Okay Mr. Smartypants. Do it. Define everyone alive according to related values. It sounds so easy, and it's not like people's qualities can contradict, nor can people be ignorant or irrational in an infintesimally large number of ways. Make yourself a billion dollars and invent perfect speech recognition while your at it.

I didn't say anything about making perfect predictions. You can't even do that for ordinary random variables, much less ones as complex as humans. There is plenty of low hanging fruit to play with, though.

indeed and if he tried to open up he would soon be dead

I doubt it. The Kim line is a personality cult. Control of the country without a visible Kim presence would be extremely difficult, at best.

If Un started running his mouth stupidly, they'd probably pump him full of drugs until he started talking about rainbows instead. Killing him would be drastic.

The more they mine data, the more they are polishing my turds.

You're just an outlier in the data. Easily identified, easily filtered out...

Coming up with a profile that is completely incorrect and undetectably so is far more difficult than just being random and contradictory.

People like to think that they're "undefinable". In fact, all they are are values of a vector random variable. If you know the values of some of the components you can infer the values of others, because they are not all independent. A similar principle (vector quantization) is used in lossy data compression.

Somebody will come in here and say "No, you can't know for certain, that's what makes us human" -- no, that's what makes you a random variable. A vector-valued one, but a random variable nonetheless.

As a mature adult, I am able to gracefully accept that people will say things I don't like. I don't need to protect myself from bad speech. I don't need to physically block my ears. I don't need to technologically block users. I simply don't allow what random strangers say to affect my emotions.

What a load of self-righteous horseshit. This isn't about protecting our fragile ears, it's about personal fucking preferences.

Isn't it interesting that you post as AC while saying all this. It's almost as if you want to prevent people from automatically filtering you out. You're the guy who goes out of his way to act like a douche and then gets all uppity about his rights when people call him on his douche-baggery. And you do so anonymously so that there is no consequence for you when that happens.

You're the coward, kid.

Are you an idiot? The judge said (exact words): "It is a scam that motorists can't win."

So, when a judge says something, he doesn't really say it, in your view? News reporters shouldn't report the exact statements made by people, in your view?

Maybe they assume that responsible adult people can handle reading a word they don't like. Free speech does mean other people might say things you don't like and free speech is more than worth it.

Ah, the old "Free speech means I can say whatever I want and you don't get to say anything back" argument. You have a special kind of stupidity, it's quite remarkable.

Providing a hash of the IP address preserves anonymity while allowing users to ignore each other if they see fit. Being able to do things you want to do, like ignore somebody else, is called "freedom." You see, freedom applies to all parties involved. You're free to be an idiot. I'm free to suggest a technological measure that would allow me personally to filter out your bullshit. Slashdot is free to ignore the suggestion. Freedom for everyone! Awesome, isn't it?

Another technical measure to avoid hearing speech you don't like, is to put your hands over your ears. Care to present an argument against that one? An argument that doesn't involve infringing my freedom to put my hands over my ears?

I'm not saying there's no prior art (there is -- stuff that I've worked on, for one thing). But this is not the same as a modem. There are significant challenges sending modulated audio in the open air. Air density variations can cause fading in specific audible bands. Multipath reflection off building walls and other objects is also problematic. There is also the obvious problem of noise in the environment. Another source of fun is the fact that the speed of sound is low (compared to light) which means Doppler shift is also a serious issue when the source or receiver is moving.

A modem doesn't have any of those problems to the same extent. There is no channel fading (unless the equipment has problems). There is no multipath reflection. The noise floor is much, much lower.

My implementation of this used OFDM-QAM for the media layer -- basically, the spectrum is split into hundreds of subchannels each of which is modulated at a very slow rate, to combat multi-path interference. The code feeding the OFDM modulator is a spread-spectrum code designed to deal with subchannel fading and bursts of noise. The downside to OFDM is that it is not robust to Doppler shift. I've been playing with this for literally years and it's a challenging project.

This stuff is far more complicated that playing a modem at high volume.

Yeah, but the sun would rise and set a half hour later on the clock.

I don't understand how shifting the timezones shifts the clock. It just shifts the set of people who are in each timezone.