"but also a programmed Malicious intent." Crap! Look at the the technologies/ecologies that have been replaced by humans. Little was done with malicious intent.
"Emulating motives that are abstract enough to eventually lead back to our demise are quite complex" Other way around isn't it? Emulating motives that allow for intellectual value are more complex.
Strange you should say that, as I am a New Zealander and spent about four months in France in the 90's. I knew no French at the time (bonjour, maybe???) and had absolutely no problems. The first thing I did was try to start out every conversation in French and get a little bit further each time. I really, really suck at languages (English included) so most of my conversations involved only a few lines of French and then I would throw my arms up in the air and say, "Bo?" (Which I think was French for um). I never had a problem. They were really, really nice. If they knew no English then we would descend to sign language (not the official one) and even if they didn't understand me then I would be taken to someone else who could help. I once saw my Great Uncle have a great night drinking whiskey with a man in Grenoble. He couldn't speak French and the man could not speak English. None the less, they sang and laughed and ate and drank until the early hours of that night and then met up over the next few weeks to catch up.
I think you may have never learnt the first lesson of language, which is: It doesn't matter whether you can speak it or not, we are all human. When you give someone a hug, a smile, a laugh, a sparkle in your eye, throw your arms up in horror, look down in shame, roll your eyes, show your palms, frown, skew your mouth or hold your head. It is language. You may have to learn a few local variables. You may make mistakes. People will still relate and like you because you are human too.
Better luck next time.:) Try it again, they really are a wonderful people.
"Saying add to gravity is not the same as saying add gravity." This is true. My apologies. I was going to debunk myself soon after posting but thought I would leave it as is and see if I could get away with it...........bugger.
"No. A centrifuge can only add to gravity." Although commonly measured in g's. You should probably point out that it doesn't increase gravity. Pedantic, I know.
Yes, that was my thought to. I was thinking more about larger plants though. Would fruit still grow the same shape under lunar gravity? Would you have to ration water to the plants so they don't suck up to much water and collapse? Would they have similar problems with nutrient loss as we do with calcium? Could be a very interesting experiment indeed.
It does appear there have been some preliminary studies done. Including growing Arabidopsis thaliana on the ISS. And rice on the Space Shuttle STS-95 mission. The abstract does mention some elongation in the coleoptile of the rice. I would imagine the bigger the plant, the bigger the changes that would develop. It is, after all, studying the effect of gravity.
"This has to be the most comprehensive spamming I've seen on this site for a while." I wouldn't mind so much if he/she made decent use of white space. I can't even read it without my eyes twisting up.
Too true. Nothing to do with making money from copyright though.
"Lawmakers worldwide are getting to grips with how to protect creative content online. All agree with Prime Minister John Key's assertion that the internet should not be a "wild west" where creators' rights are trampled underfoot. Most are working on their own solutions to the problem."
Bullshit. The truth is we are trying to negotiate free trade deals. The most important of which is with the U.S.. Key is merely looking at the effect of changing the law (minimal) vs possibly getting a free trade deal with the U.S. (our third largest trading partner I think) so we can make buckets of money from agricultural exports.
"New Zealand was at the forefront of tackling the issue with a law that had received bipartisan backing."
But, little to no imput from its citizens. As soon as people got involved it got delayed for a month so the government can see if we are serious about being upset about this, or not.
"Music makers welcomed New Zealand's policymakers tackling this problem, realising that doing nothing was no longer an option. The trade value of recorded music worldwide has fallen by more than a fifth in the past 10 years, despite more people than ever using and enjoying it."
That paragraph is unbelievable. Beside the obvious stupidity of it (Really? More people are using and the price has fallen? Thats just terrible!) it specifically fails to mention New Zealand Music! Have N.Z. music sales fallen? How could they measure it anyway? Most people I know buy music from the band at the concert.
"The recording industry has transformed its business models, making music available online and on mobile through a variety of different partners. Yet the widespread availability of unlicensed music on the internet acts as a disincentive to those considering setting up legal services."
Second sentence contradicts the first. According to the first the distribution methods have been set up. According to the second, the distribution methods are unable to be set up. And what is this licensed word? If the music is licensed then the industry would make zero money through resales (where records, tapes, and C.D.'s were scratched). In reality they make a huge amount of money through resales. I, personally, have bought most of my music four times already. Once on record, once on tape, once on C.D., and again on C.D. because I got burgled. Is he saying they owe me three sets of licences?
"The recorded music industry has been working hard to find proportionate and reasonable solutions to tackling online copyright infringement. In some countries, labels have taken legal action against users who have uploaded infringing music to the internet without permission for millions to download without payment. We believe section 92A is a better solution for everyone."
Cutting my internet because you believe I have infringed your copyright is not a resonable or proportionate solution in the same way that cutting my phone off because you believe it may have been used in a crime is. To paraphrase the last sentence,"We believe section 92A is better for us because it gives us a legal way to intimidate you with no liability.
"In New Zealand, we have looked long and hard at coming up with an effective way of tackling the problem. Internet service providers are in a unique position to help us protect creative content online. It makes sense for the Government to facilitate negotiations to ensure that ISPs that take action are not undercut by those that do not. Consumers also need to be reassured that what is being done is efficient and proportionate."
In New Zealand we have a way of facilitating negotiations between copyright holders and suspected infringers. It is called the legal system.
"In the past few weeks there have been a lot of misleading reports and sensational propaganda about section 92A. It is not surprising that many have spoken out against the legisl
More likely they will have to combat a new phobia. Fear of not being watched. This will be characterised by an inability to sustain normal social relationships without the presence of a psychological moral superior leading to spontaneous religious conversions upon crossing the ditch in order to retain sanity.
"There are no good people working at bad companies. They chose to work there. Even the "it was the only job I could get" defense is complete bullshit. You ALWAYS have a choice, even if you don't like the alternatives you have to chose from."
Although I applaud you turning down the "scummy company" at risk to yourself and family. I don't agree with your logic. Following the same line of thought leads to; "No good Americans" because of the Iraq war. "No good Israeli's" because of the attacks on Gaza. "No good Palestinians" because of the attacks on Israel.
Often the people at these companies have never been exposed to any point of view from outside the company. Most citizens of a country are the same.......indoctrinated.
We are in the same situation over here. Things have unfortunately gone so far as; 1) You can't cut a firebreak. 2) You can't remove overhanging trees on the road. 3) Recently the local road crew had their contract revoked for cutting through a > 32mm root while fixing a slip.
It would appear the trees have more rights than we.
"Verizon's 2008 operating margin was 17.34%, their return on average equity was 13.93%, neither are particularly stellar or out of line."
Thats wonderful.......errr...how much is their CEO paid? Looking at that I would have to say that the executives of the company are screwing shareholders badly. It is from 2007 of course, but do you really think much has changed?
That idea really doesn't work for me though. In you terms a person sleeping (or in a coma) isn't a human. Do you think an intellectually handicapped person is a human? I have a friend who is a doctor whose daughter was only able to smile. Was she human? It seems to me that the broadest definition of a subject I know nothing about is more accurate than the thinest
If I was to take your stance, how could you say that I wouldn't take the definition that you weren't human.....because you didn't have the same thoughts as me? Dead end really. I have never seen a human created from a single sperm or ovum. Once they have got together then I see many, that is why I base my views in this way. What is your reason?
"A single statement like "I decided to disband NASA, close all its projects down and transfer their funding into the new Emergency Assistance Fund that helps you personally" will do the job."
Ahhhh....yes. The end of the dream. Let me make a prophecy here; When America has lost its dream. America is lost. For that which was the hope of the world will have fallen. Not for a hundred years will a nation rise and say, "We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness." You have already lost the "among". So long, thanks for all the fission.
Really, how many fetus's have been born solely from an ovum? A fetus is the product of a sperm and an egg. To say that when a woman has a period (note, not ovulates) she murders an unborn child is a strawman (thanks/.:)).
Worst case scenario: you are a woman who has had an abortion. You made the right choice. There is no way I am going to make you feel pain by saying you made the wrong choice. If you had, and I was there, then I would have supported your choice, held you when you needed it, cried with you when you needed it. You are a woman. I am not. Nothing I can ever do should take that choice away from you. It is your body, not mine. I hope that I have not caused you pain through my comments. However, I still hold my belief. You may think me unjustified. In this case, I am not.
I draw the line at conception precisely because I have no (well OK I do, I was raised in a western society and was, of course, indoctrinated in various ways (children's stories, etc.....)) religious beliefs. A single sperm means nothing. A single ovum means nothing. A fertilization gives a much higher chance of a child. A birth gives 100% chance of a child.
Sorry, but in my view. You have no soul. You do however have an energy force that appears to be an emergent property of biology.
I do. But, I hear him howling "Yes"! Taking control of evolution is simply another step in it.
Re:Are you catholic?
on
Designer Babies
·
· Score: 4, Insightful
Once a baby is actually _born_, I consider it a human being (though even then, Peter Singer makes a good argument that it's not really until it's self-aware, which is a couple of months later). I used to take the same position......right up until I saw a baby born (and watched her grow) who was going to be aborted (pre three months). They are children, "potential children". That being said, I have no problem with abortions. I don't have a problem with eating meat either. I do have a problem with people trying to avoid responsibility for what they do by pretending it isn't what it is. If you kill a fetus, you have killed the potentiality of a child. Don't mess around and try and justify it, that is what you are doing. If you eat lamb, it was a baby animal. Same thing in my eyes. People should stop justifying what they do and just take responsibility. If there is no god, then there is no absolute morality. It is your choice.
Don't feel I am trying to attack your views in this. From the tone of your posting I would say your opinions are exceedingly close to mine with a few exceptions. If anything, I just hold the potential as more important than you because I watched it manifest once.
Let's take China's (old) policy of 1 child per family. Leads to a glut of boy children. We have no idea what implications that may bring in the next decade or 3. May lead to nothing, may lead to a world war.
Might lead to the greatest scientific advances in the history of the human race. You are right, we don't know what will happen. But then, we usually don't. We just have to try every option and see which ones suit us.
I'm not sure whether that should be modded insightful or not. It sounds like you have the same sort of system we have in New Zealand in that a government department (Parmac in our case.) bulk buys the drugs. We are still paying the price of our medicine. It's just that we are spreading it across the entire country via taxation and trying to pay less by making larger purcases. It isn't a bad system though. A wee bit prone to political interference if anything. It does mean that you can only get the drugs that Pharmac buys for free (or near to). Anything else, and you get to pay for it.
Slashdot Mirror
"but also a programmed Malicious intent."
Crap! Look at the the technologies/ecologies that have been replaced by humans. Little was done with malicious intent.
"Emulating motives that are abstract enough to eventually lead back to our demise are quite complex"
Other way around isn't it? Emulating motives that allow for intellectual value are more complex.
Strange you should say that, as I am a New Zealander and spent about four months in France in the 90's. I knew no French at the time (bonjour, maybe???) and had absolutely no problems. The first thing I did was try to start out every conversation in French and get a little bit further each time. I really, really suck at languages (English included) so most of my conversations involved only a few lines of French and then I would throw my arms up in the air and say, "Bo?" (Which I think was French for um). I never had a problem. They were really, really nice. If they knew no English then we would descend to sign language (not the official one) and even if they didn't understand me then I would be taken to someone else who could help. I once saw my Great Uncle have a great night drinking whiskey with a man in Grenoble. He couldn't speak French and the man could not speak English. None the less, they sang and laughed and ate and drank until the early hours of that night and then met up over the next few weeks to catch up.
I think you may have never learnt the first lesson of language, which is: It doesn't matter whether you can speak it or not, we are all human. When you give someone a hug, a smile, a laugh, a sparkle in your eye, throw your arms up in horror, look down in shame, roll your eyes, show your palms, frown, skew your mouth or hold your head. It is language. You may have to learn a few local variables. You may make mistakes. People will still relate and like you because you are human too.
Better luck next time. :) Try it again, they really are a wonderful people.
"my 512 MB Dell Latitude with its puny 1.5 Ghz Pentium M processor, and it flys!" :(
Oh, f%$k me! Now I feel old.
"Saying add to gravity is not the same as saying add gravity."
This is true. My apologies. I was going to debunk myself soon after posting but thought I would leave it as is and see if I could get away with it...........bugger.
"So.. a watermelon shaped banana? Would that be so bad?.."
Imagine picking it up when it was rotten.
"No. A centrifuge can only add to gravity."
Although commonly measured in g's. You should probably point out that it doesn't increase gravity. Pedantic, I know.
Yes, that was my thought to. I was thinking more about larger plants though. Would fruit still grow the same shape under lunar gravity? Would you have to ration water to the plants so they don't suck up to much water and collapse? Would they have similar problems with nutrient loss as we do with calcium? Could be a very interesting experiment indeed.
It does appear there have been some preliminary studies done. Including growing Arabidopsis thaliana on the ISS. And rice on the Space Shuttle STS-95 mission. The abstract does mention some elongation in the coleoptile of the rice. I would imagine the bigger the plant, the bigger the changes that would develop. It is, after all, studying the effect of gravity.
"This has to be the most comprehensive spamming I've seen on this site for a while."
I wouldn't mind so much if he/she made decent use of white space. I can't even read it without my eyes twisting up.
Nah, Due to the recession the new 69 is 78. Eating just became more expensive.
"To reduce a human being down to a statistical average and use that in hiring and termination practices is just utterly ridiculous."
:)
Ahhhhh! Elections.
Sorry. I just had to say it.
Too true. Nothing to do with making money from copyright though.
"Lawmakers worldwide are getting to grips with how to protect creative content online. All agree with Prime Minister John Key's assertion that the internet should not be a "wild west" where creators' rights are trampled underfoot. Most are working on their own solutions to the problem."
Bullshit. The truth is we are trying to negotiate free trade deals. The most important of which is with the U.S.. Key is merely looking at the effect of changing the law (minimal) vs possibly getting a free trade deal with the U.S. (our third largest trading partner I think) so we can make buckets of money from agricultural exports.
"New Zealand was at the forefront of tackling the issue with a law that had received bipartisan backing."
But, little to no imput from its citizens. As soon as people got involved it got delayed for a month so the government can see if we are serious about being upset about this, or not.
"Music makers welcomed New Zealand's policymakers tackling this problem, realising that doing nothing was no longer an option. The trade value of recorded music worldwide has fallen by more than a fifth in the past 10 years, despite more people than ever using and enjoying it."
That paragraph is unbelievable. Beside the obvious stupidity of it (Really? More people are using and the price has fallen? Thats just terrible!) it specifically fails to mention New Zealand Music! Have N.Z. music sales fallen? How could they measure it anyway? Most people I know buy music from the band at the concert.
"The recording industry has transformed its business models, making music available online and on mobile through a variety of different partners. Yet the widespread availability of unlicensed music on the internet acts as a disincentive to those considering setting up legal services."
Second sentence contradicts the first. According to the first the distribution methods have been set up. According to the second, the distribution methods are unable to be set up. And what is this licensed word? If the music is licensed then the industry would make zero money through resales (where records, tapes, and C.D.'s were scratched). In reality they make a huge amount of money through resales. I, personally, have bought most of my music four times already. Once on record, once on tape, once on C.D., and again on C.D. because I got burgled. Is he saying they owe me three sets of licences?
"The recorded music industry has been working hard to find proportionate and reasonable solutions to tackling online copyright infringement. In some countries, labels have taken legal action against users who have uploaded infringing music to the internet without permission for millions to download without payment. We believe section 92A is a better solution for everyone."
Cutting my internet because you believe I have infringed your copyright is not a resonable or proportionate solution in the same way that cutting my phone off because you believe it may have been used in a crime is. To paraphrase the last sentence,"We believe section 92A is better for us because it gives us a legal way to intimidate you with no liability.
"In New Zealand, we have looked long and hard at coming up with an effective way of tackling the problem. Internet service providers are in a unique position to help us protect creative content online. It makes sense for the Government to facilitate negotiations to ensure that ISPs that take action are not undercut by those that do not. Consumers also need to be reassured that what is being done is efficient and proportionate."
In New Zealand we have a way of facilitating negotiations between copyright holders and suspected infringers. It is called the legal system.
"In the past few weeks there have been a lot of misleading reports and sensational propaganda about section 92A. It is not surprising that many have spoken out against the legisl
More likely they will have to combat a new phobia. Fear of not being watched. This will be characterised by an inability to sustain normal social relationships without the presence of a psychological moral superior leading to spontaneous religious conversions upon crossing the ditch in order to retain sanity.
Is this already a phobia?
"There are no good people working at bad companies. They chose to work there. Even the "it was the only job I could get" defense is complete bullshit. You ALWAYS have a choice, even if you don't like the alternatives you have to chose from."
Although I applaud you turning down the "scummy company" at risk to yourself and family. I don't agree with your logic. Following the same line of thought leads to;
"No good Americans" because of the Iraq war.
"No good Israeli's" because of the attacks on Gaza.
"No good Palestinians" because of the attacks on Israel.
Often the people at these companies have never been exposed to any point of view from outside the company. Most citizens of a country are the same.......indoctrinated.
We are in the same situation over here. Things have unfortunately gone so far as;
1) You can't cut a firebreak.
2) You can't remove overhanging trees on the road.
3) Recently the local road crew had their contract revoked for cutting through a > 32mm root while fixing a slip.
It would appear the trees have more rights than we.
"Verizon's 2008 operating margin was 17.34%, their return on average equity was 13.93%, neither are particularly stellar or out of line."
Thats wonderful.......errr...how much is their CEO paid? Looking at that I would have to say that the executives of the company are screwing shareholders badly. It is from 2007 of course, but do you really think much has changed?
That idea really doesn't work for me though. In you terms a person sleeping (or in a coma) isn't a human. Do you think an intellectually handicapped person is a human? I have a friend who is a doctor whose daughter was only able to smile. Was she human? It seems to me that the broadest definition of a subject I know nothing about is more accurate than the thinest
If I was to take your stance, how could you say that I wouldn't take the definition that you weren't human.....because you didn't have the same thoughts as me? Dead end really. I have never seen a human created from a single sperm or ovum. Once they have got together then I see many, that is why I base my views in this way. What is your reason?
Anyone suggesting extending NASA is advocating extending a clearly unsafe and inefficient agency.
Agreed, JPL all the way.....under Pickering...,we may have to resurrect him.
"A single statement like "I decided to disband NASA, close all its projects down and transfer their funding into the new Emergency Assistance Fund that helps you personally" will do the job."
Ahhhh....yes. The end of the dream. Let me make a prophecy here; When America has lost its dream. America is lost. For that which was the hope of the world will have fallen. Not for a hundred years will a nation rise and say, "We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness." You have already lost the "among". So long, thanks for all the fission.
Really, how many fetus's have been born solely from an ovum? A fetus is the product of a sperm and an egg. To say that when a woman has a period (note, not ovulates) she murders an unborn child is a strawman (thanks /. :)).
Worst case scenario: you are a woman who has had an abortion. You made the right choice. There is no way I am going to make you feel pain by saying you made the wrong choice. If you had, and I was there, then I would have supported your choice, held you when you needed it, cried with you when you needed it. You are a woman. I am not. Nothing I can ever do should take that choice away from you. It is your body, not mine. I hope that I have not caused you pain through my comments. However, I still hold my belief. You may think me unjustified. In this case, I am not.
I draw the line at conception precisely because I have no (well OK I do, I was raised in a western society and was, of course, indoctrinated in various ways (children's stories, etc.....)) religious beliefs. A single sperm means nothing. A single ovum means nothing. A fertilization gives a much higher chance of a child. A birth gives 100% chance of a child.
Sorry, but in my view. You have no soul. You do however have an energy force that appears to be an emergent property of biology.
"Can you hear Darwin howling?"
I do. But, I hear him howling "Yes"! Taking control of evolution is simply another step in it.
Once a baby is actually _born_, I consider it a human being (though even then, Peter Singer makes a good argument that it's not really until it's self-aware, which is a couple of months later).
I used to take the same position......right up until I saw a baby born (and watched her grow) who was going to be aborted (pre three months). They are children, "potential children". That being said, I have no problem with abortions. I don't have a problem with eating meat either. I do have a problem with people trying to avoid responsibility for what they do by pretending it isn't what it is. If you kill a fetus, you have killed the potentiality of a child. Don't mess around and try and justify it, that is what you are doing. If you eat lamb, it was a baby animal. Same thing in my eyes. People should stop justifying what they do and just take responsibility. If there is no god, then there is no absolute morality. It is your choice.
Don't feel I am trying to attack your views in this. From the tone of your posting I would say your opinions are exceedingly close to mine with a few exceptions. If anything, I just hold the potential as more important than you because I watched it manifest once.
Let's take China's (old) policy of 1 child per family. Leads to a glut of boy children. We have no idea what implications that may bring in the next decade or 3. May lead to nothing, may lead to a world war.
Might lead to the greatest scientific advances in the history of the human race. You are right, we don't know what will happen. But then, we usually don't. We just have to try every option and see which ones suit us.
I'm not sure whether that should be modded insightful or not. It sounds like you have the same sort of system we have in New Zealand in that a government department (Parmac in our case.) bulk buys the drugs. We are still paying the price of our medicine. It's just that we are spreading it across the entire country via taxation and trying to pay less by making larger purcases.
It isn't a bad system though. A wee bit prone to political interference if anything. It does mean that you can only get the drugs that Pharmac buys for free (or near to). Anything else, and you get to pay for it.
I have taken it upon myself to independently review your comment history. It is, unfortunately, much better than mine......I hang my head in shame. :)
AWOA: Don't feed the troll.