<?xml version="1.0" encoding="utf-8"?>
<rss version="2.0"
xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/">
<channel>
<title>Comments by Richard</title>
<link>http://www.techdirt.com/</link>
<description>Easily digestible tech news....</description>
<item>
<title>Re: Water Blasts are nice, but...</title>
<link>http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20130515/11032823096/how-low-can-drones-go.shtml#c721</link>
<dc:creator><![CDATA[Richard]]></dc:creator>
<pubDate>Wed, 22 May 2013 10:57:13 PDT</pubDate>
<guid>http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20130515/11032823096/how-low-can-drones-go.shtml#c721</guid>
<content:encoded><![CDATA[In the UK you can just report him to the CAA - he is breaking the law by flying too close to a structure that is not under his control.<br />
<br />
In the UK you are not allowed to fly within 50 metres of someone else's house.]]></content:encoded>
</item>
<item>
<title>Re: Re: Precedents.</title>
<link>http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20130515/11032823096/how-low-can-drones-go.shtml#c718</link>
<dc:creator><![CDATA[Richard]]></dc:creator>
<pubDate>Wed, 22 May 2013 10:53:13 PDT</pubDate>
<guid>http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20130515/11032823096/how-low-can-drones-go.shtml#c718</guid>
<content:encoded><![CDATA[In the UK the CAA rules state that model aircraft (i.e. drones) must not be flown:<br />
<br />
f) within 50 metres of any vessel, vehicle or structure which is not under the control of the person in charge of the aircraft;]]></content:encoded>
</item>
<item>
<title>Re: You may be next, Pirate Mike!</title>
<link>http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20130517/16464823123/swedish-prosecutor-claims-registrar-se-domains-being-accomplice-infringement-because-pirate-bay-domain.shtml#c908</link>
<dc:creator><![CDATA[Richard]]></dc:creator>
<pubDate>Tue, 21 May 2013 13:59:35 PDT</pubDate>
<guid>http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20130517/16464823123/swedish-prosecutor-claims-registrar-se-domains-being-accomplice-infringement-because-pirate-bay-domain.shtml#c908</guid>
<content:encoded><![CDATA[<i>your constant defense of KNOWN criminals like infringer-millionaire Dotcom of Mega;</i><br />
<br />
If he was being tried in the UK your post would be in contempt of court.]]></content:encoded>
</item>
<item>
<title>Re: Re: Yet again, Mike can't find a lower bound.</title>
<link>http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20130505/14372422951/court-finds-fantasy-stories-obscene.shtml#c898</link>
<dc:creator><![CDATA[Richard]]></dc:creator>
<pubDate>Tue, 21 May 2013 10:33:27 PDT</pubDate>
<guid>http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20130505/14372422951/court-finds-fantasy-stories-obscene.shtml#c898</guid>
<content:encoded><![CDATA[Why should a judge be an arbiter of artisitic merit?]]></content:encoded>
</item>
<item>
<title>Re: Re: Re: Re:</title>
<link>http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20130517/16464823123/swedish-prosecutor-claims-registrar-se-domains-being-accomplice-infringement-because-pirate-bay-domain.shtml#c892</link>
<dc:creator><![CDATA[Richard]]></dc:creator>
<pubDate>Tue, 21 May 2013 10:19:57 PDT</pubDate>
<guid>http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20130517/16464823123/swedish-prosecutor-claims-registrar-se-domains-being-accomplice-infringement-because-pirate-bay-domain.shtml#c892</guid>
<content:encoded><![CDATA[And - why should they refuse to register the pirate bay but register this site?<br />
<br />
<a href='http://piratesonline.go.com/' rel="nofollow" rel="nofollow">http://piratesonline.go.com/</a>]]></content:encoded>
</item>
<item>
<title>Simple Answer</title>
<link>http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20130516/18383623114/your-word-against-ours-how-fbis-no-electronic-recording-policy-rigs-game-destroys-its-credibility.shtml#c49</link>
<dc:creator><![CDATA[Richard]]></dc:creator>
<pubDate>Mon, 20 May 2013 09:21:08 PDT</pubDate>
<guid>http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20130516/18383623114/your-word-against-ours-how-fbis-no-electronic-recording-policy-rigs-game-destroys-its-credibility.shtml#c49</guid>
<content:encoded><![CDATA[Don't say anything.<br />
<br />
<a href='http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6wXkI4t7nuc' rel="nofollow" rel="nofollow">http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6wXkI4t7nuc</a>]]></content:encoded>
</item>
<item>
<title>Re:</title>
<link>http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20130517/08324323118/trade-group-representing-many-large-companies-claims-that-exceptions-blind-would-cast-aside-copyright.shtml#c440</link>
<dc:creator><![CDATA[Richard]]></dc:creator>
<pubDate>Mon, 20 May 2013 09:11:22 PDT</pubDate>
<guid>http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20130517/08324323118/trade-group-representing-many-large-companies-claims-that-exceptions-blind-would-cast-aside-copyright.shtml#c440</guid>
<content:encoded><![CDATA[<i> it's exactly the same situation where the blind get no relief from what they have to pay for a license for a TV that they cannot watch.</i><br />
<br />
Actually the do get relief.<br />
<br />
They get to pay half price (and since it covers the household there may be people who can watch covered by the license). Also if no one in the household can see then they may as well get a b/w tv and then the license is MUCH cheaper.<br />
<br />
So actually these big companies are a lot worse than public organisations like the BBC.]]></content:encoded>
</item>
<item>
<title>Re:</title>
<link>http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20130517/06185923116/rice-university-professor-skynets-gonna-take-ur-jerbs.shtml#c815</link>
<dc:creator><![CDATA[Richard]]></dc:creator>
<pubDate>Sun, 19 May 2013 13:50:57 PDT</pubDate>
<guid>http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20130517/06185923116/rice-university-professor-skynets-gonna-take-ur-jerbs.shtml#c815</guid>
<content:encoded><![CDATA[Huh <br />
<br />
What this amounts to is that robots will take over the world by coming round and doing our housework for us.<br />
<br />
This is only a threat because we haven't figured out how to hand out the pocket money fairly when we aren't doing the chores.]]></content:encoded>
</item>
<item>
<title>Re: Fixed for you.</title>
<link>http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20130517/06185923116/rice-university-professor-skynets-gonna-take-ur-jerbs.shtml#c792</link>
<dc:creator><![CDATA[Richard]]></dc:creator>
<pubDate>Sun, 19 May 2013 13:48:20 PDT</pubDate>
<guid>http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20130517/06185923116/rice-university-professor-skynets-gonna-take-ur-jerbs.shtml#c792</guid>
<content:encoded><![CDATA[What you miss is the general applicability. Each machine is successful in its own domain the difference with humans is that they invent the game.<br />
<br />
The machine we created solves the optimisation problem - but we still decide what the problem is.]]></content:encoded>
</item>
<item>
<title>Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:</title>
<link>http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20130517/06185923116/rice-university-professor-skynets-gonna-take-ur-jerbs.shtml#c776</link>
<dc:creator><![CDATA[Richard]]></dc:creator>
<pubDate>Sun, 19 May 2013 13:45:52 PDT</pubDate>
<guid>http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20130517/06185923116/rice-university-professor-skynets-gonna-take-ur-jerbs.shtml#c776</guid>
<content:encoded><![CDATA[Like the previous reply - you miss the point.<br />
<br />
The point is that we don't really know what intelligence is. We set up a problem - only to discover that the problem is susceptible to  a brute force approach. <br />
<br />
Actually Chess is solvable in principle simply with the rules of the game, a simple tree search algorithm and a sufficiently powerful computer. In the end that was the approach that prevailed. Attempts to play chess the way humans play the game proved to be futile.<br />
<br />
Unfortunately good chess playing programs are poor opponents from the entertainment point of view - but the internet solved that problem by making human opponents more available!]]></content:encoded>
</item>
<item>
<title>Re: Re: Re:</title>
<link>http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20130517/06185923116/rice-university-professor-skynets-gonna-take-ur-jerbs.shtml#c437</link>
<dc:creator><![CDATA[Richard]]></dc:creator>
<pubDate>Sat, 18 May 2013 11:14:11 PDT</pubDate>
<guid>http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20130517/06185923116/rice-university-professor-skynets-gonna-take-ur-jerbs.shtml#c437</guid>
<content:encoded><![CDATA[<i>RadioLab did a story about machines that learn. An example was that by watching a pendulum, it figured out f=ma. Elementary, sure, but it's something that took people a while to figure out.</i><br />
<br />
However it was set up to figure out pendulum equations so its achievement is no greater than that of the chess playing computers.]]></content:encoded>
</item>
<item>
<title>Re: Re: Re:</title>
<link>http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20130517/06185923116/rice-university-professor-skynets-gonna-take-ur-jerbs.shtml#c421</link>
<dc:creator><![CDATA[Richard]]></dc:creator>
<pubDate>Sat, 18 May 2013 11:06:48 PDT</pubDate>
<guid>http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20130517/06185923116/rice-university-professor-skynets-gonna-take-ur-jerbs.shtml#c421</guid>
<content:encoded><![CDATA[<i>and people used to be getting no nearer to heavier-than-air flight until, suddenly, they were nearer. </i><br />
You mean Stringfellow?]]></content:encoded>
</item>
<item>
<title>Re:</title>
<link>http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20130517/06185923116/rice-university-professor-skynets-gonna-take-ur-jerbs.shtml#c147</link>
<dc:creator><![CDATA[Richard]]></dc:creator>
<pubDate>Sat, 18 May 2013 05:40:13 PDT</pubDate>
<guid>http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20130517/06185923116/rice-university-professor-skynets-gonna-take-ur-jerbs.shtml#c147</guid>
<content:encoded><![CDATA[<i>There isn't anything that humans can do that machines are naturally incapable of doing, just things that we haven't yet figured out how to make machines do. </i><br />
<br />
Note the "we" in that sentence.<br />
<br />
My observation is that everything that we <i>thought</i> required "intelligence", e.g. chess, has turned out in practice to be susceptible to a brute force approach of one kind or another. We are still absolutely no nearer having a machine that is really intelligent - as defined by your own criterion "being able to figure out how to do things it can't yet do."]]></content:encoded>
</item>
<item>
<title>Re:</title>
<link>http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20130516/01413623104/one-simple-copyright-reform-idea-government-edicts-should-never-be-subject-to-copyright.shtml#c388</link>
<dc:creator><![CDATA[Richard]]></dc:creator>
<pubDate>Fri, 17 May 2013 01:58:56 PDT</pubDate>
<guid>http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20130516/01413623104/one-simple-copyright-reform-idea-government-edicts-should-never-be-subject-to-copyright.shtml#c388</guid>
<content:encoded><![CDATA[<i>If someone has a copyrighted work and an administrative agency adopts it as a standard by reference, that doesn't thrust the work into the public domain. </i><br />
<br />
The administrative agency should NEVER do this - because it is clearly an act of favouritism.<br />
<br />
So, by preventing such corruption this new law would have an extra  benefit!]]></content:encoded>
</item>
<item>
<title>Fermi Lab</title>
<link>http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20110315/12411713502/dailydirt-new-models-not-funding-science.shtml#c194</link>
<dc:creator><![CDATA[Richard]]></dc:creator>
<pubDate>Thu, 16 May 2013 07:54:52 PDT</pubDate>
<guid>http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20110315/12411713502/dailydirt-new-models-not-funding-science.shtml#c194</guid>
<content:encoded><![CDATA[I liked the answer given by the director of Fermi Lab to the question:<br />
<br />
Q. What does Fermi Lab contribute to the defence of the United States?<br />
<br />
A. It makes the United States worth defending!]]></content:encoded>
</item>
<item>
<title>Re: Re: Re: Shocking</title>
<link>http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20130510/03475523032/copyright-holders-will-define-details-uks-orphan-works-bill-not-public.shtml#c685</link>
<dc:creator><![CDATA[Richard]]></dc:creator>
<pubDate>Wed, 15 May 2013 11:15:49 PDT</pubDate>
<guid>http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20130510/03475523032/copyright-holders-will-define-details-uks-orphan-works-bill-not-public.shtml#c685</guid>
<content:encoded><![CDATA[<i>The thing is Ninja that the public is one of the stakeholders, and they are represented at the table by the politicians they elected or the people those politicians appoint to do the job. </i><br />
<br />
So, according to you, rightsholders and the people that run their organisations like MAFIAA etc don't have a vote. LAst time I looked they still did so I conclude that they are <i>also</i> represented by the politicians and so shouldn't get another voice around the table.]]></content:encoded>
</item>
<item>
<title>Re:</title>
<link>http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20130510/03475523032/copyright-holders-will-define-details-uks-orphan-works-bill-not-public.shtml#c679</link>
<dc:creator><![CDATA[Richard]]></dc:creator>
<pubDate>Wed, 15 May 2013 11:09:46 PDT</pubDate>
<guid>http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20130510/03475523032/copyright-holders-will-define-details-uks-orphan-works-bill-not-public.shtml#c679</guid>
<content:encoded><![CDATA[<i>I can walk outside and yell hey creator of whatever have you orphaned your project? If they do not respond I can steal their work.</i><br />
<br />
You forget that - in this proposed law- you still have to PAY for the work so that if the rightsholder turns up later they will get the money.<br />
<br />
This is only concerned with preventing the copyright system from blocking the creation of derivative works by default.]]></content:encoded>
</item>
<item>
<title>Re: Re: But you forget, sir...</title>
<link>http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20130510/03475523032/copyright-holders-will-define-details-uks-orphan-works-bill-not-public.shtml#c672</link>
<dc:creator><![CDATA[Richard]]></dc:creator>
<pubDate>Wed, 15 May 2013 11:07:13 PDT</pubDate>
<guid>http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20130510/03475523032/copyright-holders-will-define-details-uks-orphan-works-bill-not-public.shtml#c672</guid>
<content:encoded><![CDATA[In particular you forget that rightsholders are also a part of the public and therefore (by your argument) should not need any special representation.]]></content:encoded>
</item>
<item>
<title>Re: But you forget, sir...</title>
<link>http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20130510/03475523032/copyright-holders-will-define-details-uks-orphan-works-bill-not-public.shtml#c640</link>
<dc:creator><![CDATA[Richard]]></dc:creator>
<pubDate>Wed, 15 May 2013 11:04:07 PDT</pubDate>
<guid>http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20130510/03475523032/copyright-holders-will-define-details-uks-orphan-works-bill-not-public.shtml#c640</guid>
<content:encoded><![CDATA[<i>That's what the politicians are there for. They are the ones who are supposed to be representing the public and the commons.</i><br />
<br />
And you forget , sir that your argument has been made before on this forum and roundly debunked on amny occasions.]]></content:encoded>
</item>
<item>
<title>Re: Re: Bitcoin is essentially a pyramid scheme.</title>
<link>http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20130515/08141123095/homeland-securitys-ice-group-cuts-off-dwolla-bitcoin-transfers.shtml#c229</link>
<dc:creator><![CDATA[Richard]]></dc:creator>
<pubDate>Wed, 15 May 2013 10:29:53 PDT</pubDate>
<guid>http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20130515/08141123095/homeland-securitys-ice-group-cuts-off-dwolla-bitcoin-transfers.shtml#c229</guid>
<content:encoded><![CDATA[<i>On this, I will agree with you, to an extent. BitCoin suffers from a problem: It is extremely volatile. Its value fluctuates too much, making it terrible for storing value. </i><br />
<br />
No Bitcoin is not volatile. The <i>dollar</i> is volatile - when measured against Bitcoin...]]></content:encoded>
</item>
</channel>
</rss>