Note: Due to copyright issues referenced by Nielsen Media, we cannot list the media markets as shown. Instead, a list of markets according to Metropolitan Statistical Area will be listed here soon.
> Maybe they agree and took it down because they personally recognise > that the copyright belongs to Nielsen?
Er, probably not. The DCMA provides for non-judicial takedowns, but it also gives organizations which acquiesce to those takedowns a large amount of immunity to monetary damages. Practically everyone prefers to have to go through the rigmarole of removing the content, filing a counterclaim, and reinstating the content, in order to greatly lower financial exposure.
To a large extent, we are running the place, no matter what certain Wikipedia admins might think. A few of the really obviously non-Nielsen related articles (which dealt with what TV stations are available in which localities) which were deleted have already been put back up.
In this light, I call on you and all of us to go and preemptively adopt the parallel Arbitron radio markets info just in case Arbitron gets ideas. I.e., go back them up so we can reinstate them more easily.
If the unregulated users of Wikipedia take action, Nielsen is up the creek. As stated in other posts, the DCMA does not enable "prior restraint", so the Wikipedia admins only need to delete the articles after notification of their existence. If they are recreated almost instantly, by us, this will just be a big waste of Nielsen's time and money.
> Wikipedia and most other website owners will comply with a DMCA notice > regardless of whether or not it is valid because they don't care > and is the simplest thing to do.
No, they will comply because doing so gives them, via other provisions of the DMCA, a modicum of immunity to monetary liability for copyright infringement.
If he, or anyone else, posts here as AC but claiming to be him, RIAA probably would be able to subpoena all the web server logs to see if he was cheating. Maybe that's what they really want to do? Kind of convoluted.... Bah.
Yeah, it's not, but most of the posts were! RTFP (always wanted to have an opportunity to use that acronym)... Oh, wait, is that you? You better start cleaning up all those turds on Ben-Gurion St.!
TMiaHM was written in 1966... I was talking about the stories he wrote before computers actually were around, and people knew about transistors... See the post above, and my reply.
> But by then he was making the point (repeated in Friday) that a computer, > no matter how fast, may not be able to beat human intuition.
It seems to me that modern experience with game playing AI seem to indicate that Heinlein has a fairly good chance of losing on that idea, also, in the long run, when talking about any specific and narrow field of expertise.
What still remains to be seen is whether AI will ever achieve the ability to classify its inputs into many fields of knowledge simultaneously and be able to "understand" the connections between all of these fields. I.e., when a go-playing computer program receives its opponent's move, it doesn't have the human player's ability to also say to itself "Wow, my opponent Shigeru seems to have become angry" and simultaneously "That move has caused the board position, when viewed as a graphic, to have nice composition and curious, compelling sub-symmetries".
Thanks for the backup and the interesting post (I'm not particularly an expert on Heinlein) but I'd like to add the dates the works you mention were (originally) written so that the reader can more easily see what's going on. From Wikipedia:
Beyond This Horizon - 1942 Methuselah's Children - 1941 The Moon is a Harsh Mistress - 1966 Starman Jones - 1953
Note that TMiaHM was written quite a bit later, thus the more modern ideas about computing power (if still much less than reality actually achieved).
First, I'm not sure why you posted... without checking on the contents of the post you replied to.
Kind of hard to believe a Slashdot ID as low as yours has never seen that troll post before. Or are you some kind of "second-degree troll" who pretends to believe troll posts? Arrggh! My mind ties itself into pretzels thinking about the boasting conversation at a "fourth-degree troll" convention in the far future....
OTOH, I admit there has been a decided lull (thank the FSM!) in the posting of that particular one, in recent months. Maybe you just have the blessing, in this case, of a short memory. Or got stranded on a desert island for the wrong period.
I know that your post is tongue-in-cheek, but the reality is that Heinlein didn't foresee electronic computing and in all of his early works which I am familiar with (e.g., the "Future History") he has human mathematical savants being used for navigation calculations.
Maybe you should instead have said "well luckily the universe is big enough that even if it is a fairly common occurrence we'd still be relatively safe"?
> they completed their second investigation (I think performed by someone > not in India this time, like the first one was.)
I'm curious. You actually know for a fact that the first investigation was done by an outsourced worker from India? Or are you just using a convenient meme-stereotype for shoddy work?
My understanding is that you want to know about what primes have the property that all their representations to (non-trivial) prime bases have prime lengths.
No prime p greater than 2^12 can have a representations of whose lengths are prime in all prime bases less than itself. If a base lies in the interval strictly between p^(1/4) and p^(1/3) then p will have 4 digits in that base, and for every prime p > 2^12, p^(1/3) > 2 * p^(1/4) so by Bretrand's postulate there exists a prime base such that the representation of p to that base will have 4 digits.
> Maths is fun, even if not always useful.
Glad to have found something we agree upon. Maybe this means there's a chance for world peace?:)
> At this point, it seems overwhelmingly apparent that the Olympics is simply big business
I probably should have been self-aware enough to understand that this is why I'm really, really, not interested in the Olympics, but I have to admit that your comment really opened my eyes. I do know that all of the doping scandals (or whatever you want to call them) also have contributed to turning off my spectator interest in competitive sports in general.
It reminds me of how the behavior of the **AA have turned me off of their commercial offerings, also. Luckily, I still have Slashdot....
Slashdot Mirror
Wow, it's really a pity that Slashdot didn't let you add that dramatic drum-roll in the background...
From http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_television_stations_in_North_America_by_media_market#United_States_of_America :
I suppose you weren't thinking about people with spinal cord injury when you wrote that, right?
> Maybe they agree and took it down because they personally recognise
> that the copyright belongs to Nielsen?
Er, probably not. The DCMA provides for non-judicial takedowns, but it also gives organizations which acquiesce to those takedowns a large amount of immunity to monetary damages. Practically everyone prefers to have to go through the rigmarole of removing the content, filing a counterclaim, and reinstating the content, in order to greatly lower financial exposure.
BTW, do you really think that Nielsen owns a copyright on the list of TV stations available in the Toledo, Ohio area?
To a large extent, we are running the place, no matter what certain Wikipedia admins might think. A few of the really obviously non-Nielsen related articles (which dealt with what TV stations are available in which localities) which were deleted have already been put back up.
In this light, I call on you and all of us to go and preemptively adopt the parallel Arbitron radio markets info just in case Arbitron gets ideas. I.e., go back them up so we can reinstate them more easily.
If the unregulated users of Wikipedia take action, Nielsen is up the creek. As stated in other posts, the DCMA does not enable "prior restraint", so the Wikipedia admins only need to delete the articles after notification of their existence. If they are recreated almost instantly, by us, this will just be a big waste of Nielsen's time and money.
> Wikipedia and most other website owners will comply with a DMCA notice
> regardless of whether or not it is valid because they don't care
> and is the simplest thing to do.
No, they will comply because doing so gives them, via other provisions of the DMCA, a modicum of immunity to monetary liability for copyright infringement.
Boy, you made me laugh, there....
If he, or anyone else, posts here as AC but claiming to be him, RIAA probably would be able to subpoena all the web server logs to see if he was cheating. Maybe that's what they really want to do? Kind of convoluted.... Bah.
Yeah, it's not, but most of the posts were! RTFP (always wanted to have an opportunity to use that acronym)...
Oh, wait, is that you? You better start cleaning up all those turds on Ben-Gurion St.!
TMiaHM was written in 1966... I was talking about the stories he wrote before computers actually were around, and people knew about transistors... See the post above, and my reply.
> But by then he was making the point (repeated in Friday) that a computer,
> no matter how fast, may not be able to beat human intuition.
It seems to me that modern experience with game playing AI seem to indicate that Heinlein has a fairly good chance of losing on that idea, also, in the long run, when talking about any specific and narrow field of expertise.
What still remains to be seen is whether AI will ever achieve the ability to classify its inputs into many fields of knowledge simultaneously and be able to "understand" the connections between all of these fields. I.e., when a go-playing computer program receives its opponent's move, it doesn't have the human player's ability to also say to itself "Wow, my opponent Shigeru seems to have become angry" and simultaneously "That move has caused the board position, when viewed as a graphic, to have nice composition and curious, compelling sub-symmetries".
Thanks for the backup and the interesting post (I'm not particularly an expert on Heinlein) but I'd like to add the dates the works you mention were (originally) written so that the reader can more easily see what's going on. From Wikipedia:
Beyond This Horizon - 1942
Methuselah's Children - 1941
The Moon is a Harsh Mistress - 1966
Starman Jones - 1953
Note that TMiaHM was written quite a bit later, thus the more modern ideas about computing power (if still much less than reality actually achieved).
The summary also ignores the fact that the content industries have been gaming the legislative system, to their benefit, for quite a while....
First, I'm not sure why you posted ... without checking on the contents of the post you replied to.
Kind of hard to believe a Slashdot ID as low as yours has never seen that troll post before. Or are you some kind of "second-degree troll" who pretends to believe troll posts? Arrggh! My mind ties itself into pretzels thinking about the boasting conversation at a "fourth-degree troll" convention in the far future....
OTOH, I admit there has been a decided lull (thank the FSM!) in the posting of that particular one, in recent months. Maybe you just have the blessing, in this case, of a short memory. Or got stranded on a desert island for the wrong period.
I know that your post is tongue-in-cheek, but the reality is that Heinlein didn't foresee electronic computing and in all of his early works which I am familiar with (e.g., the "Future History") he has human mathematical savants being used for navigation calculations.
And "Stainless steel mesh shielding fabric hat" just doesn't have the right ring to it; it sounds too woody, not tinny enough!
(More seriously, thanks for the link; I might buy some of this stuff when my passport gets chipped...)
Maybe you should instead have said "well luckily the universe is big enough that even if it is a fairly common occurrence we'd still be relatively safe"?
> they completed their second investigation (I think performed by someone
> not in India this time, like the first one was.)
I'm curious. You actually know for a fact that the first investigation was done by an outsourced worker from India? Or are you just using a convenient meme-stereotype for shoddy work?
Given a certain recent high-profile example of a top-quartiler with anger problems, I'm not so sure that you're totally on the money, there. But I do admit that one example isn't a good statistical comparison.
> 50GB traffic is free for $100/- per month.
I think you meant to say
=> 50GB traffic is no additional charge for $100/- per month.
no?
> What door? Hobos don't have doors unless they sleep in a toilet stall.
Idiot! It was his mother at the basement door. He meant that his mother pays his bills for him.
I'm probably out of my depths, here, but anyway...
> What if I want a fancy title without using an image that screws over scalability
> (fluid layouts FTW) and screen reading software?
Wouldn't an SVG graphic + ALT text handle this?
> How about all the number of prime bases
My understanding is that you want to know about what primes have the property that all their representations to (non-trivial) prime bases have prime lengths.
No prime p greater than 2^12 can have a representations of whose lengths are prime in all prime bases less than itself. If a base lies in the interval strictly between p^(1/4) and p^(1/3) then p will have 4 digits in that base, and for every prime p > 2^12, p^(1/3) > 2 * p^(1/4) so by Bretrand's postulate there exists a prime base such that the representation of p to that base will have 4 digits.
> Maths is fun, even if not always useful.
Glad to have found something we agree upon. Maybe this means there's a chance for world peace? :)
> At this point, it seems overwhelmingly apparent that the Olympics is simply big business
I probably should have been self-aware enough to understand that this is why I'm really, really, not interested in the Olympics, but I have to admit that your comment really opened my eyes. I do know that all of the doping scandals (or whatever you want to call them) also have contributed to turning off my spectator interest in competitive sports in general.
It reminds me of how the behavior of the **AA have turned me off of their commercial offerings, also. Luckily, I still have Slashdot....
Careful inspection reveals that the woman's lips have been broadened, also.