If you're going to commit to this exercise where you use extrapolation to arrive at a conclusion, then you're going to have to take things like 3d-printing into account and even just the general demand for machines that build machines that will lead to eventual technical advances.
Try to remember that when you cherry-pick what does and doesn't count when extrapolating stuff like this you're simply adding to the risk that earlier you implied was a bad thing.
Sure extrapolation is always risky, seems a far better to bet than going with super intelligent robots that don't exist at all on the only planet we know that has life on it.
If you apply that same extrapolation to what's happening here on Earth right now and you get right back to the super-robots being dominant. I'll give you a hint: robots are the dominant life-form on Mars right now.
Let me guess, science fiction movies? Boy are they going to be shocked when they find out that the dominant form of life in the Universe turns out to be microorganisms.
And the scientific evidence of this conclusion is...?;)
People keep repeating this line ad-nauseum, spouting 'language is dead', etcetera. They might have bona-fide complaints, but maybe they're an alias for a different annoyance, perhaps that they didn't pay enough attention in school circa 9th grade to maintain a simple conversation on a site known to attract tech-lovers. Ergo this problem will not be solved quickly.
I'm using camera controls in every game I have played on the PS4. I have no idea what you're talking about, that concept is alive and well because... making games in 3d requires it.
Also the camera controls on the flight simulator are not the same thing. You don't use the camera in a flight simulator to tell the game which way you're going.
I'm not even sure why we're arguing about this. The N64 came along and everybody else quickly changed direction. Sorry.
I don't see any camera controls there, I don't think you have an apples-to-apples comparison here. It's also worth pointing out that even if it did work that way, it didn't usher in an 'era'. Nintendo was the one that drove that, hence the mad scramble for Sony and Sega to copycat the controller and integrate it into their next round of hardware.
Brrrrzzzt wrong. The N64 brought analog control and independent camera movement to the console race. Those are two critical ingredients for the '3D era'. If you'd like to point to the PC, however, you may be able to regain footing with the point you're trying to make.
SoCal was very active with earthquakes until about the turn of the century. It went pretty quiet for over ten years. This year it started being active again. In fact a quake near downtown LA triggered aftershocks that lasted for two weeks. It proved that an early-detection system can be built and they're in the process of getting that properly proposed now.
If it'll make you happy, call it a trend. Whatever.
Meanwhile, plenty of cities survive 8+ earthquakes with minimal loss of life while others hit by the same magnitude have death tolls measured in the tens of thousands. Real sound logic there, buddy.
if the public good is really being served here by improving safety of citizens, why isn't the discussion framed more along these lines?
I'm guessing because California has been in the news a lot lately for serious financial issues. The knee-jerk reaction is criticize LA for even more wasteful spending, and why not.. it's fun. La la land is silly, right? Normally yes, but the problem is that they're unaware that this was motivated by *two* significant earthquakes this year, signaling the end of a decade-long low cycle. They're actually doing a good thing, here.
Especially since, how would you discriminate between discrimination and outright greed?
That's exactly the problem. Doubt. A team like that needs good morale. Doubt your boss, drop the ball. Err pardon the expression.
I don't think our opinions are that far apart. I don't think we should ever have heard that conversation. The problem was that was a circumstance that couldn't have been unheard.
Anyway, I think we're starting to go in circles here. But I did want to say thanks for the discussion and that I hope you have a good weekend coming up.
I find it incredibly troubling that private utterances in any context can lead to the loss of hundreds of millions of dollars worth of personal property.
I'd find it troubling if my boss hated me for reasons he should not be and may be under-paying me and a select group of my coworkers as a result of it.
Sterling was burned because he trusted the wrong person. which is an entirely different security matter.
Every year that goes by this just gets fuzzier and fuzzier. Soon your private chat is going to be picked up by somebody at the next table wearing Google Glass. Then the line will shift. And so on.
"what is your position on the forced sale of the clippers?"
Recording and leaking that audio was wrong. Since it was made public, through no fault of the NBA, it had to be dealt with. It wasn't a "what the US believes" sort of thing, it was an "oop, this got complicated fast, and our players may quit" sort of thing.
I do not believe the forced sale of the clippers is correct. I believe transmission of these photos is fine. this is what they deserve for their blind faith.
These two statements contradict each other. Sterling knows phone conversations can be recorded. He also knew he had an agreement with the NBA to behave. His blind faith lost him the Clippers. Now if you disagree with that statement we're actually a little closer to seeing eye to eye. We probably have differing ideas about where the line of liability should be drawn. Perhaps "phone chats are private but data on the cloud isn't", or something like that. The problem I have with that line of thought is the line between 'phone chat' and 'on the internet' is getting blurrier every year. Worse, we are not all masters of every domain we cross. You may know how to be safe on the internet, that doesn't mean you're super smart and are also super safe at getting your car repaired or at knowing when to use interest-free credit cards.
In either case you've got somebody who did something wrong. It sounds like tough-love right up until you're bitten by it.
I'm not talking about the bank with the bad security, I'm talking about the people actively sharing my love letters they know they don't have permission to send and how that weakens their position on certain topics.
No, I'm not, I'm suggesting that the behaviour in question is damaging the value of privacy. By behaving as though celebrities have no expectation of privacy one thing you're not doing is strengthening the privacy of everybody else.
One of the reasons privacy is important is that you don't want somebody, be it the government or some random stranger, having something they can use against you. I don't have any problem with conceding that the NSA's behaviour is a much bigger deal, but when you break things down to their basic components the philosophy is still very much the same whether it's about extorting money or punishment for having that political bumper sticker on your car.
Slashdot Mirror
The artist workstations at Sony Imageworks are Linux.
If you're going to commit to this exercise where you use extrapolation to arrive at a conclusion, then you're going to have to take things like 3d-printing into account and even just the general demand for machines that build machines that will lead to eventual technical advances.
Try to remember that when you cherry-pick what does and doesn't count when extrapolating stuff like this you're simply adding to the risk that earlier you implied was a bad thing.
Sure extrapolation is always risky, seems a far better to bet than going with super intelligent robots that don't exist at all on the only planet we know that has life on it.
If you apply that same extrapolation to what's happening here on Earth right now and you get right back to the super-robots being dominant. I'll give you a hint: robots are the dominant life-form on Mars right now.
Let me guess, science fiction movies? Boy are they going to be shocked when they find out that the dominant form of life in the Universe turns out to be microorganisms.
And the scientific evidence of this conclusion is...? ;)
Latin is a dead language, please understand that.
People keep repeating this line ad-nauseum, spouting 'language is dead', etcetera. They might have bona-fide complaints, but maybe they're an alias for a different annoyance, perhaps that they didn't pay enough attention in school circa 9th grade to maintain a simple conversation on a site known to attract tech-lovers. Ergo this problem will not be solved quickly.
That won't happen, Apple didn't want the DRM.
8-person jury will get free mac pros and iphones now
"I hate Apple so I'm just going to make shit up."
Islam is a peaceful religion, that's why extremists just went out of their way to do this.
FTFY.
I'm using camera controls in every game I have played on the PS4. I have no idea what you're talking about, that concept is alive and well because... making games in 3d requires it.
Also the camera controls on the flight simulator are not the same thing. You don't use the camera in a flight simulator to tell the game which way you're going.
I'm not even sure why we're arguing about this. The N64 came along and everybody else quickly changed direction. Sorry.
The 'C' meant 'Camera' and 'soon' meant 1997. Oh and if Sony changed mid stream... ;)
Star Fox also wasn't a 3D game, it was a shooter on rails. Dirt Trax FX would be a better example, but we are talkimg about eras and not firsts, here.
I don't see any camera controls there, I don't think you have an apples-to-apples comparison here. It's also worth pointing out that even if it did work that way, it didn't usher in an 'era'. Nintendo was the one that drove that, hence the mad scramble for Sony and Sega to copycat the controller and integrate it into their next round of hardware.
Don't need to. The Sony controller was announced after the N64's controller was revealed.
Brrrrzzzt wrong. The N64 brought analog control and independent camera movement to the console race. Those are two critical ingredients for the '3D era'. If you'd like to point to the PC, however, you may be able to regain footing with the point you're trying to make.
There are Earthquake *cycles*?
SoCal was very active with earthquakes until about the turn of the century. It went pretty quiet for over ten years. This year it started being active again. In fact a quake near downtown LA triggered aftershocks that lasted for two weeks. It proved that an early-detection system can be built and they're in the process of getting that properly proposed now.
If it'll make you happy, call it a trend. Whatever.
So yeah, it is sound logic dumbass.
Um.. yeah, did your mom set your brain to boolean when you were born or something?
I'm curious: Could you list off a few discussion sites you pay a subscription fee to? I'd just like to know where I should go after you get your way.
Meanwhile, plenty of cities survive 8+ earthquakes with minimal loss of life while others hit by the same magnitude have death tolls measured in the tens of thousands. Real sound logic there, buddy.
if the public good is really being served here by improving safety of citizens, why isn't the discussion framed more along these lines?
I'm guessing because California has been in the news a lot lately for serious financial issues. The knee-jerk reaction is criticize LA for even more wasteful spending, and why not.. it's fun. La la land is silly, right? Normally yes, but the problem is that they're unaware that this was motivated by *two* significant earthquakes this year, signaling the end of a decade-long low cycle. They're actually doing a good thing, here.
That's exactly the problem. Doubt. A team like that needs good morale. Doubt your boss, drop the ball. Err pardon the expression.
I don't think our opinions are that far apart. I don't think we should ever have heard that conversation. The problem was that was a circumstance that couldn't have been unheard.
Anyway, I think we're starting to go in circles here. But I did want to say thanks for the discussion and that I hope you have a good weekend coming up.
I find it incredibly troubling that private utterances in any context can lead to the loss of hundreds of millions of dollars worth of personal property.
I'd find it troubling if my boss hated me for reasons he should not be and may be under-paying me and a select group of my coworkers as a result of it.
Sterling was burned because he trusted the wrong person. which is an entirely different security matter.
Every year that goes by this just gets fuzzier and fuzzier. Soon your private chat is going to be picked up by somebody at the next table wearing Google Glass. Then the line will shift. And so on.
Recording and leaking that audio was wrong. Since it was made public, through no fault of the NBA, it had to be dealt with. It wasn't a "what the US believes" sort of thing, it was an "oop, this got complicated fast, and our players may quit" sort of thing.
These two statements contradict each other. Sterling knows phone conversations can be recorded. He also knew he had an agreement with the NBA to behave. His blind faith lost him the Clippers. Now if you disagree with that statement we're actually a little closer to seeing eye to eye. We probably have differing ideas about where the line of liability should be drawn. Perhaps "phone chats are private but data on the cloud isn't", or something like that. The problem I have with that line of thought is the line between 'phone chat' and 'on the internet' is getting blurrier every year. Worse, we are not all masters of every domain we cross. You may know how to be safe on the internet, that doesn't mean you're super smart and are also super safe at getting your car repaired or at knowing when to use interest-free credit cards.
In either case you've got somebody who did something wrong. It sounds like tough-love right up until you're bitten by it.
I'm not talking about the bank with the bad security, I'm talking about the people actively sharing my love letters they know they don't have permission to send and how that weakens their position on certain topics.
"You're advocating privacy through self-control."
No, I'm not, I'm suggesting that the behaviour in question is damaging the value of privacy. By behaving as though celebrities have no expectation of privacy one thing you're not doing is strengthening the privacy of everybody else.
One of the reasons privacy is important is that you don't want somebody, be it the government or some random stranger, having something they can use against you. I don't have any problem with conceding that the NSA's behaviour is a much bigger deal, but when you break things down to their basic components the philosophy is still very much the same whether it's about extorting money or punishment for having that political bumper sticker on your car.