
Zip. Nadda. Not one bit.
If a pirate wants to copy something or get a copy of something, he already has the tools to bypass whatever DRM you throw at him. Those who end up being hurt all the time is Joe Six packs who buy a copy and then the company that sold him the media goes bankrupt or his drm copy goes bad and he couldn't make fair use backups of it.
The "truth" about DRM is to make people buy media twice when they already own a licence for it.
And guess what happens to DRM when the copyright expires in 100 years from now? You still have DRM and may heaven help you if you are a historian trying to research early 21st century history and can't seem to find tools to read archaic DRM schemes (although I'll give our descendants the benefit of the doubt with computer skills by 2100.)
Not to mention this media is supposed to go into public domain once the DRM expires... But DRM is cheating the spirit of copyright law by making this impossible.
if the only people who see this are already in agreement with the EFF on this one?
Post the link on your blog. Email it to your family members. Print the link on business cards and hadn it out to strangers on the street.
MS to be fair seem to have made reasonable efforts to unify DRM with it's 'plays for sure' thingy (although I've no experience on how restrictive it actually is)
And if I have a Mac or Linux box?
But when, despite GM's best efforts, customers actually showed interest in it, GM decided to pull the plug.
Well... If it is any consolation, GM's profits are in the tank these days. Don't know how much longer they are going to stay around.