|
Install Windows posted:You do understand that even if they got the trademark, it would only be with regards to a certain class of devices, right? And especially to lock out say Microsoft Glass eye mounted display thingies. One thing I never understood (partially because I didn't follow up on it) about the Apple/Samsung battles is why things like "rounded corners" fell under patents instead of trademark or copyright. Patenting rounded corners makes little sense, but preventing someone from blatantly coping the look and feel of your product is legitimate, and what copyright and trademark law are meant to deal with.
|
#
¿
Apr 6, 2014 02:14
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ May 19, 2024 17:49 |
|
|
Re: quarters I get that paying for quarters triggers a whole lot of emotional responses but people get that money is convenience right? That's sort of the point of it. You pay for the laundromat because it's more convienient than washing by hand in the sink (something you really could do) and if you decided to pay for quarters it would be a simple extension of that convenience. Clearly it was a bad business idea because of the reaction it triggers (and high price) but in reality, there is nothing special whatsoever about trading money for time and convenience. This is stupid, but there are a ton of actually popular things that stupider than this.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 28, 2014 19:18
|
|
|
Nintendo Kid posted:Most banks don't, since cash upfront is pretty low risk for them. Some banks try to charge their own customers for using human tellers. I doubt most banks give quarters to non-customers.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 30, 2014 12:29
|
|
|
Pope Guilty posted:There's only one known kind of intelligent mind so far, so suggesting that another would be very similar to that isn't too outre. Yes it is. The human brain is the result of millions of years of evolution in the context of a bi-pedal land dwelling social creature. Our wants, desires and goals have been entirely shaped for survival and reproduction in this context. We can't even begin to imagine what some technological being would want unless we knew about it's specific context and history. Someone joked earlier that it might have better social skills than existing techies but why in the world would it want to socialize? Everything about our existence is shaped by our long evolutionary past, a past that wouldn't be shared whatsoever with a theoretical singularity. Even if we tried to create something human like "Her", by hard coding desires for learning, socialization, empathy, sex and so on, we'd be 100% guaranteed to get it wrong in many really consequential ways. Creating a shallow veneer of something that looks Human is possible. Creating something that might be considered "intelligent" while sharing this bolted on veneer is maybe plausible? But expecting a different emergent intelligence to automatically mimic human behavior in any way would be naive. Like FRINGE pointed out (first time saying this in a positive light), examples of intelligence in nature show widely different types of behavior and note that a squid shares far more in common with humans than any technological AI would.
|
|
#
¿
Aug 9, 2014 14:19
|
|
|
i am harry posted:The simple act of having to get up every day and work a job to pay for a roof and electricity affects a person's state of mind, intended goals and aspirations. If you were to awake a baby in a society that didn't require a third of your day spent working a job as an adult, adults of that society might behave very differently. Cultural and individual variations among humans are just an entirely different scale from what I'm talking about. When we're talking about theoretical technological life we're talking literally about aliens that happen to be on earth. Except biological beings on different planets are actually far more similar to us in that they've also been the product of millions of years of survival and evolution.
|
|
#
¿
Aug 9, 2014 14:38
|
|