Unless I'm reading this wrong, N-BRAIN made the personal version of UNA free, not the collaborative version, which I assume is their major revenue producer. It must suck to give away a planned revenue stream, but this looks like (good) marketing to me. Now, if they were giving away their collaborative version, there would be a little less smoke and a bit more fire.
As a way to facilitate the process of creating computers that can identify spam, put a few examples of spam and some non-spam text up as a test. Have the user identify the spam or non-spam text. That way the spammers spambots will be contributing to their own demise. This might be accomplished by setting up a web service for collecting and disseminating the spam examples and perhaps collecting feedback from each CAPTCHA client.
How do you sell freedom? The freedom to do what, abuse children and track everyone on the internet. Freedom for whom to do what? Our freedoms are based on our moralities. And whats being sold here is morality. The argument is that "morality" is more important than freedom. The only way to get this to work is to make our government a bigger enemy than child pornographers. While many of us have a healthy distrust for people with power, our dually elected representitives for example, it's a far cry from declaring them enemies of the people or a greater danger than child pornographers.
I want one, but only if: a) it cost a third as much or - b) it had full (linux) PDA capabilities like the Zaurus SL-5500/5600. So I guess I'll just wait.
If what the kids want is the box, how long is the box good for? Get one for the kids and let them play with it until it dies. Unless of course the manufacturer puts an RFID in the box that turns off the box disply when you leave the store.
The two authors mentioned in the subject line are worth a look by anyone that likes the kind of books mentioned in the list.
I'd vote these books:
Perdido Street Station - China Mieville
Expiration Date and Earthquake Weather - Tim Powers
And maybe also Tad Williams for his Otherland series.
Well, something they did not want to mention in the article is that these mice only come out a night and need to drink LOTS of blood.
Still want to get bit?
Apple's claim to fame is user experience and user interface excellence. They spend a lot of money on designers and UI/UE experts to accomplish this. Apple's motivation is to capture the marketshare that is willing to pay for this. The Open Source KDE folks, and everyone who contributes to open source projects, on the other hand are scratching an itch and engaging in a philanthropic activity. I thing the open source geeks do a damn fine job on their UI work considering that their expertise is centered more in procramming and less in UI and design. This of course will improve as more UI/UE and designers elect to scratch their own itches and pitch in on some open source projects. It would of course be nice if corporations using open source code in their projects would allow the open source guys to leverage some of their UI/UI design work.
A few years ago there was someone promoting this technology on (I'm almost sure) WBAI's "personal Computer Show" I don't remember all the details, but the guy spoke of putting 100 electron guns behind each pixel. Even if half of the electron guns fail, you still have 50 left to fire up the pixel. One of the reasons a screen like this would cost less is that the manufacturer would not be losing too many screens to quality control.
I'm not particularly happy with the tyranny of the professional politicians, and you seem to feel that "We The People" would still consitute a tyranny. I don't necessarily believe it would work out that way, but perhaps it might. Do you have any ideas what sort of self-governance might work better?
That's what the founding fathers did. They forked the colonies. The Confederacy attempted to fork their government but failed. I have to say I like the idea of forking the government in a way similar to the way it would happen in open source (nonviolently). It would have to work without money though. It's not possible to have a large complicated structure supported only by the effort contributed by individuals, is it?
Every nuclear reactor is a potential dirty bomb. You don't need meltdown, radioactive steam will do the job nicely. But who would target a nuclear reactor... never mind.
Yes, but companies like Monsanto create the food crops to be sterile, and become the only source for the seed stock. Sure they can lose a little on herbicides now to have a strangle hold on food production later. I for one do not care to have the Monsantos of the world to have that kind of monopoly. Also, where human enterprise is concerned there are always trade-offs. I agree that in the long run we will probably get GM right. We can ooh and ahh about the commercial successes of GM, but what kind of damage might we be doing to the environment and ourselves while we are figuring it out? The article and comments I have seen so far do not acknowledge other viable alternatives to nuclear power and GM crops. I'd rather be dealing with the downsides to crop diversity and rotation, and wind power generation (carbon nanotube superconductors are on the way to efficiently get the power form the windfarms to the cities) than the downsides of GM and nuclear power generation AND waste management.
This is an interesting point of view. Our political system was designed around hand carried communications and a much lower volume. It has always seemed to me that our system of representative government was at least in part an attempt to accommodate the limitations of communications at the time. Not that I think the people in power (and I am not limiting this to the current administration) would be likely to implement something like this, but I think that with modern telecommunications, the internet and computers, we could have the populace in general voting to make most of the decisions that need to made. You might view our current form of democracy as the o.4 version of open source governance. After all, isn't that what democracy is supposed to be: open source governance?
Slashdot Mirror
The age of Aquarius.
Is it a coincedence that the medly Age of Aquarius/Let the Sunshine and the birth of the Internet and the open source process both happened at the same time?
As MindKata puts it: The more open, the better. Nokia and those with a like attitude don't stand a chance, it's cosmic ;)
Unless I'm reading this wrong, N-BRAIN made the personal version of UNA free, not the collaborative version, which I assume is their major revenue producer. It must suck to give away a planned revenue stream, but this looks like (good) marketing to me. Now, if they were giving away their collaborative version, there would be a little less smoke and a bit more fire.
As a way to facilitate the process of creating computers that can identify spam, put a few examples of spam and some non-spam text up as a test. Have the user identify the spam or non-spam text. That way the spammers spambots will be contributing to their own demise. This might be accomplished by setting up a web service for collecting and disseminating the spam examples and perhaps collecting feedback from each CAPTCHA client.
How do you sell freedom? The freedom to do what, abuse children and track everyone on the internet. Freedom for whom to do what? Our freedoms are based on our moralities. And whats being sold here is morality. The argument is that "morality" is more important than freedom. The only way to get this to work is to make our government a bigger enemy than child pornographers. While many of us have a healthy distrust for people with power, our dually elected representitives for example, it's a far cry from declaring them enemies of the people or a greater danger than child pornographers.
I think I'll copyright that idea.
US administration:
...
1. creates war
2. uses war as excuse to subvert US Constitution
3.
4. (more) Profit !!!!
I want one, but only if: a) it cost a third as much or - b) it had full (linux) PDA capabilities like the Zaurus SL-5500/5600. So I guess I'll just wait.
If what the kids want is the box, how long is the box good for? Get one for the kids and let them play with it until it dies. Unless of course the manufacturer puts an RFID in the box that turns off the box disply when you leave the store.
The two authors mentioned in the subject line are worth a look by anyone that likes the kind of books mentioned in the list. I'd vote these books: Perdido Street Station - China Mieville Expiration Date and Earthquake Weather - Tim Powers And maybe also Tad Williams for his Otherland series.
Well, something they did not want to mention in the article is that these mice only come out a night and need to drink LOTS of blood. Still want to get bit?
Apple's claim to fame is user experience and user interface excellence. They spend a lot of money on designers and UI/UE experts to accomplish this. Apple's motivation is to capture the marketshare that is willing to pay for this. The Open Source KDE folks, and everyone who contributes to open source projects, on the other hand are scratching an itch and engaging in a philanthropic activity. I thing the open source geeks do a damn fine job on their UI work considering that their expertise is centered more in procramming and less in UI and design. This of course will improve as more UI/UE and designers elect to scratch their own itches and pitch in on some open source projects. It would of course be nice if corporations using open source code in their projects would allow the open source guys to leverage some of their UI/UI design work.
A few years ago there was someone promoting this technology on (I'm almost sure) WBAI's "personal Computer Show" I don't remember all the details, but the guy spoke of putting 100 electron guns behind each pixel. Even if half of the electron guns fail, you still have 50 left to fire up the pixel. One of the reasons a screen like this would cost less is that the manufacturer would not be losing too many screens to quality control.
I'm not particularly happy with the tyranny of the professional politicians, and you seem to feel that "We The People" would still consitute a tyranny. I don't necessarily believe it would work out that way, but perhaps it might. Do you have any ideas what sort of self-governance might work better?
That's what the founding fathers did. They forked the colonies. The Confederacy attempted to fork their government but failed. I have to say I like the idea of forking the government in a way similar to the way it would happen in open source (nonviolently). It would have to work without money though. It's not possible to have a large complicated structure supported only by the effort contributed by individuals, is it?
Every nuclear reactor is a potential dirty bomb. You don't need meltdown, radioactive steam will do the job nicely. But who would target a nuclear reactor ... never mind.
Yes, but companies like Monsanto create the food crops to be sterile, and become the only source for the seed stock. Sure they can lose a little on herbicides now to have a strangle hold on food production later. I for one do not care to have the Monsantos of the world to have that kind of monopoly. Also, where human enterprise is concerned there are always trade-offs. I agree that in the long run we will probably get GM right. We can ooh and ahh about the commercial successes of GM, but what kind of damage might we be doing to the environment and ourselves while we are figuring it out? The article and comments I have seen so far do not acknowledge other viable alternatives to nuclear power and GM crops. I'd rather be dealing with the downsides to crop diversity and rotation, and wind power generation (carbon nanotube superconductors are on the way to efficiently get the power form the windfarms to the cities) than the downsides of GM and nuclear power generation AND waste management.
This is an interesting point of view. Our political system was designed around hand carried communications and a much lower volume. It has always seemed to me that our system of representative government was at least in part an attempt to accommodate the limitations of communications at the time. Not that I think the people in power (and I am not limiting this to the current administration) would be likely to implement something like this, but I think that with modern telecommunications, the internet and computers, we could have the populace in general voting to make most of the decisions that need to made. You might view our current form of democracy as the o.4 version of open source governance. After all, isn't that what democracy is supposed to be: open source governance?