You could make an abolute fortune if you played it right. Of course, not being able to ever come ashore in most countries might make it seem less attractive, but something like this is bound to happen sooner or later...
... upload, post, email or otherwise transmit any Content that infringes any patent, trademark, trade secret, copyright or other proprietary rights ("Rights") of any party
I think it's justified in saying this covers posting pirated software.
Err, what? The original poster was talking about Nintendo (or whomever) being able to prove that they had sent warnings to Yahoo about such auctions. I was saying that they would be able to use E-mail records to prove this. It's got nothing to do with the automated responses from Yahoo's auction service.
Okay, fair enough, poor interpretation maybe:) As for the laws in non-US countries, IIRC both Malta and Taiwan lack copyright laws, making them the obvious place so situate such a site.
While the freedom of the internet is important, that shouldn't mean absolute lawlessnes, ESPECIALLY if a company resides in the US.
What does that mean? You seem to be implying that if a company doesn't reside in the US they should be less constrained to obey laws. Or conversely, that non-US companies are more likely to break the law than US companies. Are you being a bigot, or did you mean something else entirely?
This is often difficult to prove in the real world (hence the reason pawn brokers exist). However if they can prove that they have regularly informed Yahoo! of prirated material, and Yahoo! has still gone ahead and sold it, then Yahoo! has knowly profited from the sale of illegal goods.
Perhaps for the case of a pawn brokers, but in this situation E-mail records can show exactly what was sent to whom, and when it was sent. Look at the Microsoft case for an obvious example of this.
You understand that all information, data, text, software, music, sound, photographs, graphics, video, messages or other materials ("Content"), whether publicly posted or privately transmitted, are the sole responsibility of the person from which such Content originated. This means that you, and not Yahoo, are entirely responsible for all Content that you upload, post, email or otherwise transmit via the Service. Yahoo does not control the Content posted via the Service and, as such, does not guarantee the accuracy, integrity or quality of such Content.... Under no circumstances will Yahoo be liable in any way for any Content, including, but not limited to, for any errors or omissions in any Content, or for any loss or damage of any kind incurred as a result of the use of any Content posted, emailed or otherwise transmitted via the Service.
Since they have this is in their terms of service, surely the person who posts the stuff that they are suing for are liable for it rather than Yahoo?
... but if two particles come near each other and recoil from each other as a result of a graviton exchange, wouldn't that be a bit backwards from what actually happens? Namely, gravity is attractive (I think we all can agree on that!) and so it would seem that the absorption of a graviton would cause a particle to accelerate towards whence the graviton came.
The analogy of a particle emitting a force particle such as a gravition or photon, recoiling and then another particle absorbing the force particle and also recoiling works in the case of a repulsive force but falls down in the case of an attractive one.
What you need to remember is that in quantum field theory force carrying particles (bosons) are just excitations of the underlying field - a photon is just an excitation of the underlying EM field. As such, when considering interactions like this you really have to consider it in the full sense of quantum field theory rather than simply treating them as particles, and seeing as how in this case the graviton would be "virtual" I doubt little things like the Conservation of Momentum apply:)
Of course this is all in theory, since we don't have a quantum field theory of gravity. From recent developments it appears as though it will require a lot of unusual features, but IMHO it will at low energies approximate to a similar process as the other field theories.
WTF are you on about? There was a nation called Gaul inhabited by Celts at about the time of the Roman Empire. Either you're just unfunny or plain wrong, I really can't tell which.
I'd imagine it's because most of them don't have anybody sitting near them at all:) Seriously though, I used to be best friends with a coloured bloke called Ishmael and plenty of people I know are black. But then again from my experiance it's not nearly as bad over here in London as it is in America from what I see and read, as I'm sure you'd agree. Of course, that is somewhat of a generalisation. Comments are always welcome...
Errm, OK I'm a little biased, but Perl is more suited to quick hacks and text processing than full-blown applications. Try Python for an alternative scripting language - it's very easy to learn, has loads of useful libraries included and its inbuilt OO makes it a lot easier to write larger programs in - here where I work we've got a scripting module as part of our application which is roughly 3-4 Mb of Python code which I can maintain and extend quite easily.
Again, somewhat offtopic, but I'm originally from Welling, just down the road:) And my friend lived just a few houses down from the bus stop Stephan Lawrence was murdered at, and at least some of them definitely did it, because she knew a lot of the same people as them. But that'll never be proven now in a criminal court unfortunately.
The Amber Diceless Roleplaying Game. No dice, four attributes, a handful of powers and a couple of background perks. That's all. How do you handle melee combat then? Whichever combatent has the highest Warfare attribute wins. Of course if they're close then role-playing out the combat using tactics, dirty tricks and other factors can swing it your way, but that's the essence of the rules.
Personally I think that the Hero System is a far better "universal" RPGs, in fact it's one of the better rule sets I've seen around. I truly haven't been able to think of a character I couldn't recreate through the rules.
It does cost a bit, but there's a cutdown crossover version with R Talsorian, called Fuzion which you can download for free IIRC.
Sorry, I couldn't ever be bothered to read past the first 100 pages or so of Dune so I don't actually have a clue what you're going on about:( If you could explain a bit I'd be grateful, thanks.
There seems to be the overwhelming belief here that given a large enough computer, AI is the ineviable result. It's nice to see someone who actually thinks it might be a little more complex.
The brain, and the senses as well. For example, the ultimate monitor would be an interface that hooks directly into the optic nerve and projects a screen, when desired, wherever in the environment you want it. The same could be done for the ears. Imagine having essentially a movie quality display literally everywhere you go.
How about instant information on anything you look at and think a query? No more forgetting who something is or where to go. Virtual conferencing without any external technology via brain-to-brain look ups - I think it's safe to assume at that stage a transmitter and receiver are easily included in the setup.
And as for the ears, how's about volume enhancement to hear quiet conversations, discrimatory hearing to listen to that one conversation in a crowded room or lie detection through voice stress analysis?
And seeing as the brain regulates the body, why not automatic blocking of pain, increasing adrenalin and masking tiredness in danger situations, cutting down on autonomic responses such as shakiness, twitching or whatever.
The possible applications are endless, and that's without all the programs you can think of by enabling the brain to connect to vast external DB systems - tracers, messengers, data miners etc.
Maybe on paper computer hardware will reach the point where it performs the same amount of calculations as a human brain, but that in no way means that it will make AI possible.
In some ways, yes, the brain is an emergant system arising from a requisite level of complexity in its makeup, but it's also the result of billions of years of evolution which has left it with any number of subsystems which have different putposes, control different aspects of our body, and generally work in concert with the rest of the brain. The brain is not just a large neural net, and IMHO it will take far more understanding of both sapience and sentience before AI becomes a reality.
Yeah, I agree with most of your points, but I'm uncertain of your time frame. What you've got to remember is the human self-image is very strong and that even given the ineviable lessening of opposition to genetic engineering that will occur over the next thousand years, people will still want to look pretty much like "people". I'm guessing the internal changes will be far more extreme than changes to the external makeup of the body (excepting cosmetic changes).
Again the same with cybernetics. I know that there's currently a group of people in America who are in love with the idea of having cybernetics attached to themselves, but IMHO they're just a variation on the body-mutilators, albeit a slightly less bizarre one. I think the real applications of human-machine interfaces will be in the brain. Once the technology has evolved to allow easily implanted, reliable and compatible hardware to interface with the brain I think a whole host of useful technologies can be devised. If anyone's read Peter Hamilton's "Night's Dawn" trilogy they'll know the sort of thing I'm talking about - the neural nanonics packages which most people possess in that.
Agreed, I noticed a period a couple of months ago when every single comment he made was modded down to -1, and then he stopped posting. Recently he seems to have stopped using his +1 bonus, and most of his posts are modded up a point or two. It's all a bit sad really that he has to bother with all this bollocks.
First off, thank you for a great post, some excellent points made on the viability of the electronic book. I have to say that the process of moving to a fully digital book will be a slow, incremental process, probably spearheaded by technical and/or scientific literature, where things like hyperlinks, animated pictures and the like make sense and can make the book a lot more useful.
With fiction I think the process will be far slower. Apart from a few die-hard technology people most readers, myself most definitely included, would far prefer to read a book than read a monitor. Books are for when you stop using your computer, and until the process of reading a digital book is as easy and pain-free as reading a paperback the jump will not be made. And I think the current state of play in e-book development is way behind that.
i'm sure on the scale of nastyness, Gnutella isn't quite so evil compared to trolling
Hey now, that's not fair! If you're talking about the cut'n'paste spammers or the "Taco ate my balls" idiots then true, but if you're going by the Jargon File definition then there really aren't that many of us here. It does actually take half a brain to come up with something which shows up/.ers as reactionary zealots, unlike posting the same sentance repeated a hundred times over. I think you'll find most/. trolls have user accounts and karma levels well over the _+1 bonus point (I know I do).
In response to point 1 I agree. Given the way the contest is judged I think Python would be ideal - it can be vastly quicker to develop a working implementation of an algorithm in Python than it can in C/C++/Pascal or whatever.
Slashdot Mirror
You could make an abolute fortune if you played it right. Of course, not being able to ever come ashore in most countries might make it seem less attractive, but something like this is bound to happen sooner or later...
For example, if I tell you that there's a guy selling cocaine on your front lawn, and you don't do anything about it, then you're an accomplice.
If you told me that, I'd be out there like a shot with some cash *grin* But I agree with your point from a legal standpoint.
It also says just after:
You agree to not use the Service to:
... upload, post, email or otherwise transmit any Content that infringes any patent, trademark, trade secret, copyright or other proprietary rights ("Rights") of any party
I think it's justified in saying this covers posting pirated software.
Err, what? The original poster was talking about Nintendo (or whomever) being able to prove that they had sent warnings to Yahoo about such auctions. I was saying that they would be able to use E-mail records to prove this. It's got nothing to do with the automated responses from Yahoo's auction service.
Okay, fair enough, poor interpretation maybe :) As for the laws in non-US countries, IIRC both Malta and Taiwan lack copyright laws, making them the obvious place so situate such a site.
While the freedom of the internet is important, that shouldn't mean absolute lawlessnes, ESPECIALLY if a company resides in the US.
What does that mean? You seem to be implying that if a company doesn't reside in the US they should be less constrained to obey laws. Or conversely, that non-US companies are more likely to break the law than US companies. Are you being a bigot, or did you mean something else entirely?
This is often difficult to prove in the real world (hence the reason pawn brokers exist). However if they can prove that they have regularly informed Yahoo! of prirated material, and Yahoo! has still gone ahead and sold it, then Yahoo! has knowly profited from the sale of illegal goods.
Perhaps for the case of a pawn brokers, but in this situation E-mail records can show exactly what was sent to whom, and when it was sent. Look at the Microsoft case for an obvious example of this.
You understand that all information, data, text, software, music, sound, photographs, graphics, video, messages or other materials ("Content"), whether publicly posted or privately transmitted, are the sole responsibility of the person from which such Content originated. This means that you, and not Yahoo, are entirely responsible for all Content that you upload, post, email or otherwise transmit via the Service. Yahoo does not control the Content posted via the Service and, as such, does not guarantee the accuracy, integrity or quality of such Content. ... Under no circumstances will Yahoo be liable in any way for any Content, including, but not limited to, for any errors or omissions in any Content, or for any loss or damage of any kind incurred as a result of the use of any Content posted, emailed or otherwise transmitted via the Service.
Since they have this is in their terms of service, surely the person who posts the stuff that they are suing for are liable for it rather than Yahoo?
The analogy of a particle emitting a force particle such as a gravition or photon, recoiling and then another particle absorbing the force particle and also recoiling works in the case of a repulsive force but falls down in the case of an attractive one.
What you need to remember is that in quantum field theory force carrying particles (bosons) are just excitations of the underlying field - a photon is just an excitation of the underlying EM field. As such, when considering interactions like this you really have to consider it in the full sense of quantum field theory rather than simply treating them as particles, and seeing as how in this case the graviton would be "virtual" I doubt little things like the Conservation of Momentum apply :)
Of course this is all in theory, since we don't have a quantum field theory of gravity. From recent developments it appears as though it will require a lot of unusual features, but IMHO it will at low energies approximate to a similar process as the other field theories.
WTF are you on about? There was a nation called Gaul inhabited by Celts at about the time of the Roman Empire. Either you're just unfunny or plain wrong, I really can't tell which.
I'd imagine it's because most of them don't have anybody sitting near them at all :) Seriously though, I used to be best friends with a coloured bloke called Ishmael and plenty of people I know are black. But then again from my experiance it's not nearly as bad over here in London as it is in America from what I see and read, as I'm sure you'd agree. Of course, that is somewhat of a generalisation. Comments are always welcome...
Errm, OK I'm a little biased, but Perl is more suited to quick hacks and text processing than full-blown applications. Try Python for an alternative scripting language - it's very easy to learn, has loads of useful libraries included and its inbuilt OO makes it a lot easier to write larger programs in - here where I work we've got a scripting module as part of our application which is roughly 3-4 Mb of Python code which I can maintain and extend quite easily.
Again, somewhat offtopic, but I'm originally from Welling, just down the road :) And my friend lived just a few houses down from the bus stop Stephan Lawrence was murdered at, and at least some of them definitely did it, because she knew a lot of the same people as them. But that'll never be proven now in a criminal court unfortunately.
The Amber Diceless Roleplaying Game. No dice, four attributes, a handful of powers and a couple of background perks. That's all. How do you handle melee combat then? Whichever combatent has the highest Warfare attribute wins. Of course if they're close then role-playing out the combat using tactics, dirty tricks and other factors can swing it your way, but that's the essence of the rules.
Personally I think that the Hero System is a far better "universal" RPGs, in fact it's one of the better rule sets I've seen around. I truly haven't been able to think of a character I couldn't recreate through the rules.
It does cost a bit, but there's a cutdown crossover version with R Talsorian, called Fuzion which you can download for free IIRC.
Sorry, I couldn't ever be bothered to read past the first 100 pages or so of Dune so I don't actually have a clue what you're going on about :( If you could explain a bit I'd be grateful, thanks.
There seems to be the overwhelming belief here that given a large enough computer, AI is the ineviable result. It's nice to see someone who actually thinks it might be a little more complex.
The brain, and the senses as well. For example, the ultimate monitor would be an interface that hooks directly into the optic nerve and projects a screen, when desired, wherever in the environment you want it. The same could be done for the ears. Imagine having essentially a movie quality display literally everywhere you go.
How about instant information on anything you look at and think a query? No more forgetting who something is or where to go. Virtual conferencing without any external technology via brain-to-brain look ups - I think it's safe to assume at that stage a transmitter and receiver are easily included in the setup.
And as for the ears, how's about volume enhancement to hear quiet conversations, discrimatory hearing to listen to that one conversation in a crowded room or lie detection through voice stress analysis?
And seeing as the brain regulates the body, why not automatic blocking of pain, increasing adrenalin and masking tiredness in danger situations, cutting down on autonomic responses such as shakiness, twitching or whatever.
The possible applications are endless, and that's without all the programs you can think of by enabling the brain to connect to vast external DB systems - tracers, messengers, data miners etc.
Maybe on paper computer hardware will reach the point where it performs the same amount of calculations as a human brain, but that in no way means that it will make AI possible.
In some ways, yes, the brain is an emergant system arising from a requisite level of complexity in its makeup, but it's also the result of billions of years of evolution which has left it with any number of subsystems which have different putposes, control different aspects of our body, and generally work in concert with the rest of the brain. The brain is not just a large neural net, and IMHO it will take far more understanding of both sapience and sentience before AI becomes a reality.
Yeah, I agree with most of your points, but I'm uncertain of your time frame. What you've got to remember is the human self-image is very strong and that even given the ineviable lessening of opposition to genetic engineering that will occur over the next thousand years, people will still want to look pretty much like "people". I'm guessing the internal changes will be far more extreme than changes to the external makeup of the body (excepting cosmetic changes).
Again the same with cybernetics. I know that there's currently a group of people in America who are in love with the idea of having cybernetics attached to themselves, but IMHO they're just a variation on the body-mutilators, albeit a slightly less bizarre one. I think the real applications of human-machine interfaces will be in the brain. Once the technology has evolved to allow easily implanted, reliable and compatible hardware to interface with the brain I think a whole host of useful technologies can be devised. If anyone's read Peter Hamilton's "Night's Dawn" trilogy they'll know the sort of thing I'm talking about - the neural nanonics packages which most people possess in that.
Agreed, I noticed a period a couple of months ago when every single comment he made was modded down to -1, and then he stopped posting. Recently he seems to have stopped using his +1 bonus, and most of his posts are modded up a point or two. It's all a bit sad really that he has to bother with all this bollocks.
First off, thank you for a great post, some excellent points made on the viability of the electronic book. I have to say that the process of moving to a fully digital book will be a slow, incremental process, probably spearheaded by technical and/or scientific literature, where things like hyperlinks, animated pictures and the like make sense and can make the book a lot more useful.
With fiction I think the process will be far slower. Apart from a few die-hard technology people most readers, myself most definitely included, would far prefer to read a book than read a monitor. Books are for when you stop using your computer, and until the process of reading a digital book is as easy and pain-free as reading a paperback the jump will not be made. And I think the current state of play in e-book development is way behind that.
i'm sure on the scale of nastyness, Gnutella isn't quite so evil compared to trolling
Hey now, that's not fair! If you're talking about the cut'n'paste spammers or the "Taco ate my balls" idiots then true, but if you're going by the Jargon File definition then there really aren't that many of us here. It does actually take half a brain to come up with something which shows up /.ers as reactionary zealots, unlike posting the same sentance repeated a hundred times over. I think you'll find most /. trolls have user accounts and karma levels well over the _+1 bonus point (I know I do).
In response to point 1 I agree. Given the way the contest is judged I think Python would be ideal - it can be vastly quicker to develop a working implementation of an algorithm in Python than it can in C/C++/Pascal or whatever.
It's getting very silly now :)