I was pretty disappointed that the Pro doesn't have Office on it though ... have to say ... did not even think about it.  I assumed it would be included.

3 minutes ago, cbae wrote

*snip*

It's not "when". It's still very much "if". That's why we're having this dialog now, before it comes to pass. You're acting as if it's a foregone conclusion that there are going to be recording devices in every square inch of society. Even if we have such technological capability, we really ought to be asking "why?".

To me it is a forgone conclusion, yes, and I don't think anything is going to stop it.  Why?  History, virtual time travel, truth, protection, sharing information ... lots of reasons why.  You need the data before you can even know the full benefits that knowledge that data will bring.  And consequences.

Cloaking devices are the only answer.  Good thing there's like, a million kids who all grew up on Harry Potter working on that stuff now.

58 seconds ago, figuerres wrote

*snip*

wha .... um well a "memory" normally when I see that word or hear that word in general use means something from the human brain.   digital recordings stored on some form of computer system are not "memories" they are files that have data.

so I do not think this is about rights to anyone's "memories" , it's audio and video created my the use of a device and then what rights they should have to them

If you disagree that computer memory is an extension of human memory, then why are these memories made if not for humans to use?  It is not going to be far off, that people will have computer memory integrated into their biological memories.

3 minutes ago, davewill wrote

@Richard.Hein: Choice is key.  Unfortunately some not so nice people take information bypassing choice.  Choice has consequences as it always has.  But when others take the information without your choice who suffers the consequences now?  What happens to the balance?

I'm afraid you don't have a choice when it comes to allowing other people into your presence in public places nor do you have a choice whether they look at you or remember your face, or publish pictures of you if you are in a public place.  Even if you are in private with another individual, I think we've probably all had pictures that were less than flattering make it online, even if it's just a bad photo, and it's annoying, but what can you do?

1 minute ago, cbae wrote

@Richard.Hein: I don't think the issue has to do with whether or not an individual has a right to recall past memories, perfectly or otherwise. The issue has to do with the ease in which those memories can be distributed to others.

Honestly, I don't like the idea of people recording and publishing embarrassing or incriminating stuff about me, anymore than anyone else would, but how could it ever be anything else than a culture of mutual fear of reprisal that would ever stop it?  Unless you could put some kind of protection that requires everyone you are recording to give explicit permission for you to transfer some "memory", how could you ever stop it?  If our children and grandchildren grow up in an "always recording" state, then they probably won't even care.  The only plausible deniability that something happened would be to claim it's edited or CGI, and then the tools should be so good, who knows? 

EDIT:

Let's specifically think about memory sharing.  How could preventing certain memories from being shared ever be a right thing to do?  If you share a secret, you trust a person not to tell.  If they break that trust, then you don't trust them again.  You flag them as a betrayer of trust and everyone knows. 

If you watch a movie and share that memory with perfect recall, such that it's equivalent to another person watching that movie themselves, what right does the copyright holder have to your memory or your right to share that memory?

10 minutes ago, Harlequin wrote

http://channel9.msdn.com/Events/windowsazure/Windows-AzureConf-2013

This page will be updated once we get close to the stream?

Surely it will ... hehe, just forgot about timezones.

19 minutes ago, Charles wrote

@Richard.Hein: It's 7:42AM in Seattle... I'd imagine it kicks off at 9AM.
C

LOL, of course ... the email notification I got says, "Windows
Azure Conf is Running Right Now!", so I was trying to join. 

In any case, I haven't seen any official numbers for this years conference posted anywhere.  Does anyone know how many tickets are being sold this time?

3 hours ago, Harlequin wrote

...

And companies also lose out, because if I remember right, conferences like these can go towards a Gold partnership.

I don't think that's true anymore, and it only applied to the Worldwide Partner Conference.