I see your point. If some company gets the police to come to your house and incorrectly arrest and prosecute you, then yes we have a problem. Also, if, by activating the product, your privacy is invaded, then yes we may have another problem. (I know my license is scanned even when I go buy a 6 pack, but I think even that's fair).
DRM is only as ethical as its implementation- there are a myriad of different ways to achieve the result of preventing theft. I don't consider the lock on my door unethical, but a shotgun pointed at the door with a string attached to the trigger might be.
You know, that's rather ignorant. There are people out there that work hard to create content that will enrich other people's lives. Sometimes those people do it so much (aka job) they have to rely on income in order to eat and live. Why shouldn't those people have the right not to have that content stolen?
Why is it that so many people think that because something is in a digital format that it cannot be "real" property? Information is still something to be protected.
So I think saying "DRM sucks" is a popular catchphrase but it is unreasonable to think everything in this life should be free.
I really couldn't agree more.
Shame on the mods for lowering the score on this one. This story is absolutely ridiculous. Save your energy for an issue more worthwhile.
The technology "measures energy generated in the lungs"?
Ultrasound works by transmitting an acoustic pulse into the body and processing the reflected sound. These frequencies are up to the MHz range, and are used because they have a small wavelength. Smaller wavelength means better imaging resolution.
I highly doubt our lungs are generating the MHz frequencies necessary for this to occur./out
excellent mention of the incompatibility of faith and proof- i was raised in the church and now that ive moved on, i find myself explaining this over and over to many christians who don't see the problem with looking for "proof" (eating from the tree of knowledge, anyone?)
Isn't it possible to foresee a robot that has been programmed to learn, not restricting it to pre-programmed actions? Given a robot that can "learn" by scouring the internet, isn't is possible, or rather highly likely, that a robot would demand rights based on the web pages and documents on civil rights?
I would still view that robot as a complicated tool, but the robot that demands equality will definitely exist at some point in the near future.
As an engineer, its easy for me to realize that no matter how sophisticated the software to mimic the emotions of humans, a robot is still a bunch of bolts and transistors at the base level. Basically, a very complicated game of mouse trap with transistors merely responding to stimuli.
I imagine that people without an electrical background or interest in the subject can be duped more easily into believing a tool has rights, but I believe logic will win out in this one and robotic rights won't be a major issue.
I have to agree with what I believe Kamineko is hinting at...
First of all, if the rotation of a skyscraper can be powered simply by the light it collects, then bravo. Skyscrapers have a LOT of mass that needs to be moved, and the idea of the skyscraper is to cram as much into as small a space as possible. So, to pack that much structure into such a small space, and use that space's received solar energy to move it is quite an engineering feat.
Of course, using the energy to say... power most of the skyscraper would rate a higher achievement in my book than a silly rotational table.
engineers that should be engineers realize that some classes/professors will be more hassle than they are a learning experience; they will always be a part of the mix, because research is an integral part of higher education.
but those should-be-engineers realize there is a greater goal to be achieved; sure, your chemisty or signals (for you EEs) class may have been a waste of time, but there's plenty of material out there to master it yourself.
99% percent of the time, it comes down to effort for those who fail, plain and simple.
Go to class. Spend a few hours on the homework and reading BEFORE you ask the TA.
Slashdot Mirror
POGO? Couldn't be more perfect.
Lucifer?
I really don't want more oversight.
I see your point. If some company gets the police to come to your house and incorrectly arrest and prosecute you, then yes we have a problem. Also, if, by activating the product, your privacy is invaded, then yes we may have another problem. (I know my license is scanned even when I go buy a 6 pack, but I think even that's fair). DRM is only as ethical as its implementation- there are a myriad of different ways to achieve the result of preventing theft. I don't consider the lock on my door unethical, but a shotgun pointed at the door with a string attached to the trigger might be.
someone tagged this as TROLL? good god, what is happening to slashdot? offtopic, yes, but still a valid response.
You know, that's rather ignorant. There are people out there that work hard to create content that will enrich other people's lives. Sometimes those people do it so much (aka job) they have to rely on income in order to eat and live. Why shouldn't those people have the right not to have that content stolen? Why is it that so many people think that because something is in a digital format that it cannot be "real" property? Information is still something to be protected. So I think saying "DRM sucks" is a popular catchphrase but it is unreasonable to think everything in this life should be free.
I really couldn't agree more. Shame on the mods for lowering the score on this one. This story is absolutely ridiculous. Save your energy for an issue more worthwhile.
The technology "measures energy generated in the lungs"? Ultrasound works by transmitting an acoustic pulse into the body and processing the reflected sound. These frequencies are up to the MHz range, and are used because they have a small wavelength. Smaller wavelength means better imaging resolution. I highly doubt our lungs are generating the MHz frequencies necessary for this to occur. /out
excellent mention of the incompatibility of faith and proof- i was raised in the church and now that ive moved on, i find myself explaining this over and over to many christians who don't see the problem with looking for "proof" (eating from the tree of knowledge, anyone?)
if using google is cool, then consider me miles davis
Isn't it possible to foresee a robot that has been programmed to learn, not restricting it to pre-programmed actions? Given a robot that can "learn" by scouring the internet, isn't is possible, or rather highly likely, that a robot would demand rights based on the web pages and documents on civil rights? I would still view that robot as a complicated tool, but the robot that demands equality will definitely exist at some point in the near future.
As an engineer, its easy for me to realize that no matter how sophisticated the software to mimic the emotions of humans, a robot is still a bunch of bolts and transistors at the base level. Basically, a very complicated game of mouse trap with transistors merely responding to stimuli. I imagine that people without an electrical background or interest in the subject can be duped more easily into believing a tool has rights, but I believe logic will win out in this one and robotic rights won't be a major issue.
I have to agree with what I believe Kamineko is hinting at... First of all, if the rotation of a skyscraper can be powered simply by the light it collects, then bravo. Skyscrapers have a LOT of mass that needs to be moved, and the idea of the skyscraper is to cram as much into as small a space as possible. So, to pack that much structure into such a small space, and use that space's received solar energy to move it is quite an engineering feat. Of course, using the energy to say... power most of the skyscraper would rate a higher achievement in my book than a silly rotational table.
0/x is the same as 0*(1/x), and anything times zero is zero so 0/x=0
engineers that should be engineers realize that some classes/professors will be more hassle than they are a learning experience; they will always be a part of the mix, because research is an integral part of higher education. but those should-be-engineers realize there is a greater goal to be achieved; sure, your chemisty or signals (for you EEs) class may have been a waste of time, but there's plenty of material out there to master it yourself. 99% percent of the time, it comes down to effort for those who fail, plain and simple. Go to class. Spend a few hours on the homework and reading BEFORE you ask the TA.