It would require a creator and who in that case created the creator?
You have illustrated my point nicely. You reject the idea of there being a creator, because that must be taken on faith, yet I doubt you have any problem accepting the idea of all matter coming from the the big bang, but where did that singularity come from? At some point, it all becomes untestable, it all becomes faith.
In those cases where science... produces theories that aren't God-threatening they don't mind.
It's not just "Christians" and it's not just with science. There are people all over the globe with "one-right-way" viewpoint about any variety of subjects. If you present them with anything that challenges this viewpoint, they get upset/angry/reactionary. This also goes for religious ideas that are or are not threating to scientific ideas. If you reframe the evolution vs. creationism debate into a evolution and creationism combination (i.e. which makes more sense: random occurances leading to an almost infinitely complex system, or guided occurances?) you will upset some people for whom "pure" science is their "one-right-way" viewpoint.
You have to ask yourselves, what will the next Sputnik be?
We also have a big technological upswing after major wars. So if we ever get out of this one, then the tech that is useful to the private sector will find it's way into industry and improved products. There is alot of military R&D work going on right now.
If you succumb to the astronomically slim chance of dying by the hand of The Criminals?
Since she wasn't just threatened with a possibly rhetorical "i could kill you" , but was threatened with specific acts of violent rape, I thought you just might be interested in the "astromically slim chances" you so easily blow off.
"Approximately thirteen million people (approximately 5% of the U.S. population) are victims of crime every year. Approximately one and a half million are victims of violent crime." http://www.disastercenter.com/crime/
She doesn't need to calm down. You need to wake up.
You seem to be under the common mistaken impression that the law applies equally to all people. Rich powerful people don't go to jail, they just have to wear an ankle braclet around the mansion. Rich powerful people don't get to vote just once, they can have dinner to discuss new legislation whenever they want. Rich power people aren't restricted by the law, they just tell the media that they do have the right to do what ever it is they are doing, and enough people believe it that they get away with it. Just look at how someone who had several failed businesses, multiple DUI's, and a well known cocaine habit got to rule the world. Money and power.
Anyone who needs their network to be more than casually "safe" needs to run cat5. Running some cable is too much of a problem, but repainting your house and installing some specialty doors and windows is somehow easier?
With your telling your friend how to vote as opposed to letting him make a decision on his own, one wonders.
Yes, only those with the finances to have their opinions televised should be allowed to express opinions or influence people. We little people shouldn't think too hard or speak too loudly, it might cause us to forget our place.
soap,ballot,jury,ammo. you used the first two, try the third, and then go enforce your state's term limit. If nothing else the bad national PR should bring them down.
allow porn to expand even further onto the Internet."
Is that really possible? In all seriousness,"Internet porn is a $2.84 bln market"http://www.itfacts.biz/index.php?id=P7960 How much of paypal's success is tied up in that $2.8 bil? What about faster bandwith, or video compression, or antivirus software? Gaming certainly plays a significant part in the adoption of faster computers, I think porn might play a similar part in the relm of data transfer. We are more eager to get new toys than to work more efficiently.
I don't think that is all that particular to programming or engineering. The art world is so "intergrator" it's almost sad. In entertainment, it's all about who you know, which translates into social life = work. I'm sure there are other fields that are heavily slanted towards intergrators, I'm actually have trouble thinking of a high earning field that isn't.
"The other posters fears about unaccounted for circumstances are unfounded. If there was some problem with the program it would default to safe mode (eg car would stop)."
That is precisely the problem. My worry isn't about a computer malfunction, it's more a worry of government malfunction. The more you concentrate power, the greater it's corrupting effects. What if your car wouldn't let you go to a protest? Or it "froze up" on your way to vote? I know this sounds 1984 paranoid, but this is the perfect tool for controling: who goes where. It's one more bit of personal responsiblity that we are so eager to give away the Uncle Sam.
Now this, to me, is a very important distiction. What if for this to work well, all the cars have to be computer controlled? What if computer control is then mandated? This is a whole new exciting level of "nanny government". Sure this might be safer in that there would be fewer auto accidents, but do you really want all transportation to be centrally controlled? Sure each car might be autonomous at first, but emergency workers need the ability to remotely turn on off, right? It's for everyone's safety.
It's funny, how this "rejection of the mainsteam average" is in favor of a second "mainstream". "I want to be different, just like all my friends here." They are still conformists, who delegate the authoring of their souls to a group... it's just a smaller group that ironically includes a sense of "being different" in its groupthink, sometimes identified as the "counterculture".
Ah yes very true, but this is part of what "rebelling" is all about. These tweens and teens are forming their identities, so trying something that is very different from the way they were as children, is the easiest way to learn about the effects of their social choices. Very few are rejecting culture in a misanthropic way, it's more of trying on a differernt culture, usually a culture of someone they want to be like. Someone who uses the fact that they are "different" to achieve social success is going to appeal to kid who feels "different".
(But I guarantee they are "usually" smart enough to ignore rap).
I guess that depends on where you live/what you are exposed to. There are some very smart rappers out there that discuss deep issues that most genres won't touch. The easiest example I can think of is Eminem's reposnse to Columbine et al:
When you dont give a fuck, when you wont just put up
With the bullshit they pull, cause they full of shit too
When a dudes gettin bullied and shoots up his school
And they blame it on marilyn (on marilyn).. and the heroin
Where were the parents at? and look where its at
Middle america, now its a tragedy
Now its so sad to see, an upper class ci-ty
Rap might not be your cup of tea, but it would be a mistake to write off it's fans as less intelligent because of a differing asthetic sense.
Not unless RIAA gives her some huge sum of money (> her attorney fees + $100000),
Um, Dr.Evil, $100,000 isn't that much money any more. Anything less than $10 million is beans with this kind of publicity. She should ride it out to a legal precedent, then write a book and do some talk show appearences.
Note that he said the question is if people can rely on artificial constructs of law for their livelihood, he did not say the question is people could rely on creating new works of art and ideas for their livelihood
But that artificial construct makes it possible to make millions from one month of actual work in the studio, what now I can't be independently wealthy because I wrote a catchy song ?!?
Heavy metal and punk both have two characteristics that could easily appeal to gifted kids. There is a rejection of the mainstream average(you-don't-understand-me) and an inclusion in a brotherhood of "different-but-better". This misunderstood elite is obviously going to appeal to kids that are bored in class and frequently ostricized because of thier intelligence. Why do you think "news for nerds" is a source of pride for/.ers ?
"Do you really think machines and software can write a gripping novel, paint a beautiful picture, or develop the next great computer game?"
I didn't intend an analogy, I meant to illustrate that changing technology changes the market value of certain skillsets and consumer expectations. Take a look at furniture: All furniture used to be handmade by skilled artisans, it also used to last a long time. Now we have pressboard, flat-pack, semi-disposable furniture. Nothing that will be passed down through three generations. You can still get good handmade furniture, but it's expensive enough to be a specialty item. I think the same has been happening with alot of "art" for a while now. Compare the amount of effort and craft put into modern top 40 vs. a classic symphony or opera. One is cheap and disposable the other is passed on for generations. Compare a real painting (actual paint on actual canvas) vs. art reprint posters. Again cheap and disposable on one hand, heirloom quality on the other. Why is this difference important? Because it doesn't make sense for the cheap and disposible to be worth nearly as much as the finely crafted one of a kind. It doesn't make sense for a lifetime's worth of wages to go to someone peddling a "cheap and disposible". And now that there is no cost for distribution of a copy of "cheap and disposible" the market will no longer bear costs that make no sense. A ticket to a Rolling Stones concert is worth hundreds of dollars, because it is unique and involves an effort from the artist. A MP3 of "Satisfaction" is worth about 1 cent, because it is common. The artist has already been well paid for that recording session 30+ years ago, and everyone knows it. I don't think this developement will stifle art, if anything it will invigorate art as the returns on effort begin to resemble regular jobs, encouraging continuious production over "one-hit-wonders". So in a way I think machines will make for better novels, pictures, sculptures,and songs than the corporate guided mainstream that was previously in place because of distribution.
In light of the earlier posted arugments of correlation != causation. I think it would be a good follow up study to detrmine if the messier people are actually just more intelligent, therefore more productive. "Some minds are capable of creating links between disparate objects and handling multiple tasks at once" The ability to make non-obvious connections is going to make someone more productive, regardless of their organizational habits.
Maybe it's time in the evolution of things for copyright to go away. Yes alot of people's job's rely on them, but then again alot of people relied on factory positions that vanished because of technological progress, too. Where do they go? What do they do? I can't say for sure, but (IMHO) I imagine future job growth will be in services and tangible goods, things that can't be freely distributed across the globe.
Re:Makes sense from a certain point of view
on
EU Weighs Copyright Law
·
· Score: 3, Insightful
"including prison time for employees, if their networks, software programs or online services are ever used to carry illegally copied material such as music or film, according to a draft law from the European Commission supported Tuesday by a committee of the European Parliament."
Sounds like it's time to find a way to pass downloads through government owned property. If any downloads even touch property owned by the EU, demand that your rep. do jail time.
Yes I do mind, just like I mind it every time I find a new menu slid under my door. Just like I mind the six credit card offers a week I get in the mail. I sigh, I throw it away, I briefly ponder how that shit could ever turn a profit.
Slashdot Mirror
It would require a creator and who in that case created the creator?
You have illustrated my point nicely. You reject the idea of there being a creator, because that must be taken on faith, yet I doubt you have any problem accepting the idea of all matter coming from the the big bang, but where did that singularity come from? At some point, it all becomes untestable, it all becomes faith.
Let's inject it into all our livestock.
In those cases where science ... produces theories that aren't God-threatening they don't mind.
It's not just "Christians" and it's not just with science. There are people all over the globe with "one-right-way" viewpoint about any variety of subjects. If you present them with anything that challenges this viewpoint, they get upset/angry/reactionary. This also goes for religious ideas that are or are not threating to scientific ideas. If you reframe the evolution vs. creationism debate into a evolution and creationism combination (i.e. which makes more sense: random occurances leading to an almost infinitely complex system, or guided occurances?) you will upset some people for whom "pure" science is their "one-right-way" viewpoint.
You have to ask yourselves, what will the next Sputnik be?
We also have a big technological upswing after major wars. So if we ever get out of this one, then the tech that is useful to the private sector will find it's way into industry and improved products. There is alot of military R&D work going on right now.
Since she wasn't just threatened with a possibly rhetorical "i could kill you" , but was threatened with specific acts of violent rape, I thought you just might be interested in the "astromically slim chances" you so easily blow off.
She doesn't need to calm down. You need to wake up.
If only there was a way to make the barcode impossible to lose...
...tatooed on the back of your neck of course.
You seem to be under the common mistaken impression that the law applies equally to all people. Rich powerful people don't go to jail, they just have to wear an ankle braclet around the mansion. Rich powerful people don't get to vote just once, they can have dinner to discuss new legislation whenever they want. Rich power people aren't restricted by the law, they just tell the media that they do have the right to do what ever it is they are doing, and enough people believe it that they get away with it. Just look at how someone who had several failed businesses, multiple DUI's, and a well known cocaine habit got to rule the world. Money and power.
Anyone who needs their network to be more than casually "safe" needs to run cat5. Running some cable is too much of a problem, but repainting your house and installing some specialty doors and windows is somehow easier?
With your telling your friend how to vote as opposed to letting him make a decision on his own, one wonders.
Yes, only those with the finances to have their opinions televised should be allowed to express opinions or influence people. We little people shouldn't think too hard or speak too loudly, it might cause us to forget our place.
soap,ballot,jury,ammo. you used the first two, try the third, and then go enforce your state's term limit. If nothing else the bad national PR should bring them down.
allow porn to expand even further onto the Internet."
Is that really possible? In all seriousness,"Internet porn is a $2.84 bln market"http://www.itfacts.biz/index.php?id=P7960 How much of paypal's success is tied up in that $2.8 bil? What about faster bandwith, or video compression, or antivirus software? Gaming certainly plays a significant part in the adoption of faster computers, I think porn might play a similar part in the relm of data transfer. We are more eager to get new toys than to work more efficiently.
I don't think that is all that particular to programming or engineering. The art world is so "intergrator" it's almost sad. In entertainment, it's all about who you know, which translates into social life = work. I'm sure there are other fields that are heavily slanted towards intergrators, I'm actually have trouble thinking of a high earning field that isn't.
"The other posters fears about unaccounted for circumstances are unfounded. If there was some problem with the program it would default to safe mode (eg car would stop)."
That is precisely the problem. My worry isn't about a computer malfunction, it's more a worry of government malfunction. The more you concentrate power, the greater it's corrupting effects. What if your car wouldn't let you go to a protest? Or it "froze up" on your way to vote? I know this sounds 1984 paranoid, but this is the perfect tool for controling: who goes where. It's one more bit of personal responsiblity that we are so eager to give away the Uncle Sam.
Make it either Opt-In or by Court Order
Now this, to me, is a very important distiction. What if for this to work well, all the cars have to be computer controlled? What if computer control is then mandated? This is a whole new exciting level of "nanny government". Sure this might be safer in that there would be fewer auto accidents, but do you really want all transportation to be centrally controlled? Sure each car might be autonomous at first, but emergency workers need the ability to remotely turn on off, right? It's for everyone's safety.
Ah yes very true, but this is part of what "rebelling" is all about. These tweens and teens are forming their identities, so trying something that is very different from the way they were as children, is the easiest way to learn about the effects of their social choices. Very few are rejecting culture in a misanthropic way, it's more of trying on a differernt culture, usually a culture of someone they want to be like. Someone who uses the fact that they are "different" to achieve social success is going to appeal to kid who feels "different".
(But I guarantee they are "usually" smart enough to ignore rap).
I guess that depends on where you live/what you are exposed to. There are some very smart rappers out there that discuss deep issues that most genres won't touch. The easiest example I can think of is Eminem's reposnse to Columbine et al:
Rap might not be your cup of tea, but it would be a mistake to write off it's fans as less intelligent because of a differing asthetic sense.
So don't force what doesn't come naturally. You'll be much happier if you stick to an OS that suits your personality.
a Mac user trying to convince the rest of the world he doesn't like taking it in the ass
All he's saying is don't force it, it will make you unhappy. Sounds like the voice of experience to me.
Not unless RIAA gives her some huge sum of money (> her attorney fees + $100000),
Um, Dr.Evil, $100,000 isn't that much money any more. Anything less than $10 million is beans with this kind of publicity. She should ride it out to a legal precedent, then write a book and do some talk show appearences.
Note that he said the question is if people can rely on artificial constructs of law for their livelihood, he did not say the question is people could rely on creating new works of art and ideas for their livelihood
But that artificial construct makes it possible to make millions from one month of actual work in the studio, what now I can't be independently wealthy because I wrote a catchy song ?!?
Countries where the loser of the civil case has to pay the legal fees for both sides have alot less frivolous litigation than here in the US.
Heavy metal and punk both have two characteristics that could easily appeal to gifted kids. There is a rejection of the mainstream average(you-don't-understand-me) and an inclusion in a brotherhood of "different-but-better". This misunderstood elite is obviously going to appeal to kids that are bored in class and frequently ostricized because of thier intelligence. Why do you think "news for nerds" is a source of pride for /.ers ?
"Do you really think machines and software can write a gripping novel, paint a beautiful picture, or develop the next great computer game?"
I didn't intend an analogy, I meant to illustrate that changing technology changes the market value of certain skillsets and consumer expectations. Take a look at furniture: All furniture used to be handmade by skilled artisans, it also used to last a long time. Now we have pressboard, flat-pack, semi-disposable furniture. Nothing that will be passed down through three generations. You can still get good handmade furniture, but it's expensive enough to be a specialty item. I think the same has been happening with alot of "art" for a while now. Compare the amount of effort and craft put into modern top 40 vs. a classic symphony or opera. One is cheap and disposable the other is passed on for generations. Compare a real painting (actual paint on actual canvas) vs. art reprint posters. Again cheap and disposable on one hand, heirloom quality on the other. Why is this difference important? Because it doesn't make sense for the cheap and disposible to be worth nearly as much as the finely crafted one of a kind. It doesn't make sense for a lifetime's worth of wages to go to someone peddling a "cheap and disposible". And now that there is no cost for distribution of a copy of "cheap and disposible" the market will no longer bear costs that make no sense. A ticket to a Rolling Stones concert is worth hundreds of dollars, because it is unique and involves an effort from the artist. A MP3 of "Satisfaction" is worth about 1 cent, because it is common. The artist has already been well paid for that recording session 30+ years ago, and everyone knows it. I don't think this developement will stifle art, if anything it will invigorate art as the returns on effort begin to resemble regular jobs, encouraging continuious production over "one-hit-wonders". So in a way I think machines will make for better novels, pictures, sculptures,and songs than the corporate guided mainstream that was previously in place because of distribution.
In light of the earlier posted arugments of correlation != causation. I think it would be a good follow up study to detrmine if the messier people are actually just more intelligent, therefore more productive. "Some minds are capable of creating links between disparate objects and handling multiple tasks at once" The ability to make non-obvious connections is going to make someone more productive, regardless of their organizational habits.
Maybe it's time in the evolution of things for copyright to go away. Yes alot of people's job's rely on them, but then again alot of people relied on factory positions that vanished because of technological progress, too. Where do they go? What do they do? I can't say for sure, but (IMHO) I imagine future job growth will be in services and tangible goods, things that can't be freely distributed across the globe.
"including prison time for employees, if their networks, software programs or online services are ever used to carry illegally copied material such as music or film, according to a draft law from the European Commission supported Tuesday by a committee of the European Parliament."
Sounds like it's time to find a way to pass downloads through government owned property. If any downloads even touch property owned by the EU, demand that your rep. do jail time.
So you don't mind getting all the spam then?
Yes I do mind, just like I mind it every time I find a new menu slid under my door. Just like I mind the six credit card offers a week I get in the mail. I sigh, I throw it away, I briefly ponder how that shit could ever turn a profit.