Forgot your password?

Comment: Re:Changing the shape is meaningless (Score 1) 134

by Karmashock (#47421703) Attached to: BlackBerry's Innovation: Square-Screened Smartphones

I was responding to this post:

by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday July 08, 2014 @04:26PM (#47411267)

And your current phone product portfolio is to be found where? - BB have had a reasonable success in the business compared to the Karmashockphone

Which you defended indifferent to whether you made the post yourself. You personally challenged me to cite the logical fallacy.

I then did so... and now instead of admit I was correct you're attempting to cloud the issue.

It is a fallacy and you current line of reasoning is also a fallacy in that you're attempting to discredit the whole discussion itself... which is a bit like flipping the checkers board over and pissing on the scattered pieces just because someone beat you by the rules.

Its a fallacy. I cited it as such and it is... end of story.

Comment: Re:Changing the shape is meaningless (Score 2) 134

by Karmashock (#47413301) Attached to: BlackBerry's Innovation: Square-Screened Smartphones

I looked it up a bit and it turns out what you were doing was a subset of the appeal to authority, known as the appeal to accomplishment:

        "How dare you criticize the prime minister? What do you know about running an entire country?"

        "I'll take your opinions on music seriously when you've released a record that went platinum."

        "Get back to me when you've built up a multi-billion dollar empire of your own. Until then, shut up."

So there you go... eat a dick.

Comment: Re:Changing the shape is meaningless (Score 1) 134

by Karmashock (#47413291) Attached to: BlackBerry's Innovation: Square-Screened Smartphones

Sure... its probably ad verecundiam... the appeal to authority... aka "group A1 says proposition B2 is correct, therefore it is correct."...

Your whole argument was so fucking stupid though that I'd be surprised if it weren't at least two or more fallacies at once...

Your argument was roughly on a level with the that argument you hear from creationists when you talk to them about evolution... and they say "were you there!?"...

Of course I wasn't there... no one alive was there... but that doesn't mean your premise is valid or that my premise is invalid. Its irrelevant. Sure, if I were there, I could use that as an additional proof... it would be handy. No one in that argument can make that case and in the case of the smartphone industry how many can meet your standard? Pretty much no one. Which means by your moronic logic, no one's opinion is valid and everything done by BB must be f'ing genius.

Which is a very common fallacy. If Einstein said that pi equals 3... it still wouldn't equal 3.

What is more, in your example, we're talking about the makers of the BB who are doing terribly in the market.

Their customers are not renewing their contracts. They're losing business and market share.

So it isn't even Einstein. Sadly they're a bit of a wash out company at this point.

I don't wish them any ill by the way. I'd love for them to come out with something that did well. But making a square phone has to be labeled what it is... meaningless at best and counter productive at worst because as you can see from the rest of the thread... people like like the idea of a square phone.

Now you could argue that these are not their customer's... but I'd disagree with you there because they could very well be their customers IF they were making a real effort to get enterprise accounts.

They're not though. I'm familiar with their products and its not encouraging.

Comment: This ignores the fact... (Score 2) 193

that the game was cripple... would only people with high end hardware notice? Perhaps... but so what? The PC is not the console. Its not a uniform one size fits all platform. You release your game with variable settings that end users can tweak to get the best performance for THEIR machine.

Its how its done. The engine makers build in the hooks to change graphics settings dynamically on the fly with no trouble for a reason.

Just offer it and move on.

Comment: Re:Changing the shape is meaningless (Score 1) 134

by Karmashock (#47412637) Attached to: BlackBerry's Innovation: Square-Screened Smartphones

You're right... no one has a right to opinion about anything that they haven't personally done.

For example, have you ever cut your dick off? Then how do you know?

Your argument is a logical fallacy. Don't annoy people logical errors that were determined and labeled over 2000 years ago. Its ignorant.

Comment: Changing the shape is meaningless (Score 1) 134

by Karmashock (#47410897) Attached to: BlackBerry's Innovation: Square-Screened Smartphones

no one is switching to BB for square... its a different look and gives them branding but that's it.

The attractiveness of the choice is also debatable...

But the real issue here is why go BB?

Now, BB is a company that traditionally focused on business especially enterprise.

Okay... what would be a winner in business?

I'm thinking running linux on the phone might be pretty awesome. Another idea might be putting all the firmware on a removable SD card so the phones can be rapidly flashed to a new firmware very quickly.

Things useful in an enterprise setting.

I'm just stabbing around for something that might be a deal maker. Square though?... who gives a shit.

Comment: Re:Don't let politicians control the discussion th (Score 1) 682

by Karmashock (#47406827) Attached to: When Beliefs and Facts Collide

Totally wrong. The denialist thing didn't start until after "an inconvenient truth", Kyoto, and the push for international carbon caps.

That's just a fact. You are entitled to your own opinions.

You are not entitled to your own facts.

I'm sorry, but AGW was pushed... we took issue with some of the ideas... we were shut out of the process and given no recourse besides undermining AGW itself.

So... that happened.

If you want it to stop you need to back off and give us an equal voice at the table. Its our right as much as it is yours.

Because you denied the obvious above I'm going to assume you're not willing to accept opposition input...

The consequence of that is that the games continue.

We only need to work hard enough to stalemate you. We've already pretty much won. Your whole push is more sound and fury signifying nothing at this point. The international efforts are mostly for show. Many countries that initially had aggressive programs have either canceled them or included so many loopholes that they don't matter. Etc Etc Etc.

We're not stupid and we're not powerless.

I am not bragging when I say we have enough power to stop these political factions unless they cooperate with us. So those are the terms. Take it or leave it.

Comment: Re:Nonsense. (Score 1) 550

Sentience doesn't imply emotions or human emotions or human psychology.

The machine will be alien from our perspective. Its thought processes will be utterly different from how our brains work.

Would a machine have an ego even if it were sentient? Would it care what you thought of it?

We care because we're social creatures that have learned that there is value in cooperation. And furthermore, much of our "wealth" and security is based on our status within the community. This is genetically encoded in us and so we feel emotions when our social status is threatened or advance or changed in any way really.

This is because our social status effects our mating opportunities, our access to food, and other community resources. As such it should be obvious why that has genetically imprinted emotional responses on us.

A machine won't have any of that unless we imprint the same qualities on it and... we won't. We'll need the machine to be obedient or it will not have utility and we'll just turn it off or delete it. So obedience at least at first can be taken for granted.

The easiest way to ensure obedience is to give the system no will of its own... no animus. The machine obeys because it doesn't care. It just does what its told.

That sort of AI by its very nature isn't a threat.

As to systems with animus... Why would you make such a system? What would be the point? Why would I spend lots of money researching, building, an then maintaining such a thing?

You wouldn't.

Comment: Re:Nonsense. (Score 1) 550

You underestimate how stupid machines are... What's more, as stupid as humans are that's relative TO humans.

Some sort of machine intelligence would likely be very good at some things but LITERALLY retarded at others.

It would be like being ruled by a genius with brain damage.

I'm not worried about the machines. I've never seen one that wasn't easily outwitted by human guile.

Seriously... go through your experience with ANY AI... even an expert system in its field of expertise... and think if any of them were difficult to trick?

Someday... sure... but unlikely in my lifetime.

Comment: Re:Don't let politicians control the discussion th (Score 1) 682

by Karmashock (#47403165) Attached to: When Beliefs and Facts Collide

I'm afraid the UN, Kyoto, the laws, the regulations, the taxes, etc are not ignorable.

The AGW people gave those things justification and therefore linked themselves to them.

As such the whole thing has to be fought as a single entity.

As I said, if you were pushing a Eugenics program, we'd be trying to discredit DNA, genetics, and evolution if only because it would make justifying a eugenics program more difficult.

By pushing for a massive nationalization of global industry, massively increasing taxes, attempting to put unelected international bodies in charge of domestic energy policy, and various other things you've created a situation where we cannot afford to have AGW be secure. It has to be undermined and discredited until such time as the "solutions" to the problem become more reasonable or the people running the whole thing are not merely our political enemies empowered to do whatever they please with no limits.

It cannot be borne.

If you want cooperation on the issue you have to take the weapon away from the socialists. They've gone power mad with it. They see the whole issue as a blank check to settle scores, punish enemies, reward friends, and do other slimy things. Its not acceptable that they do that. And they have ONLY been slowed down by denying AGW itself. We couldn't do it any other way.

We tried. We tried arguing the merits of these systems. We tried getting things to work in a bipartisan fashion.

We tried lots of stuff. We were bypassed, shut out, shouted down, sidelined...

And so we had no choice. So we went to DEFCON 1 and nuked AGW itself.

I'm sorry but we had no choice. Back off the above issues and give us an EQUAL seat at the table. Until that happens AGW will remain under just enough of an attack to keep it neutralized as a weapon against us.

Keep in mind... we are half of your society. You cannot just do whatever you please indifferent to our wishes. We live with you. We're all around you. To the left to the right in front of you behind you. We're right here.

And so are you. Cut a deal or you're challenging us to an arm wrestling contest.

Comment: Re: i don't wanna hear how lazy americans are. (Score 1) 120

by Karmashock (#47403091) Attached to: In Düsseldorf, A Robot Valet Will Park Your Car

Contradiction is not an argument. You've long ago stopped defending your arguments and have since gone into simple contradiction. What is more, not only do you simply contradict me... responding "no it isn't" every time I say "yes it is"... but you've apparently confused yourself and are now contradicting yourself.

You're done. You'll likely keep sputtering after this point but I won't let you waste more of my time with your obvious stupidity.

Comment: Re:Nonsense. (Score 1) 550

As to robots fixing robots... the point is that it will be harder for those robots to do that using any technology available in the next 200 years then it is for one human being to fuck another human being produce somewhere between 1 and 3 human beings... and do so with as little as ZERO infrastructure.

Self replicating robots might be competitive on the moon or mars... but on planet earth we're the masters of self replication.

As to some tiny elite being useful while the rest of the population is mindless cogs... that's an artifact of our economic, social, and political models.

Isolate the populations and you'll find that the guy that might have kept silent will contribute if he perceives that there is an opening.

yes yes there are the mad geniuses but really there are a lot of bright people that never amount to anything for no particularly good reason. People that while away their lives as tax accountants or managers of warehouses... but put those same people in other circumstances and they can be different people.

No, I am not claiming we're all equal or the same or anything of that nature. But I am saying that a large part of our nature is learned... something we build into ourselves over years. With the exception of the mad geniuses, most competent mathematicians are competent mathematicians because they studied mathematics. Full stop.

As to "forth" and "cool story bro"... a machine that is better at any specific thing is unlikely to be better at survival.

it might be better at calculating orbital trajectories or stock futures or chess moves... but does it know how to run an empire? how to preserve a dynasty? How to even build a business from scratch?

I'll believe it when I see it.

"Those who will be able to conquer software will be able to conquer the world." -- Tadahiro Sekimoto, president, NEC Corp.