As was evidenced by the new FTL(faster than light) optical data processing center at the core of Slashdot, This article was accidentally Posted INTO the PAST!!!!
Thus, making the first post read a DUPE, and not this one. This is the original!/my head asplodes.
whenever something is turned into an industry the entire product falls apart.
industry == exploitation at some level.
industry takes the fun and innovation out of products (note how art is not an industry), industry squeezes every last penny out of a product, and then sells you the same thing over again.
industry is currently a bad word in my books, when something is described as such *cough*searchengines*cough* i know they are gonig to suffer as a result.
ps. anyone note that the "your not a script" uses dictionary words? dictionary based attack anyone?
DO NOT forget that should common carrier status be dropped that ISP's can now CENSOR PARTS OF THE INTERNET.
Please Correct me if I am mistaken, This is wildly more important that price gouging.
For example, the ISP you are currently at may block you from going to a competetors site, a party may give $$$ to the ISP and block you from viewing another party's website.
i submit that baseball is not very often exciting, therefore a mathematical algorithm would be interesting for me, and i expect it would be non-obvious as the computer has no real human inputs other than score/runs/hits/and perhaps noise level.
We are reaching critical mass in the legalistic system, retalitory lawsuits fired off from company to company will destabilize the global economy.
It becomes more efficient to patent obvious buisness methods and steps to solving a problem, and then sue people using those methods to allow them to compete with you, rather than try and innovate.
Innovation costs money, Patent arsenals allow for wasteful practices to continue unabated for the lifetime of the patent.
Roland P is bad man, he takes news, rewords it lightly and submits with a 100% acceptance rating to the/. editors. bad man. Someone with the copy/paste full text info package, please post.
Privacy is necessary for an open society in the electronic age. Privacy is not secrecy. A private matter is something one doesn't want the whole world to know, but a secret matter is something one doesn't want anybody to know. Privacy is the power to selectively reveal oneself to the world.
If two parties have some sort of dealings, then each has a memory of their interaction. Each party can speak about their own memory of this; how could anyone prevent it? One could pass laws against it, but the freedom of speech, even more than privacy, is fundamental to an open society; we seek not to restrict any speech at all. If many parties speak together in the same forum, each can speak to all the others and aggregate together knowledge about individuals and other parties. The power of electronic communications has enabled such group speech, and it will not go away merely because we might want it to.
Since we desire privacy, we must ensure that each party to a transaction have knowledge only of that which is directly necessary for that transaction. Since any information can be spoken of, we must ensure that we reveal as little as possible. In most cases personal identity is not salient. When I purchase a magazine at a store and hand cash to the clerk, there is no need to know who I am. When I ask my electronic mail provider to send and receive messages, my provider need not know to whom I am speaking or what I am saying or what others are saying to me; my provider only need know how to get the message there and how much I owe them in fees. When my identity is revealed by the underlying mechanism of the transaction, I have no privacy. I cannot here selectively reveal myself; I must always reveal myself.
Therefore, privacy in an open society requires anonymous transaction systems. Until now, cash has been the primary such system. An anonymous transaction system is not a secret transaction system. An anonymous system empowers individuals to reveal their identity when desired and only when desired; this is the essence of privacy.
Privacy in an open society also requires cryptography. If I say something, I want it heard only by those for whom I intend it. If the content of my speech is available to the world, I have no privacy. To encrypt is to indicate the desire for privacy, and to encrypt with weak cryptography is to indicate not too much desire for privacy. Furthermore, to reveal one's identity with assurance when the default is anonymity requires the cryptographic signature.
We cannot expect governments, corporations, or other large, faceless organizations to grant us privacy out of their beneficence. It is to their advantage to speak of us, and we should expect that they will speak. To try to prevent their speech is to fight against the realities of information. Information does not just want to be free, it longs to be free. Information expands to fill the available storage space. Information is Rumor's younger, stronger cousin; Information is fleeter of foot, has more eyes, knows more, and understands less than Rumor.
We must defend our own privacy if we expect to have any. We must come together and create systems which allow anonymous transactions to take place. People have been defending their own privacy for centuries with whispers, darkness, envelopes, closed doors, secret handshakes, and couriers. The technologies of the past did not allow for strong privacy, but electronic technologies do.
We the Cypherpunks are dedicated to building anonymous systems. We are defending our privacy with cryptography, with anonymous mail forwarding systems, with digital signatures, and with electronic money.
Cypherpunks write code. We know that someone has to write software to defend privacy, and since we can't get privacy unless we all do, we're going to write it. We publish our code so that our fellow Cypherpunks may practice and play with it. Our code is free for all to use, worldwide.
using this for solar energy would be the better idea, but tidal forces from the moon would dictate that it be made in many smaller parts which are controlled by an adaptive AI and able to orient properly, and not crash into eachother.
university is good, but it SHOULD NOT BE DESIGNED for dumber people.
Courses should be tough and unrelenting, a constant barrage of knowledge that grinds children and young adults into suicidal tendancies to figure out which ones are the best at doing work.
I see my friends, dumb as posts, being able to hack it at university. The PHD profs (another can of worms entirely about how it is easy to get a PHD..) for the most part dont teach until later on in school. Many of them are brainwashed into producing 'scientists for industry' to exploit and pollute this planet for profit.
They lack moral backbone, and all students shoudl be required to take at least 2 arts, Debate, and reasoning as mandatory, to be able to shove aside strawman/ad hominum/diversions/misleads/falsities/fallacies/ ect if this one thing were done the world would be much better.
i would prefer kindergardeners to get the same treatment with reason. It is difficult to learn, but it is a skill none-the-less.
for instance, lighting, different weapons, weapons with 2 modes, reloading animations, running animations, reflections in water/mirrors/shiny things, monster AI, physics engine, shaders, control layout?!?
since the person was soo sick that he could not do anything, previous activities are used as a baseline.
if this guy was a skydiver, or an avid runner or other sport the line would read.
"The patient responded well to the treatment immediately and has since made a total recovery, returning to work and being able to skydive and run again."
ITS JUST A BASELINE (assumining everyone works and that work is productive)
i believe that the article is talking about the judges understanding what the people require.
It is also my understanding that higher court judges can overturn laws (notably marijuana laws in canada, various laws in the states) and dictate to the government that they need to shape up the laws to work with society.
The first stage is where the people complain,
then the judges will help,
then you have a problem and it must be legislated,
because criminals cannot be judged free 100% of the time for a crime...
for example (from the canadian marijuana laws overturnment) the city i am from orignially had a judge who THREW out every possesion arrest trial because the governemtn had not properly asserted the laws in a manner consistent with society!
One day im going to write up a program to scour articles for bias based on the context of words in relation to other words, using a towards/away method. (or rather, a left/right method)
utilizing words such as stealing in combination with copyright articles would result in a bias warning and it could be analyzed graphically!
I would believe that this family has the right to put whatever they want on the side of their house if they demonstrate that the radiowaves are life threatening.
For that matter if the city does not declare them an "eye sore" then they cannot force them to pull it down.
A solution for the family is to paint it for a big mural and declare it an artistic expression.
btw, IANAL dont use my advice, check with your lawyer, or go take the bar and 4 years of law school coupled with some practical experience.
something that is "innovative" is never described that way by anyone involved, to them it was just work.
these maps are cool, but not innovative, innovative would be if google was able to predict the weather month by month on a farily high resolution (current weather systems do predictions for 200 km square blocks.
Slashdot Mirror
As was evidenced by the new FTL(faster than light) optical data processing center at the core of Slashdot, This article was accidentally Posted INTO the PAST!!!!
/my head asplodes.
Thus, making the first post read a DUPE, and not this one. This is the original!
iceberg
snitches get stiches!
stolen was the word of the day.
My Machines have not slipped up on their firefox share, they are 100% fox today, just like they were many moons ago.
whenever something is turned into an industry the entire product falls apart.
industry == exploitation at some level.
industry takes the fun and innovation out of products (note how art is not an industry), industry squeezes every last penny out of a product, and then sells you the same thing over again.
industry is currently a bad word in my books, when something is described as such *cough*searchengines*cough* i know they are gonig to suffer as a result.
ps. anyone note that the "your not a script" uses dictionary words? dictionary based attack anyone?
I applaude IBM for taking this stance and entering the hotly contested search engine world.
More competition is better. I would enjoy more innovation. They do have a hard long road to follow however, and they may find it difficult.
Check out my journal if interested in a difficult problem.
A glass parking lot!...?
(yes i am talking about the internet.)
down wit terrerists
DO NOT forget that should common carrier status be dropped that ISP's can now CENSOR PARTS OF THE INTERNET.
Please Correct me if I am mistaken, This is wildly more important that price gouging.
For example, the ISP you are currently at may block you from going to a competetors site, a party may give $$$ to the ISP and block you from viewing another party's website.
i submit that baseball is not very often exciting, therefore a mathematical algorithm would be interesting for me, and i expect it would be non-obvious as the computer has no real human inputs other than score/runs/hits/and perhaps noise level.
saying all that... i hate baseball. very boring.
it is the slippery slope.
first today it will be 1%
then tommorow 1.5%
the next day maybe 2% gone
a week? 5% gone,
20 years? 50% gone
I am talking about freedoms. They are slipping through your fingers and you care not.
We are reaching critical mass in the legalistic system, retalitory lawsuits fired off from company to company will destabilize the global economy.
It becomes more efficient to patent obvious buisness methods and steps to solving a problem, and then sue people using those methods to allow them to compete with you, rather than try and innovate.
Innovation costs money, Patent arsenals allow for wasteful practices to continue unabated for the lifetime of the patent.
The patent wars are just starting right now.
Which side are you on?
i didn't even look at the submitter....
/. editors. bad man. Someone with the copy/paste full text info package, please post.
dam you pipsqueek. dam you to hell.
Roland P is bad man, he takes news, rewords it lightly and submits with a 100% acceptance rating to the
a cut copy from the site.
A Cypherpunk's Manifesto
by Eric Hughes
Privacy is necessary for an open society in the electronic age. Privacy is not secrecy. A private matter is something one doesn't want the whole world to know, but a secret matter is something one doesn't want anybody to know. Privacy is the power to selectively reveal oneself to the world.
If two parties have some sort of dealings, then each has a memory of their interaction. Each party can speak about their own memory of this; how could anyone prevent it? One could pass laws against it, but the freedom of speech, even more than privacy, is fundamental to an open society; we seek not to restrict any speech at all. If many parties speak together in the same forum, each can speak to all the others and aggregate together knowledge about individuals and other parties. The power of electronic communications has enabled such group speech, and it will not go away merely because we might want it to.
Since we desire privacy, we must ensure that each party to a transaction have knowledge only of that which is directly necessary for that transaction. Since any information can be spoken of, we must ensure that we reveal as little as possible. In most cases personal identity is not salient. When I purchase a magazine at a store and hand cash to the clerk, there is no need to know who I am. When I ask my electronic mail provider to send and receive messages, my provider need not know to whom I am speaking or what I am saying or what others are saying to me; my provider only need know how to get the message there and how much I owe them in fees. When my identity is revealed by the underlying mechanism of the transaction, I have no privacy. I cannot here selectively reveal myself; I must always reveal myself.
Therefore, privacy in an open society requires anonymous transaction systems. Until now, cash has been the primary such system. An anonymous transaction system is not a secret transaction system. An anonymous system empowers individuals to reveal their identity when desired and only when desired; this is the essence of privacy.
Privacy in an open society also requires cryptography. If I say something, I want it heard only by those for whom I intend it. If the content of my speech is available to the world, I have no privacy. To encrypt is to indicate the desire for privacy, and to encrypt with weak cryptography is to indicate not too much desire for privacy. Furthermore, to reveal one's identity with assurance when the default is anonymity requires the cryptographic signature.
We cannot expect governments, corporations, or other large, faceless organizations to grant us privacy out of their beneficence. It is to their advantage to speak of us, and we should expect that they will speak. To try to prevent their speech is to fight against the realities of information. Information does not just want to be free, it longs to be free. Information expands to fill the available storage space. Information is Rumor's younger, stronger cousin; Information is fleeter of foot, has more eyes, knows more, and understands less than Rumor.
We must defend our own privacy if we expect to have any. We must come together and create systems which allow anonymous transactions to take place. People have been defending their own privacy for centuries with whispers, darkness, envelopes, closed doors, secret handshakes, and couriers. The technologies of the past did not allow for strong privacy, but electronic technologies do.
We the Cypherpunks are dedicated to building anonymous systems. We are defending our privacy with cryptography, with anonymous mail forwarding systems, with digital signatures, and with electronic money.
Cypherpunks write code. We know that someone has to write software to defend privacy, and since we can't get privacy unless we all do, we're going to write it. We publish our code so that our fellow Cypherpunks may practice and play with it. Our code is free for all to use, worldwide.
they are not dropping 50 b notes onto this in one year...
if it takes 10 years to be built its only 5 billion a year....
if it takes 50 years... well then we have a different situation on our hands..LOL
according to the almight wikipedia this endevor, if accomplished, would put us at a civilization level of:
about 1-1.2
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kardashev_scale
A level of 1.7 would be a complete dyson sphere.
using this for solar energy would be the better idea, but tidal forces from the moon would dictate that it be made in many smaller parts which are controlled by an adaptive AI and able to orient properly, and not crash into eachother.
university is good, but it SHOULD NOT BE DESIGNED for dumber people.
Courses should be tough and unrelenting, a constant barrage of knowledge that grinds children and young adults into suicidal tendancies to figure out which ones are the best at doing work.
I see my friends, dumb as posts, being able to hack it at university. The PHD profs (another can of worms entirely about how it is easy to get a PHD..) for the most part dont teach until later on in school. Many of them are brainwashed into producing 'scientists for industry' to exploit and pollute this planet for profit.
They lack moral backbone, and all students shoudl be required to take at least 2 arts, Debate, and reasoning as mandatory, to be able to shove aside strawman/ad hominum/diversions/misleads/falsities/fallacies/ ect if this one thing were done the world would be much better.
i would prefer kindergardeners to get the same treatment with reason. It is difficult to learn, but it is a skill none-the-less.
you guys seem to forget that now:
Computer is associated with MS(my computer)
Internet is associated with MS(IE)
Email is associated with MS(Outlook)
They are degenerating the line between their product and what the user is doing/percieves.
People who are not computer literate will begin to associate Internet with IE EVEN MORE THAN IS CURRENT.
This is horrible!
ps. i bet that these icons will not be removable from the desktop....
# 217527 - Left column on Slashdot is sometimes too narrow or too wide for its contents.
I believe that some applause is nessisary.
None of this can possibly be patentable!
can it?
for instance, lighting, different weapons, weapons with 2 modes, reloading animations, running animations, reflections in water/mirrors/shiny things, monster AI, physics engine, shaders, control layout?!?
What would be patentable?
since the person was soo sick that he could not do anything, previous activities are used as a baseline.
if this guy was a skydiver, or an avid runner or other sport the line would read.
"The patient responded well to the treatment immediately and has since made a total recovery, returning to work and being able to skydive and run again."
ITS JUST A BASELINE (assumining everyone works and that work is productive)
In keeping with old west customs, when hijacking a web page use the following phrases:
"YEEEE HAWWWWW, RIDE 'em cowboy"
"I know what your thinking, did I use 5 scripts or did I use 6, well today is your lucky day, punk."
"SSHHHAANNNNNNNNNNNEEEEEEEEE!!!!!!!!!!!!"
im out of ideas, feel free to continue
i believe that the article is talking about the judges understanding what the people require.
It is also my understanding that higher court judges can overturn laws (notably marijuana laws in canada, various laws in the states) and dictate to the government that they need to shape up the laws to work with society.
The first stage is where the people complain,
then the judges will help,
then you have a problem and it must be legislated,
because criminals cannot be judged free 100% of the time for a crime...
for example (from the canadian marijuana laws overturnment) the city i am from orignially had a judge who THREW out every possesion arrest trial because the governemtn had not properly asserted the laws in a manner consistent with society!
One day im going to write up a program to scour articles for bias based on the context of words in relation to other words, using a towards/away method. (or rather, a left/right method)
utilizing words such as stealing in combination with copyright articles would result in a bias warning and it could be analyzed graphically!
I would believe that this family has the right to put whatever they want on the side of their house if they demonstrate that the radiowaves are life threatening.
For that matter if the city does not declare them an "eye sore" then they cannot force them to pull it down.
A solution for the family is to paint it for a big mural and declare it an artistic expression.
btw, IANAL dont use my advice, check with your lawyer, or go take the bar and 4 years of law school coupled with some practical experience.
something that is "innovative" is never described that way by anyone involved, to them it was just work.
these maps are cool, but not innovative, innovative would be if google was able to predict the weather month by month on a farily high resolution (current weather systems do predictions for 200 km square blocks.
at least there will be a new "Einstein" coming out of our woodwork then!