I checked the original article. It doesn't support the claims about bacon. I guess it's still safe to eat breakfast. At least, safe for my family and friends. Maybe not so safe for my heart.
The reverse is also true. I ate my family and friends for breakfast and now my bacon is safe. At least until lunch.
It's hard to believe that he could really be that oblivious to how the real world works. The messages he sent from Bolivia where he talks about the value of cocaine, and evading authorities, don't help his case, either.
I'm struck by the astuteness of your observation. As a nubile lingerie-model, I've been looking for someone like you to help lift me up out of the downward spiral to which I've been doomed by my slightly unwholesome good looks and improbably bountiful bosom. I know it's beyond all reason to hope that some stranger on the internet might condescend to lift me from out of this maelstrom of sexually depraved antics and obscene luxury, but is there any chance that someone of your pronounced intellect and homespun charms might be able to love a poor thing like me? Bonus points if you have a peg leg and are too fat to fit in one of those backscatter machines.
The problem is that NK has an army of mostly soldiers, even HORSES still. That means they will be spread all over the field, so bombs and drones won't be very effective.
We just need to think outside the box. For example, I bet you those horses don't eat very well. What if we dangled carrots from the drones?
If you give me six lines written by the hand of the most honest of dude's girlfriends, I will find something in them which will get him to hang himself.
exactly how many girlfriends does this most honest of dudes have?
Aside from the fact that the Apple logo alone will have people lined up outside of Apple stores across the country to buy this thin, I'm inclined to ask what this watch actually DOES (aside from the obvious "tells time").
it's just a regular watch, but it only has one hand
You can't magically change your behavior and habits with a piece of software.
sure you can. once I was a biology grad student with good hygiene. after three years of WoW I am a basement-dwelling troglodyte fighting a losing battle against crotch fungus of a type my doctor claims has never been catalogued before in the annals of western medicine. So I guess I'm still involved in biology, in a way. one of these days I'm going to pull myself together and do my dissertation on it.
One can easily see the insurance companies making everybody take one of these, and then refusing you coverage based on your genetics.
one can easily see the individual taking one of these on the sly, then signing up for a full-service insurance plan only if he expects to need it, which then means the company must either do the test on everyone who applies for insurance, or jack up everyone's rate to accommodate such self selection.
In the sense that one can, for example, fire someone and yet be empathetic toward him, I agree that empathy and utilitarianism are not mutually exclusive. However, it appears to me the relevant question is not whether the agent possesses empathy, but whether empathy or utilitarianism motivates his actions. Someone who kicks the fat guy off the bridge to save the lives of the people on the trolley might indeed feel empathy toward that person, and even visit his grave every day, but the action of doing the kicking is itself strictly utilitarian, indistinguishable from the same action were it committed by a sociopath who doesn't think twice about it.
I have no idea what the CEO is like, but from the first time I saw one of their promotions, I thought this is a really bad concept, and I would not invest a bean in it.
what if we give you 50% off the second bean's worth
Would universities be better requiring medical students to play tennis each day or take up cross stitch than playing Wii?
As a conscientious surgeon dedicated to excellency in my chosen vocation, I'm willing to do absolutely anything to improve the lives of my patients, except knit or take exercise.
I don't know about this advice. I once fell for one of those nigerian scammers who duped me into giving him my email password. then I changed my password to 'gullible', since I've heard that's not in the dictionary. somehow it was the first thing he guessed. what's worse is I used it for all my accounts, and now he posts idiotic comments as me on slashdot.
once we can prove that they can not be taken over by an enemy
Any system can be hacked. Having humans directly in the loop is the basic Wargames lesson.
they could operate autonomously when conditions warrant
And that is exactly what these drones should NEVER be allowed to do. And that's the basic Terminator lesson.
Seems like you put rather too much faith in humans, who are themselves quite capable of ignoring orders, going berserk, succumbing to battle fatigue, and committing war crimes. Plenty of civilians get executed or otherwise unnecessarily inconvenienced by war without the help of robots. The optimal strategy would be to use those tools, human or machine, most likely to effect a favorable outcome in a given situation.
Since 2002, the Agency has become increasingly concerned about the possible existence in Iran of undisclosed nuclear related activities involving military related organizations, including activities related to the development of a nuclear payload for a missile.
presumably you consider this increasing concern to be the result of "strong indications that the nuclear program is peaceful."
how is this flapdoodle getting modded informative? he says
It seems that the IAEA has in all their reports strong indications that the nuclear program is peaceful.
and yet the IAEA has indeed issued a report owning to strong suspicions the program is not peaceful. From The Economist
The UN's nuclear watchdog, the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA), published a damning report detailing its concerns over the “possible military dimensions” of Iran's nuclear programme... The IAEA's November report also indicated that Iran had probably already tested a sophisticated detonation system for an explosive device suitable for use as a ballistic-missile warhead (albeit the tests are likely to have taken place before 2004, when the weaponisation side of the programme was pursued more energetically than it is today). Informed by the IAEA's work and intelligence sources, estimates of Iran's potential timeline to nuclear weapons—if the country were to quit the NPT and throw everything into its programme—vary between just a couple of months for a single crude device and more than two years for an arsenal of three or four nuclear-tipped, solid-fuelled ballistic missiles.
focus on unnecessary phrasing to justify your position
That's the point. The phrasing "we don't need" is unnecessary to the argument. It is a rhetorical device implying that the decision to outlaw drones depends on whether we need them crashing out of the sky. A lack of things crashing out of the sky is not a need drones are intended to fulfill. To say "there would be a negative effect if drones crash out of the sky" avoids this rhetoric, as it does not pretend to address the possible benefits drones are intended to provide.
Agree with the former, disagree with the latter.
given that weapons are generally dangerous, and presumably necessary for any society unwilling to risk invasion, I expect you're quite the pacifist.
Slashdot Mirror
I checked the original article. It doesn't support the claims about bacon. I guess it's still safe to eat breakfast. At least, safe for my family and friends. Maybe not so safe for my heart.
The reverse is also true. I ate my family and friends for breakfast and now my bacon is safe. At least until lunch.
It's hard to believe that he could really be that oblivious to how the real world works. The messages he sent from Bolivia where he talks about the value of cocaine, and evading authorities, don't help his case, either.
I'm struck by the astuteness of your observation. As a nubile lingerie-model, I've been looking for someone like you to help lift me up out of the downward spiral to which I've been doomed by my slightly unwholesome good looks and improbably bountiful bosom. I know it's beyond all reason to hope that some stranger on the internet might condescend to lift me from out of this maelstrom of sexually depraved antics and obscene luxury, but is there any chance that someone of your pronounced intellect and homespun charms might be able to love a poor thing like me? Bonus points if you have a peg leg and are too fat to fit in one of those backscatter machines.
haven't these people suffered enough?
Not likely. China is growing tired of Peyongyang's shenanigans.
I think as diplomatic policy the US should start referring to their tricks as pyongyanigans.
The problem is that NK has an army of mostly soldiers, even HORSES still. That means they will be spread all over the field, so bombs and drones won't be very effective.
We just need to think outside the box. For example, I bet you those horses don't eat very well. What if we dangled carrots from the drones?
my can-opener robot's in the uncanny valley. he's not much use there.
If you give me six lines written by the hand of the most honest of dude's girlfriends, I will find something in them which will get him to hang himself.
exactly how many girlfriends does this most honest of dudes have?
Aside from the fact that the Apple logo alone will have people lined up outside of Apple stores across the country to buy this thin, I'm inclined to ask what this watch actually DOES (aside from the obvious "tells time").
it's just a regular watch, but it only has one hand
You can't magically change your behavior and habits with a piece of software.
sure you can. once I was a biology grad student with good hygiene. after three years of WoW I am a basement-dwelling troglodyte fighting a losing battle against crotch fungus of a type my doctor claims has never been catalogued before in the annals of western medicine. So I guess I'm still involved in biology, in a way. one of these days I'm going to pull myself together and do my dissertation on it.
that is correct, the thought experiment requires that the utilitarian place some practical value on human life.
One can easily see the insurance companies making everybody take one of these, and then refusing you coverage based on your genetics.
one can easily see the individual taking one of these on the sly, then signing up for a full-service insurance plan only if he expects to need it, which then means the company must either do the test on everyone who applies for insurance, or jack up everyone's rate to accommodate such self selection.
In the sense that one can, for example, fire someone and yet be empathetic toward him, I agree that empathy and utilitarianism are not mutually exclusive. However, it appears to me the relevant question is not whether the agent possesses empathy, but whether empathy or utilitarianism motivates his actions. Someone who kicks the fat guy off the bridge to save the lives of the people on the trolley might indeed feel empathy toward that person, and even visit his grave every day, but the action of doing the kicking is itself strictly utilitarian, indistinguishable from the same action were it committed by a sociopath who doesn't think twice about it.
Presumably one makes that assumption of any leader he supports, even such leader as appears to act out of empathy.
I have no idea what the CEO is like, but from the first time I saw one of their promotions, I thought this is a really bad concept, and I would not invest a bean in it.
what if we give you 50% off the second bean's worth
this is an interesting issue because people tend to want their leaders to have empathy, but it can be argued that they would be better served by utilitarians.
Would universities be better requiring medical students to play tennis each day or take up cross stitch than playing Wii?
As a conscientious surgeon dedicated to excellency in my chosen vocation, I'm willing to do absolutely anything to improve the lives of my patients, except knit or take exercise.
it suffers from the jack-of-all-trades-master-of-none capability profile
maybe they should rename it the Yellow Jacket of All Trades
That 53 million is for FOUR of them,. with ordnance.
Yes, taking out the human saves a lot of money.
that would be a great advertising slogan: "we took out the human so you can take out more humans!"
Cerberus is the more appropriate name.
I disagree. what could be more confusing then naming both the planet and the moon after dogs?
to something not in the dictionary?
I don't know about this advice. I once fell for one of those nigerian scammers who duped me into giving him my email password. then I changed my password to 'gullible', since I've heard that's not in the dictionary. somehow it was the first thing he guessed. what's worse is I used it for all my accounts, and now he posts idiotic comments as me on slashdot.
once we can prove that they can not be taken over by an enemy
Any system can be hacked. Having humans directly in the loop is the basic Wargames lesson.
they could operate autonomously when conditions warrant
And that is exactly what these drones should NEVER be allowed to do. And that's the basic Terminator lesson.
Seems like you put rather too much faith in humans, who are themselves quite capable of ignoring orders, going berserk, succumbing to battle fatigue, and committing war crimes. Plenty of civilians get executed or otherwise unnecessarily inconvenienced by war without the help of robots. The optimal strategy would be to use those tools, human or machine, most likely to effect a favorable outcome in a given situation.
And that's the basic Alien lesson. RIP Bishop!
Since 2002, the Agency has become increasingly concerned about the possible existence in Iran of undisclosed nuclear related activities involving military related organizations, including activities related to the development of a nuclear payload for a missile.
presumably you consider this increasing concern to be the result of "strong indications that the nuclear program is peaceful."
It seems that the IAEA has in all their reports strong indications that the nuclear program is peaceful.
and yet the IAEA has indeed issued a report owning to strong suspicions the program is not peaceful. From The Economist
The UN's nuclear watchdog, the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA), published a damning report detailing its concerns over the “possible military dimensions” of Iran's nuclear programme ... The IAEA's November report also indicated that Iran had probably already tested a sophisticated detonation system for an explosive device suitable for use as a ballistic-missile warhead (albeit the tests are likely to have taken place before 2004, when the weaponisation side of the programme was pursued more energetically than it is today). Informed by the IAEA's work and intelligence sources, estimates of Iran's potential timeline to nuclear weapons—if the country were to quit the NPT and throw everything into its programme—vary between just a couple of months for a single crude device and more than two years for an arsenal of three or four nuclear-tipped, solid-fuelled ballistic missiles.
senator palpatine
focus on unnecessary phrasing to justify your position
That's the point. The phrasing "we don't need" is unnecessary to the argument. It is a rhetorical device implying that the decision to outlaw drones depends on whether we need them crashing out of the sky. A lack of things crashing out of the sky is not a need drones are intended to fulfill. To say "there would be a negative effect if drones crash out of the sky" avoids this rhetoric, as it does not pretend to address the possible benefits drones are intended to provide.
Agree with the former, disagree with the latter.
given that weapons are generally dangerous, and presumably necessary for any society unwilling to risk invasion, I expect you're quite the pacifist.