Re: Rivers *are* people
No, Rylands v Fletcher 1868. flooding river is a natural efflux and thus non actionable.
Your Neighbours tree perhaps, certainly his mine flooding and spilling under your fence....
283 posts • joined 18 Jan 2010
'In keeping with our values to leverage the power of technology to resolve societal challenges, we will continuously develop and expand strategic products in our consumer electronics division with defence-grade security, purpose-built, with innovative and intuitive business tools designed for a new world'
somone laboured hard to throw these words out.... and it shows.
Thing really is, Can the AI have all the legal atributes of a natural human being? In a very real sense this would be tantamount to (partly) giving the AI human atributes, in this case to 'own' interlectual property.
I'd like to see the AI assert its rights, or indeed give instructions to legal counsel to action its rights, or for that matter assign its rights to another, agree to share the patent with another. Didnt think so,
Also, if the bloke bringing the action on behalf of the AI has 'control' of the AI the AI would be something of a slave for bloke at his command, then surely the AI could have no rights as but if the Court has decided the right to assert interlectual property can be said to be 'owned (in part) by the AI Then what?
The Law is an ass, but here what is needed is amendment to legislation that has been advanced past by the modern world to decide if mathmatics can be described as human. this AI is a bit of mathmatics nothing more. get your abacus out, in fact train a zoo of monkeys to get their abacuses out, wait a few hundred years and then decide if the bit of paper they write it all out on is sentient. might be a ultra low bandwidth discussion, remenber it's a principle of law not reality that is defective...
Well, no not quite, Ohain like Whittle went for the centrifugal commpressor not because it was the best but because it was expected to be workable and within reach. True the Bmw and Jumo axial engines were technically better, however they were also extra-destructo-fire-bang machines wheras the Whittle engines were developed to the point of 100hr overhaul rather than the feeble 25hr maybe (if the pilots and ground crew didnt screw up engine handling) of the German axial engines. Believe it or not, German metallurgy was not up to the task, possibly due to war shortages but thats another discussion...
Now can anyone guess why the Me 262 had mildly swept wings?
From inside, the problems seem mostly to be the outside looking in, certainly it does not seem to suffer the afternoon blues like Teams does.
The Court side interface is clunky and has an annoying habit of having a nap and becoming unresponsive mid session.
Oh and i nearly forgot the pathetic and near inability to filter out howl-round feedback, how did i nearly forget that!
Still, Teams and Zoom are more familiar to general users, perhaps that very familiarity is skewing the responses...
Not that i'm defending CVP
Biting the hand that feeds IT © 1998–2021