Exactly how is this proverbial scanning software supposed to tell the difference between an illegal file and a legitimate one?
By using the meat_space_meeting_of_minds() api call;-)
By which I mean: it can't compute the important bit (isLegal) based on what's stored on the computer, because humans can make agreements that are invisible to the computers; among others, agreements about copyrights and licenses, and those are what determine what is and isn't legal.
(that said, it can approximate the bit by assuming all copyrighted music is illegal to posses in digital form; Apple and their customers might be upset, but the MAFIAA doesn't care)
I think anything that ends with "ATSE" is going to be displeasing to the internet savvy crowd. Please tell me you don't have people cheering "GO IATSE":-(
since we mostly have everything we typically want, in western civilization anyways.
Well, once you get up to the well-off middle class, your happiness depends on owning more stuff than people you know*. Americans aren't as a people richer than their compatriots, so there's something it will always be impossible for everybody to have.
(* as a proxy for owning the most stuff, which makes you the most attractive mate, which lets you attract mates with higher fitness)
all that being said, she has perfect pitch (can emulate any sound (within reason) she wants to even without hearing it right before (she can pull sounds up from long term memory). She also has a measurably more sensitive sense of hearing (i.e. you can whisper in the other room and she will hear it). She is different, and markedly so, but I cannot say that this is the direction in which all human evolution will flow.
but this law is fundamentally based on the laws of physics.:P
And psychology! Think of visual perceptive delay, attention, reaction time, decision making, motor planning ("slam the brakes") and execution. It's not robots driving the cars:-)
make some of the time in which your light is yellow, into time in which it's red, and the opposing flow of traffic *still* isn't moving.
I think that should work. Making yellows longer works. I think the mechanism is this: people are likely to run a yellow if they see the change from green (not so much if they don't); they also assess the situation and take social clues ("is they guy in front running?"). Having more all-red time should make people take fewer risks.
(It might also slow traffic? Does that need to happen anyways?...)
Disclaimer: I don't have kids, and I grew up as the computer expert in my house (I paid for internet access out of my allowance). Take my opinion with whatever amount of salt you find appropriate.
I learned growing up that I could always get access to the internet at a place where my parents couldn't reach me (friend, public library, internet cafe). I assume this hasn't changed today.
Or, even doing what you want and accidentally running across goatse guy?
Well, you know who goatse is and what he looks like. Look at the horrible damages that knowledge caused you! Wait, it didn't? Oh well; I learned about him in my secondary education ("High School", except Danish), so at an age between sixteen and eighteen. Didn't do me much harm.
So you are ok with your kids being on AIM all day looking for older guys who make them feel special? Or surfing porn all day?
Wait, does your firewall come with a "drop conversations from older guys" filter? Does it come with a "allow a little porn but don't feed porn addiction" filter?
I think the way to have youngsters avoid the bad sides of the internet is to talk clearly (no-bullshit) about what they are, why they are bad, how they work, and then about how they can be avoided.
Don't just impose a rule on them---show them the goal the rule is meant to accomplish, get them to agree with the goal, then suggest the rule to them. Especially don't have a robot (router) impose the rule on them.
He's not looking to be the gestapo.
No, he's looking for the router to be the gestapo---a faceless machinery enforcing the rules of a dictatorship.
Talk to kids. Get them to understand what the dangers are and how to protect against them. Get them to agree, first of all. Because if they don't they'll break the rule, and if they do you didn't need a rule in the first place.
This requires money and trained teachers. Equipment like $50,000 computer labs with large format and 3D printers, pro 3D rendering and design software, pro circuit and aerospace simulation software.
Money? To teach math, pretty much all you need is a blackboard, some chalk, an inspiring teacher and an attentive student. (Maybe a 'loaner' laptop or two for the students who have none, so they can write some LaTeX documents).
I'm thinking physics can be taught using a blackboard and chalk too, with the addition of some string, a measuring tape, a stop watch, some 2-by-4's and a toy car. Not all of physics, but enough of it to fascinate the eager student and convey the most important truth of physics: that you know the world through evidence from experiments.... Or am I off my rocker here?
if it had support for multiple user logins to keep e-mail sorted and private.
Who is root? Who can (and can't) install key loggers? Who has read access to which parts of the file system? You do use SMTP over TLS on all accounts so the email can't be sniffed on the network, right?
Sorting the mail is the easier task. I'm not sure about privacy; exactly how would you design the system so it's even possible?
Mass markets, economies of scale?
on
iPad Jailbroken
·
· Score: 1
You do not lose anything if someone else buys it.
If other people use an insecure operating system on a net-connected device (i.e. Windows on PC) I get more spam and less bandwidth.
If I use OpenVMS and everybody else uses Linux, no one's going to write games/drivers/... for my OS.
If everybody buys a device because of the slick UI, and the device implements a certain policy, then that policy becomes the norm, and future device makers might not give me an alternative to a policy I don't want.
Things cause other things to happen. People buying an iPad or two won't, but everybody and their brother owning an iPad will.
Be careful about conflating things
on
iPad Jailbroken
·
· Score: 1
The issue is [...] how appropriate the lockdown is.
I think I agree. How does one measure the propriety of building the lock down, though? Do we measure what the population want vs. what Apple wants? In the mathematical model of free markets, what's good for sellers is good for buyers; do we have a market failure going on here? There are a lot of questions one can ask here, some more useful than others, some more urgently in need of an answer than others, but everybody in this debate ought to know the questions.
Apple tends to argue for "speed bump" DRM.
No matter how you twist and turn it, "speed bump DRM" is imposing artificial limitations in the service of someone's profitability, and not the user's.
Yes, there's an argument that ensuring someone else's profitability is also in the user's interest (see the copyright rationale). But if people really bought into the "I give up my rights temporarily to have better music" argument, why would you need DRM? If there is DRM, does that make people buy into the argument more often? Or is DRM always counter to the user's interest?
You don't want crazy shit happening on a cell phone.
Be very careful here: Apple's various goals is one thing, their strategies for achieving them are another.
Wanting high quality secure software is a fine thing. Wanting your users to have that is fine too.
That doesn't mean that every way of reaching that goal is justified.
For instance, Apple couldn't have turned "not vetted by mothership" into warnings rather than errors and let the user proceed anyways. Then the user can have all the benefits of someone else's auditing and their own freedom.
but it's a trade that gives me a value I want.
I think that's the most important point here: this is something you want. How many people want the same thing? How many fully informed people want the same thing?
I think that arguing that what Apple is doing is good/bad, right/wring, smart/dumb based on "what I want" is a rather risky proposition.
So... uhm... thanks for letting us know what you (in my eyes a random internet stranger) likes and dislikes? Or did you say something more?
The only difference between this and regular polls is that this is less scientific (since they make no effort to find a random selection of people from the population). It's probably a little better than online polls (probably less manipulation) and a little worse than scientifically-designed polls.
Judge for yourself, here's what they say:
Surprisingly, we discovered that the chatter of a community can indeed be used to make quantitative predictions that outperform those of artificial markets. These information markets generally involve the trading of state-contingent securities, and if large enough and properly designed, they are usually more accurate than other techniques for extracting diffuse information, such as surveys and opinions polls.
So twitter-reading beats markets which beats polls.
Also, what do you mean by "scientifically"? If you mean "like scientists", could you please explain to me what the important properties of what scientists do are?
If you can identify a mechanism in homeschooling which prevents Mr. Smith from telling his child that evolution is a lie from the devil and that the world is 6000 years old, I'd be glad to entertain the idea in a more serious light.
In order to fix the school system, you must first educate the public. How zen...
Does public school prevent mr. Smith from talking to his kids? Does it do anything that can't be done to home-schooled kids too (except for the frequency)?
Unless you literally meant icing and cake, it's spelled just deserts. It comes from the word `deserve' and has nothing to do with low downpour terrain nor the final course of a multicourse meal. It's pronounced like "desserts", though, which confuses a lot of people.
Slashdot Mirror
Exactly how is this proverbial scanning software supposed to tell the difference between an illegal file and a legitimate one?
By using the meat_space_meeting_of_minds() api call ;-)
By which I mean: it can't compute the important bit (isLegal) based on what's stored on the computer, because humans can make agreements that are invisible to the computers; among others, agreements about copyrights and licenses, and those are what determine what is and isn't legal.
(that said, it can approximate the bit by assuming all copyrighted music is illegal to posses in digital form; Apple and their customers might be upset, but the MAFIAA doesn't care)
I think anything that ends with "ATSE" is going to be displeasing to the internet savvy crowd. Please tell me you don't have people cheering "GO IATSE" :-(
Foreigners are especially bad because they mostly don't fully understand the situation and accept "evidence" at face value.
But this can't happen! Schools teach critical thinking! >:(
since we mostly have everything we typically want, in western civilization anyways.
Well, once you get up to the well-off middle class, your happiness depends on owning more stuff than people you know*. Americans aren't as a people richer than their compatriots, so there's something it will always be impossible for everybody to have.
(* as a proxy for owning the most stuff, which makes you the most attractive mate, which lets you attract mates with higher fitness)
all that being said, she has perfect pitch (can emulate any sound (within reason) she wants to even without hearing it right before (she can pull sounds up from long term memory). She also has a measurably more sensitive sense of hearing (i.e. you can whisper in the other room and she will hear it). She is different, and markedly so, but I cannot say that this is the direction in which all human evolution will flow.
(considered-p "netsavior" (not (using 'lisp)))
Ethics.
Would you buy a toaster based on wattage used, types of heater elements, what kind of processor is used for the timing mechanism?
Welcome to slashdot! ;-)
Just like "Your rights at sea" is for when you are at sea, discussing what rights you have on land, yeah? ;-)
Maybe YRO (rather than YOR) is used for the ambiguity, because that makes kdawson sound smart and like a journalist and such.
but this law is fundamentally based on the laws of physics. :P
And psychology! Think of visual perceptive delay, attention, reaction time, decision making, motor planning ("slam the brakes") and execution. It's not robots driving the cars :-)
make some of the time in which your light is yellow, into time in which it's red, and the opposing flow of traffic *still* isn't moving.
I think that should work. Making yellows longer works. I think the mechanism is this: people are likely to run a yellow if they see the change from green (not so much if they don't); they also assess the situation and take social clues ("is they guy in front running?"). Having more all-red time should make people take fewer risks.
(It might also slow traffic? Does that need to happen anyways? ...)
Of course as you note, long yellows are counter to profit from red light cameras.
It's a good thing the public sector isn't a for-profit organization, then, right? :(
We cannot expect the government to protect us from every possible implication of our own actions.
Especially not if it implies the $COUNTRY government dictating terms to $OTHER_COUNTRY. Especially especially not if one or the other is the USA.
mac users got to play marathon for 11 years.
Pardon the pun (you made it), but isn't that kind of ironic when you think of the mac platform as poorly suited for running games? ;-)
Write an app for your phone that picks up the call and plays back a wav file...
(That's why I got the Nokia N900: so I can hack it to do this, and say "I'm sleeping, press 5 to wake me up", and ...)
Disclaimer: I don't have kids, and I grew up as the computer expert in my house (I paid for internet access out of my allowance). Take my opinion with whatever amount of salt you find appropriate.
I learned growing up that I could always get access to the internet at a place where my parents couldn't reach me (friend, public library, internet cafe). I assume this hasn't changed today.
Or, even doing what you want and accidentally running across goatse guy?
Well, you know who goatse is and what he looks like. Look at the horrible damages that knowledge caused you! Wait, it didn't? Oh well; I learned about him in my secondary education ("High School", except Danish), so at an age between sixteen and eighteen. Didn't do me much harm.
So you are ok with your kids being on AIM all day looking for older guys who make them feel special? Or surfing porn all day?
Wait, does your firewall come with a "drop conversations from older guys" filter? Does it come with a "allow a little porn but don't feed porn addiction" filter?
I think the way to have youngsters avoid the bad sides of the internet is to talk clearly (no-bullshit) about what they are, why they are bad, how they work, and then about how they can be avoided.
Don't just impose a rule on them---show them the goal the rule is meant to accomplish, get them to agree with the goal, then suggest the rule to them. Especially don't have a robot (router) impose the rule on them.
He's not looking to be the gestapo.
No, he's looking for the router to be the gestapo---a faceless machinery enforcing the rules of a dictatorship.
Talk to kids. Get them to understand what the dangers are and how to protect against them. Get them to agree, first of all. Because if they don't they'll break the rule, and if they do you didn't need a rule in the first place.
As far as I see these API's are trying to protect the devices (and the company and the users).
What from?
So that is why all the guys I see are bald... Hmm, what do you know...
This requires money and trained teachers. Equipment like $50,000 computer labs with large format and 3D printers, pro 3D rendering and design software, pro circuit and aerospace simulation software.
Money? To teach math, pretty much all you need is a blackboard, some chalk, an inspiring teacher and an attentive student. (Maybe a 'loaner' laptop or two for the students who have none, so they can write some LaTeX documents).
I'm thinking physics can be taught using a blackboard and chalk too, with the addition of some string, a measuring tape, a stop watch, some 2-by-4's and a toy car. Not all of physics, but enough of it to fascinate the eager student and convey the most important truth of physics: that you know the world through evidence from experiments. ... Or am I off my rocker here?
There site is practically unlinkable
Does it have lycanthropy, or is it just a where-site?
(Sorry)
if it had support for multiple user logins to keep e-mail sorted and private.
Who is root? Who can (and can't) install key loggers? Who has read access to which parts of the file system? You do use SMTP over TLS on all accounts so the email can't be sniffed on the network, right?
Sorting the mail is the easier task. I'm not sure about privacy; exactly how would you design the system so it's even possible?
You do not lose anything if someone else buys it.
If other people use an insecure operating system on a net-connected device (i.e. Windows on PC) I get more spam and less bandwidth.
If I use OpenVMS and everybody else uses Linux, no one's going to write games/drivers/... for my OS.
If everybody buys a device because of the slick UI, and the device implements a certain policy, then that policy becomes the norm, and future device makers might not give me an alternative to a policy I don't want.
Things cause other things to happen. People buying an iPad or two won't, but everybody and their brother owning an iPad will.
The issue is [...] how appropriate the lockdown is.
I think I agree. How does one measure the propriety of building the lock down, though? Do we measure what the population want vs. what Apple wants? In the mathematical model of free markets, what's good for sellers is good for buyers; do we have a market failure going on here? There are a lot of questions one can ask here, some more useful than others, some more urgently in need of an answer than others, but everybody in this debate ought to know the questions.
Apple tends to argue for "speed bump" DRM.
No matter how you twist and turn it, "speed bump DRM" is imposing artificial limitations in the service of someone's profitability, and not the user's.
Yes, there's an argument that ensuring someone else's profitability is also in the user's interest (see the copyright rationale). But if people really bought into the "I give up my rights temporarily to have better music" argument, why would you need DRM? If there is DRM, does that make people buy into the argument more often? Or is DRM always counter to the user's interest?
You don't want crazy shit happening on a cell phone.
Be very careful here: Apple's various goals is one thing, their strategies for achieving them are another.
Wanting high quality secure software is a fine thing. Wanting your users to have that is fine too.
That doesn't mean that every way of reaching that goal is justified.
For instance, Apple couldn't have turned "not vetted by mothership" into warnings rather than errors and let the user proceed anyways. Then the user can have all the benefits of someone else's auditing and their own freedom.
but it's a trade that gives me a value I want.
I think that's the most important point here: this is something you want. How many people want the same thing? How many fully informed people want the same thing?
I think that arguing that what Apple is doing is good/bad, right/wring, smart/dumb based on "what I want" is a rather risky proposition.
So... uhm... thanks for letting us know what you (in my eyes a random internet stranger) likes and dislikes? Or did you say something more?
The only difference between this and regular polls is that this is less scientific (since they make no effort to find a random selection of people from the population). It's probably a little better than online polls (probably less manipulation) and a little worse than scientifically-designed polls.
Judge for yourself, here's what they say:
Surprisingly, we discovered that the chatter of a community can indeed be used to make quantitative predictions that outperform those of artificial markets. These information markets generally involve the trading of state-contingent securities, and if large enough and properly designed, they are usually more accurate than other techniques for extracting diffuse information, such as surveys and opinions polls.
So twitter-reading beats markets which beats polls.
Also, what do you mean by "scientifically"? If you mean "like scientists", could you please explain to me what the important properties of what scientists do are?
If you can identify a mechanism in homeschooling which prevents Mr. Smith from telling his child that evolution is a lie from the devil and that the world is 6000 years old, I'd be glad to entertain the idea in a more serious light.
In order to fix the school system, you must first educate the public. How zen...
Does public school prevent mr. Smith from talking to his kids? Does it do anything that can't be done to home-schooled kids too (except for the frequency)?
just desserts
Unless you literally meant icing and cake, it's spelled just deserts. It comes from the word `deserve' and has nothing to do with low downpour terrain nor the final course of a multicourse meal. It's pronounced like "desserts", though, which confuses a lot of people.
</picking-of-nits>