Maybe I don't get it, but there are hundreds of sighted cats that are put down every day in shelters around the US. How about giving your blind cat the gift of mercy and adopting a new cat?
Well the researched and technology gained from these experiments will be helpful to restoring the sight of human subjects.
Unless you suggest we put old blind grandma down out of mercy too;)
I think the best thing anyone can do for themselves it to get a vasectomy as soon as they realize that having children is merely a genetic impulse that we are programmed to do.
The impulse is the same thing that makes us want to have sex, drink caffeine, play World of Warcraft, do drugs, or whatever stimulates your brain.
It isn't a bad thing per se but you have to realize that maybe it isn't something you have to do in life to be happy. Quite the contrary if you consider financial success to be happiness which you may or may not see as real happiness but I digress.
The problem that we as a society faces is that the most intelligent or wealthy people (who perhaps were wealthy because of intelligence factors) realize this and either have 1 or no kids essentially reducing the gene pool of people who don't want to have massive amounts of kids they don't want.
Intelligence is of course relative and I know a few PHDs with buttloads of kids so you can always generalize by a case by case basis if you throw free will into the mix.
However, if you reflect on the action as you as a person deciding to have a child and its impact on you, society, and the environment then you realize that it doesn't really make a difference in the grand scheme of things when you have a child.
From a personal conclusion about having a child still means you will die... And so will your child and eventually all memories of you and your world maybe lost and you won't care since you are dead. With that in mind, I have personally decided that it is pointless to have children and would only be a detriment to me, the child (bad family genetics), possibly society from my lack of interest in said child, and the environment due to me causing more resources to be used.
So... As the parent poster said... The core problem of this issue is not that child is uncared for with their internet usage, but rather people who shouldn't be having children just to have them.
I am not obligated to give up my property and my current life--which are mine not by permission or privilege but by right--simply to avoid having my rights violated. Rather, you are simply obligated to cease violating my rights.
I hate to point this out, but you are aware of eminent domain and the draft.
I don't like the idea of them either, but it is kind of pointless to say that our society and or government works.
As far as the "Is it worth it" question; as far as I have seen (I haven't experienced this personally yet, my son is only 2), but sometimes its not about material wealth, often times parents are forced into situations like these just to keep a roof over their heads, food on the table, utilities running, and put their kids in decent schools. They are left with a decision of which is worse, a poorer education and more limited opportunities later in life or less time spent with the kids. This isn't true in all cases, but in most middle class situations I can understand it.
Many people don't realize, but could really move to Norway or a nation that pays 100% of college education if you put forth the effort to get a work permit.
However, many people don't because they just have the knowledge or the whereabouts to realize where they live now may not be the best situation for their children.
My parents realized this and moved to a very rural area when I was very young in the States. They didn't have good pay, but in general it was safe and I still had opportunities afterwards.
Remember, school and college isn't everything to making a someone happy and successful in life.
I mean what is the point if you go to school only to get a job you hate to raise your batch of kids. Personally, I have decided to end the cycle and not have children and I wish people would realize that is a valid option.
Having kids in itself is not really necessary for the rest of the world. The world doesn't need any more kids and having kids by itself won't complete you as a person. If you already have kids then you need to make the best of it. If you don't then consider your options about the environment you will be in if you tried to raise kids.
It may not be the best if you have to work 50 hours per week in your current area.
If you really want kids and want to put forth the effort then I think the grandparent post is right to really consider something else than just your job. Move somewhere that doesn't cost a great deal to live... Heck... Move to a country with better education. Vote with you feet. Not just your money.
Um.... If Windows is your Uncle and you use Windows to play games... I'm not sure what kind of games you and your uncle play and I think I really don't want to know.
While the ones that seem possible don't (flying cars, etc.).
Technological progress is funny like that. If you traveled back and time and tried to explain the internet, laptops, or cell phones to people in the 1950s they would most likely shrug and say "Who would use a thing like that!"
That and futurists often concoct ideas without thinking of social ramifications.
Imagine the accident and death toll related to flying cars and drunk driving for example.
FTFA:
NETELLER suspended trading its shares on the London Stock Exchange in light of the detention of founding members Stephen Lawrence and John Lefebvre. Besides owning stock in NETELLER, the two do not hold any positions with the company. I thought the whole point of being a shareholder was that you couldn't be charged for the wrong doing of the corporation?
Oh, really? Human brain activity is non-deterministic and sometimes unreliable. Exactly how does this translate to any kind of logic-based, deterministic system?
The mind is made of chemicals reactions and organic material which is in turn made of energy and atoms.
Atoms and energy must adhere to the laws of physics so they are deterministic.
Otherwise either you have to assume that the brain does not have follow the laws of physics since we live in an illogical universe or that the mind is not because of the brain and of some higher (non falsable) spiritual order and physics and science is unnecessary which means it would also mean we live in an illogical universe.
So unless you believe in religion over science or that the laws of physics do not apply, then the mind must of course be constrained to determinable states (Heisenberg uncertainty aside, but you really don't need to see electron states to see how the mind works).
With that in mind it is only a matter of time before the human mind can be simulated.
However, I think the 2038 date is way out there and that we won't simply simulate the human mind, but instead come up with general purpose AI by 2020 that is more or less an algorithm rather than brute forcing every single neuron in a pure simulation of the human mind.
That would be like building a scale replica of a 50ft bird when you really should have built a Boeing 747. There are better ways to build the human mind.
It's not that d4 3v1l 01l c0mp4n13z are forcing you to use their products. You use their products because they are plentiful, available, and cheap.
Seriously, I'm not sure if you live in the states or not but 95% of Americans have to drive to earn their income.
I could in theory use public transportation since I live in a big city in the North East, but many of Americans have to drive to get to work and have no choice.
Secondly, if I could afford a hybrid or pure electric I would buy one in a heart beat, but I can't.
So no... Gasoline is not a choice right now unless we want to be unemployed.
There are cases where there can be too much realism, but this isn't one of those things.
There was a serious discussion by Red Orchestra game devs at one time (or least they said) about the use of keeping corpes in the game because they are aiming for the most "realitic" game ever. And RO is brutally realistic if you have never played it. (no crosshairs, realistic weapon trajectories, and realistic human attributes)
Given the fact that Stalingrad was literally covered with dead bodies that couldn't be buried because of the constant battles it was also considered for static models of dead bodies on the battle field.
But the problem was that the engine could not handle it without serious issues and there was no point in hurting game play just to have something so cosmetic.
Hopefully in the future it could be included once game engines and hardware can do so.
overmental Databases I'm actually for some of the times because the stories on here just reeks of people who read 1984 a few to many times and think goverment is bad.
Or Atlas Shrugged, but the point being that if you haven't gotten the point of 1984 then you need to read it a few more times.
It isn't that government is bad per se, but that the potential for what it can do should be in our minds at all given times least we be the next victims.
Mostly, that 1984 is an allegory directly to Stalin and the purges of 1937. The telescreens are actually metaphors for citizens that report on each other during this time frame.
The point was not that technology would do this, but that society was already like that in Stalinist Russia in the late 30s. He was trying to affirm that in a society like Stalin's is possible and this is how it works and the warning signs were clearly pointed out.
This is a bit off topic, but that is the message that Orwell was trying to really put across.
Why are the child porn types writing software that magically puts child porn on random people's computers? I'm really not clear about what they're accomplishing there, other than potentially hurting their business by bringing child pornography into the spotlight.
If one were the malicious hacker type, I can't see anything worse you can do to someone than putting child porn on their computer in order to get them thrown in Federal prison.
If this could be automated on a larger scale, then think of all the destruction you could cause with so many lives.
Or you could just target one person and threaten blackmail.
I'm surprised that Eastern Europe groups or the Russian mafia haven't picked up on such techniques.
I know, I've been "poor". I've also know what its like to have to get up off my ass and get a job, and do crappy work for a living. If one works hard, is honest and never stops learning, one can end up in IT, with a decent wage. But it does require SOME effort, and not quitting... EVER.
And what happens when your CEO gets a bonus for laying you and your coworkers off and outsourcing to India?
And then the job market is so bad you can only can get a job at Starbucks and can't afford your mortgage or car payments?
Wouldn't you be pissed?
This actually happened to coworkers of mine at "not to be named" ISP which I had quit out of personal morals because of policy changes to go to another company. Unfortunately when you lay off 1,000+ people form the same company nationwide you tend to get a lot of people with the same job skills looking for the same job.
You bust your ass through college, work hard, long hours in your job, and when you are successful, you'd have to give away your money to some angry kid who despises you for your hard earned success and is too lazy to pay for his own education!
Ah but you are mistaken about the very wealthy. When you are so rich that you do not have to work at all.
It makes me ill that if I had 10,000,000 that I wouldn't ever had to work every again for the rest of my life... For the next 1,000 years with my current income.
Or if we have the Federal Reserve that money could pay for my life style forever if I just purchased CD's or left it in a bank (if I happen to live that long).
You see if you haven't been paying attention the US economy has gone from 25% financial 75% industrial to 75% finacial to 25% industrial in our economy.
Which means the most money being made is actually through money itself and not actual work. Credit card companies, Mutual Funds, Annuities, bonds, and of course the stock market.
Really... How much work does it take to leave your money in the bank? Or maybe buy a few thousand shares and wait till it rises in price?
Hell... Even I play the game with dividends and CDs. It is still minuscule to my day job, but I know well enough that if I had money I could simply use money to not have to work ever again and have all my needs met.
Sometimes I even feel guilty when I set limit order sells on stocks that I only bought a few days ago because I know I'm just playing this system to vampire blood out of actual working people at that company.
Then the guilt passes and I hit the OK button and get the high of making money without working.
Although I am a small business owner myself I know that in the end I'm the one who has to feed myself.
I have refused to buy anything from Apple just because of their support of DRM. I don't need my rights "managed", especially by a corporation.
Funny. I have OS X, iTunes, and an iPod without a single bit of DRM on it.
Could it be that the only DRM that apple has is from their iTMS (iTunes Music Store) which I avoid like the plague.
Fairplay DRM isn't about protecting intellectual property as it is a vendor lock in to Apple products, but you can still own Apple products without DRM.
Why? Because there's a serious risk that someone would bulldozer my house while I'm on vacation and build something else.
Because if that were the case, I could hold vague and broad land titles for the entire country side and do anything with the land for years until someone someone thinks its still unowned and spend the effort to build a house...
Then I jump out of the wood work and shout "GIVE ME YOUR MONIES!!!"
When you look at the land title it says that I own everything that is nearby a tree and has grass and maybe not owned by others.
And you tell me that this is so vague it could be land anywhere in the country side.
And to that I would tell you that I will see you in court and you unable to pay the court fees now have to rent the house that you spent money to build to me.
And as always their glorious status of this bug:
STATUS Microsoft has confirmed that this is a problem in the Microsoft products that are listed in the "Applies to" section. Microsoft is researching this problem and will post more information in this article when the information becomes available. Which leaves many people who use Entourage in the corporate environment out to dry.
Here is what I forgot to say or summarize in my previous post:
Government Regulation that promotes monopolies is bad. Government Regulation that promotes competition is good.
That is what real libertarianism is about. Government is a necessary evil (and I emphasize the evil part) but we need it so that non-government monopolies and despots do not enforce a will of their own the people and prevent free trade.
Slashdot Mirror
Maybe I don't get it, but there are hundreds of sighted cats that are put down every day in shelters around the US. How about giving your blind cat the gift of mercy and adopting a new cat?
;)
Well the researched and technology gained from these experiments will be helpful to restoring the sight of human subjects.
Unless you suggest we put old blind grandma down out of mercy too
Or in the case:
"Resistance is... Oooh! A peice of yarn!" *pounce* -Cat Borg
I'd have to agree.
I think the best thing anyone can do for themselves it to get a vasectomy as soon as they realize that having children is merely a genetic impulse that we are programmed to do.
The impulse is the same thing that makes us want to have sex, drink caffeine, play World of Warcraft, do drugs, or whatever stimulates your brain.
It isn't a bad thing per se but you have to realize that maybe it isn't something you have to do in life to be happy. Quite the contrary if you consider financial success to be happiness which you may or may not see as real happiness but I digress.
The problem that we as a society faces is that the most intelligent or wealthy people (who perhaps were wealthy because of intelligence factors) realize this and either have 1 or no kids essentially reducing the gene pool of people who don't want to have massive amounts of kids they don't want.
Intelligence is of course relative and I know a few PHDs with buttloads of kids so you can always generalize by a case by case basis if you throw free will into the mix.
However, if you reflect on the action as you as a person deciding to have a child and its impact on you, society, and the environment then you realize that it doesn't really make a difference in the grand scheme of things when you have a child.
From a personal conclusion about having a child still means you will die... And so will your child and eventually all memories of you and your world maybe lost and you won't care since you are dead. With that in mind, I have personally decided that it is pointless to have children and would only be a detriment to me, the child (bad family genetics), possibly society from my lack of interest in said child, and the environment due to me causing more resources to be used.
So... As the parent poster said... The core problem of this issue is not that child is uncared for with their internet usage, but rather people who shouldn't be having children just to have them.
I am not obligated to give up my property and my current life--which are mine not by permission or privilege but by right--simply to avoid having my rights violated. Rather, you are simply obligated to cease violating my rights.
I hate to point this out, but you are aware of eminent domain and the draft.
I don't like the idea of them either, but it is kind of pointless to say that our society and or government works.
A 9 or 10-year-old would be much more likely to accept their propaganda than, say, a 14-year-old.
So how is that D.A.R.E. program working out?
As far as the "Is it worth it" question; as far as I have seen (I haven't experienced this personally yet, my son is only 2), but sometimes its not about material wealth, often times parents are forced into situations like these just to keep a roof over their heads, food on the table, utilities running, and put their kids in decent schools. They are left with a decision of which is worse, a poorer education and more limited opportunities later in life or less time spent with the kids. This isn't true in all cases, but in most middle class situations I can understand it.
Many people don't realize, but could really move to Norway or a nation that pays 100% of college education if you put forth the effort to get a work permit.
However, many people don't because they just have the knowledge or the whereabouts to realize where they live now may not be the best situation for their children.
My parents realized this and moved to a very rural area when I was very young in the States. They didn't have good pay, but in general it was safe and I still had opportunities afterwards.
Remember, school and college isn't everything to making a someone happy and successful in life.
I mean what is the point if you go to school only to get a job you hate to raise your batch of kids. Personally, I have decided to end the cycle and not have children and I wish people would realize that is a valid option.
Having kids in itself is not really necessary for the rest of the world. The world doesn't need any more kids and having kids by itself won't complete you as a person. If you already have kids then you need to make the best of it. If you don't then consider your options about the environment you will be in if you tried to raise kids.
It may not be the best if you have to work 50 hours per week in your current area.
If you really want kids and want to put forth the effort then I think the grandparent post is right to really consider something else than just your job. Move somewhere that doesn't cost a great deal to live... Heck... Move to a country with better education. Vote with you feet. Not just your money.
Um.... If Windows is your Uncle and you use Windows to play games... I'm not sure what kind of games you and your uncle play and I think I really don't want to know.
While the ones that seem possible don't (flying cars, etc.).
Technological progress is funny like that. If you traveled back and time and tried to explain the internet, laptops, or cell phones to people in the 1950s they would most likely shrug and say "Who would use a thing like that!"
That and futurists often concoct ideas without thinking of social ramifications.
Imagine the accident and death toll related to flying cars and drunk driving for example.
Eh. It isn't as much as the game was bad, but the game lasted way too long and was annoying to travel.
I think I sunk 30 hours in it before I just felt that I really didn't need to spend 10 more to see the ending.
Oh, really? Human brain activity is non-deterministic and sometimes unreliable. Exactly how does this translate to any kind of logic-based, deterministic system?
The mind is made of chemicals reactions and organic material which is in turn made of energy and atoms.
Atoms and energy must adhere to the laws of physics so they are deterministic.
Otherwise either you have to assume that the brain does not have follow the laws of physics since we live in an illogical universe or that the mind is not because of the brain and of some higher (non falsable) spiritual order and physics and science is unnecessary which means it would also mean we live in an illogical universe.
So unless you believe in religion over science or that the laws of physics do not apply, then the mind must of course be constrained to determinable states (Heisenberg uncertainty aside, but you really don't need to see electron states to see how the mind works).
With that in mind it is only a matter of time before the human mind can be simulated.
However, I think the 2038 date is way out there and that we won't simply simulate the human mind, but instead come up with general purpose AI by 2020 that is more or less an algorithm rather than brute forcing every single neuron in a pure simulation of the human mind.
That would be like building a scale replica of a 50ft bird when you really should have built a Boeing 747. There are better ways to build the human mind.
It's not that d4 3v1l 01l c0mp4n13z are forcing you to use their products. You use their products because they are plentiful, available, and cheap.
Seriously, I'm not sure if you live in the states or not but 95% of Americans have to drive to earn their income.
I could in theory use public transportation since I live in a big city in the North East, but many of Americans have to drive to get to work and have no choice.
Secondly, if I could afford a hybrid or pure electric I would buy one in a heart beat, but I can't.
So no... Gasoline is not a choice right now unless we want to be unemployed.
So here's a question: if we stopped emitting burning fossil fuels entirely, right now, would the earth start cooling?
No, but if we put a few nuclear bombs in an active volcano I bet it would.
You may laugh, but besides the fallout it would really work for a short period of time.
Volcanoes are the #1 reason for times of Earth's cooling.
There are cases where there can be too much realism, but this isn't one of those things.
There was a serious discussion by Red Orchestra game devs at one time (or least they said) about the use of keeping corpes in the game because they are aiming for the most "realitic" game ever. And RO is brutally realistic if you have never played it. (no crosshairs, realistic weapon trajectories, and realistic human attributes)
Given the fact that Stalingrad was literally covered with dead bodies that couldn't be buried because of the constant battles it was also considered for static models of dead bodies on the battle field.
But the problem was that the engine could not handle it without serious issues and there was no point in hurting game play just to have something so cosmetic.
Hopefully in the future it could be included once game engines and hardware can do so.
There certainly were corpses in DOOM.. they just looked the same from every direction!
Personally, I found the meaty piles of flesh and giblet production more entertaining.
Of course, I think the game was made to play with IDKFA, IDDQD, and BFG or stimpack the entire time.
Although the chainsaw did have its moments.
overmental Databases I'm actually for some of the times because the stories on here just reeks of people who read 1984 a few to many times and think goverment is bad.
Or Atlas Shrugged, but the point being that if you haven't gotten the point of 1984 then you need to read it a few more times.
It isn't that government is bad per se, but that the potential for what it can do should be in our minds at all given times least we be the next victims.
Mostly, that 1984 is an allegory directly to Stalin and the purges of 1937. The telescreens are actually metaphors for citizens that report on each other during this time frame.
The point was not that technology would do this, but that society was already like that in Stalinist Russia in the late 30s. He was trying to affirm that in a society like Stalin's is possible and this is how it works and the warning signs were clearly pointed out.
This is a bit off topic, but that is the message that Orwell was trying to really put across.
Why are the child porn types writing software that magically puts child porn on random people's computers? I'm really not clear about what they're accomplishing there, other than potentially hurting their business by bringing child pornography into the spotlight.
If one were the malicious hacker type, I can't see anything worse you can do to someone than putting child porn on their computer in order to get them thrown in Federal prison.
If this could be automated on a larger scale, then think of all the destruction you could cause with so many lives.
Or you could just target one person and threaten blackmail.
I'm surprised that Eastern Europe groups or the Russian mafia haven't picked up on such techniques.
Not quite yet maybe but I don't know everyone who's gonna buy a new "big" desktop PC anymore.
The same people who have always bought desktops... Gamers, technophiles, and enthusiasts.
Sure you could always by a PS3 or Xbox, but there are many games (mostly small shops and modders) that you won't see on a console anytime soon.
I know, I've been "poor". I've also know what its like to have to get up off my ass and get a job, and do crappy work for a living. If one works hard, is honest and never stops learning, one can end up in IT, with a decent wage. But it does require SOME effort, and not quitting ... EVER.
And what happens when your CEO gets a bonus for laying you and your coworkers off and outsourcing to India?
And then the job market is so bad you can only can get a job at Starbucks and can't afford your mortgage or car payments?
Wouldn't you be pissed?
This actually happened to coworkers of mine at "not to be named" ISP which I had quit out of personal morals because of policy changes to go to another company. Unfortunately when you lay off 1,000+ people form the same company nationwide you tend to get a lot of people with the same job skills looking for the same job.
You bust your ass through college, work hard, long hours in your job, and when you are successful, you'd have to give away your money to some angry kid who despises you for your hard earned success and is too lazy to pay for his own education!
Ah but you are mistaken about the very wealthy. When you are so rich that you do not have to work at all.
It makes me ill that if I had 10,000,000 that I wouldn't ever had to work every again for the rest of my life... For the next 1,000 years with my current income.
Or if we have the Federal Reserve that money could pay for my life style forever if I just purchased CD's or left it in a bank (if I happen to live that long).
You see if you haven't been paying attention the US economy has gone from 25% financial 75% industrial to 75% finacial to 25% industrial in our economy.
Which means the most money being made is actually through money itself and not actual work. Credit card companies, Mutual Funds, Annuities, bonds, and of course the stock market.
Really... How much work does it take to leave your money in the bank? Or maybe buy a few thousand shares and wait till it rises in price?
Hell... Even I play the game with dividends and CDs. It is still minuscule to my day job, but I know well enough that if I had money I could simply use money to not have to work ever again and have all my needs met.
Sometimes I even feel guilty when I set limit order sells on stocks that I only bought a few days ago because I know I'm just playing this system to vampire blood out of actual working people at that company.
Then the guilt passes and I hit the OK button and get the high of making money without working.
Although I am a small business owner myself I know that in the end I'm the one who has to feed myself.
I have refused to buy anything from Apple just because of their support of DRM. I don't need my rights "managed", especially by a corporation.
Funny. I have OS X, iTunes, and an iPod without a single bit of DRM on it.
Could it be that the only DRM that apple has is from their iTMS (iTunes Music Store) which I avoid like the plague.
Fairplay DRM isn't about protecting intellectual property as it is a vendor lock in to Apple products, but you can still own Apple products without DRM.
Why? Because there's a serious risk that someone would bulldozer my house while I'm on vacation and build something else.
Because if that were the case, I could hold vague and broad land titles for the entire country side and do anything with the land for years until someone someone thinks its still unowned and spend the effort to build a house...
Then I jump out of the wood work and shout "GIVE ME YOUR MONIES!!!"
When you look at the land title it says that I own everything that is nearby a tree and has grass and maybe not owned by others.
And you tell me that this is so vague it could be land anywhere in the country side.
And to that I would tell you that I will see you in court and you unable to pay the court fees now have to rent the house that you spent money to build to me.
Otherwise known as RIMM and Blackberry.
http://support.microsoft.com/?kbid=924606
And as always their glorious status of this bug: STATUS
Microsoft has confirmed that this is a problem in the Microsoft products that are listed in the "Applies to" section. Microsoft is researching this problem and will post more information in this article when the information becomes available. Which leaves many people who use Entourage in the corporate environment out to dry.
Would you expect a base station to help you restore your Mac from an image? I didn't think so.
Maybe with Time Machine, but seeing the product isn't out yet, that is only speculation.
Here is what I forgot to say or summarize in my previous post:
Government Regulation that promotes monopolies is bad.
Government Regulation that promotes competition is good.
That is what real libertarianism is about. Government is a necessary evil (and I emphasize the evil part) but we need it so that non-government monopolies and despots do not enforce a will of their own the people and prevent free trade.