Slashdot Mirror

I really enjoyed Ben Rich's book on Skunk Works. One thing that stood out to me is that the real reason we're still flying the U-2 is that Dick Chaney killed the SR-71 program, which was kind of an evolution of the U-2 program. Chaney argued that spy satellites replaced the need for airplanes to do surveillance. Turns out the reason he said that was because he was associated with companies that were into spy satellites and he didn't want the SR-71 to compete for that market. Such a shame that politics played such a large role in the neutering of America's capabilities. Most sad of all was that McNamara ordered the destruction of all plans and tooling for the SR-71. Even if the SR-71 was too expensive to fly, that's still a real crime that much of what was learned in that program has been lost.

The U-2 is probably much much cheaper to operate than the SR-71, so it's possible the SR-71 would have died anyway. But certainly politics played a huge role in its demise.

Sadly, in the current political climate it's doubtful Skunk Works would ever produce anything like the U-2, the SR-71, and the stealth fighter. Maybe it's a blessing though. The government seems hell bent on spying on even American citizens. I dunno.

http://www.blackbirds.net/sr71/fallblackbird.html
https://www.google.com/search?q=Skunk+Works%3A+A+Personal+Memoir+of+My+Years+of+Lockheed

Some freelance/flexible workplace websites: 1) flexjobs - job site offering over 50 career categories and jobs ranging from entry-level to executive, freelance to full-time. http://www.flexjobs.com/About.aspx 2) Elance and oDesk - online employment sites for freelancers/contractors. https://www.elance.com/q/about-elance and https://www.odesk.com/ 3) Mom Corps - offers part-time, flexible work for working moms http://www.momcorps.com/home.aspx Also check out info on http://sites.google.com/site/techcareerreentry about networking and online classes. (It's aimed at tech career re-entry, but also has info useful for your situation.) Linux groups often are good sources for info on work opportunities, often small short-term projects are advertised on the email list for a couple Linux groups I'm a member of.

Bradley Horowitz tries his best, but at the end of the day he has to do what that piece of shit Vic Gundotra guy wants. It is really sad when you think that this idiot singlehandedly managed to ruin mobile and social.

--
There is a new arrogant asshole in town.

Wrong.

My money is on the exfoliation of a huge strip of coastal land followed by massive runoff as the culprit. There's still 20 million tons of debris floating. Imagine how much more either dissolved or sank.

https://www.google.com/search?q=japanese+tsunami+ocean+debris&hl=en&safe=off&client=firefox-a&hs=23L&rls=org.mozilla:en-US:official&prmd=imvns&source=lnms&tbm=isch&ei=g38jT9K2II74gAf_tvzxCA&sa=X&oi=mode_link&ct=mode&cd=2&ved=0CBYQ_AUoAQ&biw=1343&bih=891

that should be why the sea life around the place is dying.

https://www.google.com/search?sourceid=chrome&ie=UTF-8&q=sea+life+dying+around+fukushima

Newt was not the first to propose an ambitious space project.

Mars, bitches!

And this, my fellow Americans, is why we need to have our first real black president.

Well, you could always try RT:

http://rt.com/search/?q=Soyuz&filter=news

(for those who don't get the joke -- RT is Russia Today, an English language news program which tends to bash the U.S. in general, and be borderline Russian propoganda. ... and right now, they don't have anything on this incident, but they'd probably have an interesting spin if/when they put it up.)

Of course, anyone who really cared about other coverage can just put 'Soyuz' into Google News:

http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&gl=us&tbm=nws&q=Soyuz

Unless you're boycotting Google, and then you can just go to space.com:

http://www.space.com/14381-russian-soyuz-spacecraft-cracks-march-launch.html

You know who also keeps ricin recipes? The USPTO. Hop to it.

Brawndo! It's got what plants crave! It's got ELECTROLYTES!

http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-4056644458485033927

http://translate.google.com/translate?hl=en&sl=fr&tl=en&u=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.kader-arif.fr%2Factualites.php%3Factualite_id%3D147

Original link: http://www.kader-arif.fr/actualites.php?actualite_id=147

In my humble opinion is to replace "tech" and "geek" in your idea of a wedding with "love" and "heart". That's what I believe a wedding should be about.

So maybe you like to code... How about some minimalism? Why not leave the bloat out of your weddding. Forget about thematics, and just don't include the nightmare library so you don't actually have to worry about which way you are going to fold your napkins.

So you like electronics... Maybe you could make your own version of a blinkenlights wall or print some miscellaneous objects with your 3d printer so you can give each guest an object and then match dance partners togheter by calling your phone's random function to match objects? But whatever project you chose, just don't let it take too much time and focus out of the important stuff: having fun spending some time with your lover.

So maybe you like to design UIs and open source and freedom... Why not leave the glitters and the cornflower blue obssessions out of your weddding... Just find a pleasant palette to work from and don't go nuts about it. Forcing bride maid's to dye their italian leather shoes and guests to wear very specific and/or particularly hard to find garments is about anything but freedom. Let your guests decide what to wear, what gift to bring, in short let them be themselves, let them bring their own little color to the canvas of your event.

So maybe you like the environnement and the planet... Know that most orchids people use in their weddings are imported. Why not keep your carbon credits for an actual wedding trip instead of spending them on flowers. Spend an afternoon in the big blue room with your soon-to-be wife and gather some wild flowers together. If you do things simply, you will not need to worry about not having time to do this.

Just my 2 cents. Maybe you won't get instant success from following this guide, but at the end of the day you might very well end up saying "this was the best day of my life" without having to force a wry smile on your face... :)

In my humble opinion is to replace "tech" and "geek" in your idea of a wedding with "love" and "heart". That's what I believe a wedding should be about.

So maybe you like to code... How about some minimalism? Why not leave the bloat out of your weddding. Forget about thematics, and just don't include the nightmare library so you don't actually have to worry about which way you are going to fold your napkins.

So you like electronics... Maybe you could make your own version of a blinkenlights wall or print some miscellaneous objects with your 3d printer so you can give each guest an object and then match dance partners togheter by calling your phone's random function to match objects? But whatever project you chose, just don't let it take too much time and focus out of the important stuff: having fun spending some time with your lover.

So maybe you like to design UIs and open source and freedom... Why not leave the glitters and the cornflower blue obssessions out of your weddding... Just find a pleasant palette to work from and don't go nuts about it. Forcing bride maid's to dye their italian leather shoes and guests to wear very specific and/or particularly hard to find garments is about anything but freedom. Let your guests decide what to wear, what gift to bring, in short let them be themselves, let them bring their own little color to the canvas of your event.

So maybe you like the environnement and the planet... Know that most orchids people use in their weddings are imported. Why not keep your carbon credits for an actual wedding trip instead of spending them on flowers. Spend an afternoon in the big blue room with your soon-to-be wife and gather some wild flowers together. If you do things simply, you will not need to worry about not having time to do this.

Just my 2 cents. Maybe you won't get instant success from following this guide, but at the end of the day you might very well end up saying "this was the best day of my life" without having to force a wry smile on your face... :)

In my humble opinion is to replace "tech" and "geek" in your idea of a wedding with "love" and "heart". That's what I believe a wedding should be about.

So maybe you like to code... How about some minimalism? Why not leave the bloat out of your weddding. Forget about thematics, and just don't include the nightmare library so you don't actually have to worry about which way you are going to fold your napkins.

So you like electronics... Maybe you could make your own version of a blinkenlights wall or print some miscellaneous objects with your 3d printer so you can give each guest an object and then match dance partners togheter by calling your phone's random function to match objects? But whatever project you chose, just don't let it take too much time and focus out of the important stuff: having fun spending some time with your lover.

So maybe you like to design UIs and open source and freedom... Why not leave the glitters and the cornflower blue obssessions out of your weddding... Just find a pleasant palette to work from and don't go nuts about it. Forcing bride maid's to dye their italian leather shoes and guests to wear very specific and/or particularly hard to find garments is about anything but freedom. Let your guests decide what to wear, what gift to bring, in short let them be themselves, let them bring their own little color to the canvas of your event.

So maybe you like the environnement and the planet... Know that most orchids people use in their weddings are imported. Why not keep your carbon credits for an actual wedding trip instead of spending them on flowers. Spend an afternoon in the big blue room with your soon-to-be wife and gather some wild flowers together. If you do things simply, you will not need to worry about not having time to do this.

Just my 2 cents. Maybe you won't get instant success from following this guide, but at the end of the day you might very well end up saying "this was the best day of my life" without having to force a wry smile on your face... :)

Japan did produce several new products in the 90s such as blue/violet/green/white LEDs, hybrid cars, etc. But they lost some of their thunder when they gave up the so called lower end of the electronics market to the Koreans and Taiwanese. They never quite recovered from it. This means all consumer electronics are tendentiously being manufactured by corporations from those countries.

There is nothing stopping China from increasing domestic consumption in the long term. In fact they have increasingly been increasing their internal consumption. You can even buy overpriced pieces of glorified junk like the iPhone in there.

You are absolutely right. If there is no threat, there is no job. So they will make themselves worthwhile any way they can.

    Consider the current "Terrorists want to blow up your plane with binary explosives!". You can't carry a soda on a plane, unless you purchased from a TSA approved vendor inside of the security perimeter. And dear god, a mother can't bring a bottle of breast milk.

    Even lighters were banned for a while, but after enough complaints, they again allowed them.

    Terrorists must be anyone who isn't an old rich white guy. If they talk funny, look different, or behave differently due to cultural differences, they must be terrorists. The evil enemy that all Americans must fear.

    The terrorist behind every Bush fear subsided. Then we killed the leader of the terrorists we were told to fear.

    They are trying to find the next threat. If there isn't a threat, there isn't a need for DHS, is there? Those new threats will keep coming. They may be foreign nationals with a misguided grudge. They may even be regular, but insane, Americans.

    If they don't get enough real threats, they'll overstate some minor threat. They weren't clear what the real threat was. It could have been a local kid, who bounced through an off-shore server, who managed to log into a control box.

    My question is, why the hell would they leave those controls accessible by the Internet in general? Why was it connected to the Internet at all? Assuming there was a good reason for it, why weren't they restricted to select IPs? Rather than freaking out and blaming "the terrorists", why don't we focus on the problems like "our infrastructure shouldn't be accessible by the whole Internet".

    Hell, when I stick a server online with a previously unused IP, I get people trying to hit it in no time. If you want some entertainment, put an older unpatched distribution up with root logins enabled, and set the password to "password". I'd give it 10 minutes before it had new people running it.

    Lets not forget who the new terrorists are. All those people who agree with, or fall into the category of 99%. Domestic terrorism is our greatest threat. They must be stopped. We're going to need bigger prisons and more guys with badges and guns.

    Oh wait.. I forgot the right line. "I trust our government. Terrorists are behind every Bush. Protect me government. I'll give up any rights you ask me to."

The Energy department should not have wasted a dime of public money on a specialized search engine built into their website. Yet it looks like they did just that. Government agencies should focus on getting the documents posted in standard formats (e.g., PDF) and then let commercial engines do all the work. You get bonus points if you mark the documents with key metadata (title, authors, abstract, date), but even without that, most commercial search engines can find lots. I'm not the first to note that, several articles have noted this.

If an agency just HAVE to have a search engine on the page, they can just reuse a commercial one. For example, if you want to reuse Google, just follow the instructions here: http://www.google.com/sitesearch/ which just inserts a few lines of HTML. From then on, all done. You can see an example on my website front page at www.dwheeler.com. I don't actually do the searching... I just redirect to Google. And users don't have to use Google, they can use any search engine they find convenient.

Look, I've told you about this before. If you're not going to pick a relevant strip please pick a different one; there's even a search box provided.

Thanks for responding.

I can't remember what version I used at the time, probably 3.6, or whatever came right after that. I tried the game in FF 9, and it wouldn't work at all (possibly my fault, and I don't really have the time to debug it right now). But I tried the box2dweb demo, and it ran much better. There was none of the jerkiness I saw before.

So yeah, it did improve.

Fuck Austria. Fuck Australia. Fuck Belgium. Fuck Bulgaria. Fuck Canada. Fuck the Czech Republic. Fuck Denmark. Fuck Finland. Fuck France. Fuck Greece. Fuck Hungary. Fuck Ireland. Fuck Italy. Fuck Japan. Fuck Latvia. Fuck Lithuania. Fuck Luxemburg. Fuck Malta. Fuck Morocco. Fuck New Zealand. Fuck Poland. Fuck Portugal. Fuck Romania. Fuck Singapore. Fuck Slovenia. Fuck South Korea. Fuck Spain. Fuck Sweden. Fuck the UK. Fuck the USA.

That's a lot of fucking. I hope you brought enough condoms.

More seriously, don't confuse the countries for the few dickheads in those countries who are fucking things up. I've been to a good handful-and-some of the 30 countries you've listed, and most of the people I've met have been decent sorts.

Narrowing the field to just the assholes in charge, the people in these countries responsible for drafting and then signing ACTA generally look a lot like this guy. I don't know about your preferences, *I* certainly don't want to fuck 30 different versions of that.

Now, if you had instead said, "beat them upside the head (and elsewhere) with a cluebat until they personally and intimately understand the extent of the damage they're doing to everyone else", I'd be booking my flights right now.

Looking at the two pictures, they are different in:
1) location (one on stairs by the bridge, or even on the road on the side of the Thames)
2) lens effect (the second one has a stronger perspective -- it is closer and uses a wider-angle lens)
3) lighting and contrast (upper one taken on an overcast day with muted shadows, lower one has the contrast pushed and/or a clearer day with stronger shadows)
4) Big Ben looks different (squarish facade in the second one on the clock face, probably related to maintenance)
5) upper one has an ornate lamp post visible, the lower one doesn't.

And, hell, in terms of aesthetics, I just plain like the perspective in the lower one better, even though the resolution of the image itself is too low. The bus isn't obscured by the railing of the bridge and by people, and it's more the focus of attention.

I'm not even an art/photography critic and I can see LOADS of differences, including in the artistic composition of the photo. About the only parallel in these images is subject (Big Ben + bus) and the (rather obvious) idea of highlighting the bus by leaving it in colour, which is a pretty standard technique for emphasis. Even leaving aside what's wrong with the principle of being able to copyright an idea like this, is the guy demanding the license really claiming to be the very first person to come up with this artistic idea, and therefore expecting to be able to demand licenses for life + 75 years?

The judge is freaking nuts.

You're right. There's obvious copyright infringement in these photographs. We should stop taking photos of the Pyramids and the Eiffel tower too, just in case. Wouldn't want to get sued.

You're right. There's obvious copyright infringement in these photographs. We should stop taking photos of the Pyramids and the Eiffel tower too, just in case. Wouldn't want to get sued.

"But what they cannot have is a southbound Routemaster on Westminster Bridge"

They don't. Westminster Bridge runs East-West.

OK, have a look. Looks like six similar shots on the first line alone. I very much doubt that the plaintiff was the first to ever do that and I very much doubt that he'll be the last.

If the plumber wants too much money to put in a new toilet, I'll do it myself. If the photographer wants too much money for yet another shot of a bus with Big Ben in the background, I'll take one myself.

As for the Linux case, how about if they do what the photographer did and have a look at the ABI and make a brand new implementation of it (with a few twists) to produce yet another Unix like kernel?

Also, the second photo was intentionally made to avoid licensing fees from using the original.

original, you say?

I see lots of prior art on that google image page...

The judge is an idiot.

Also, the second photo was intentionally made to avoid licensing fees from using the original.

original, you say?

Now there are some technically legal / illegal cases even some times with them. I see a lot of people do technically illegal moves near them. And there have been changes do to deaths on how the lights are setup in the area. Let me talk about some local area lights / crossing.

People start to move when the gates are going but be for they are all the way up / lights off.

1st off generally along northwest highway there are a lot of linked crossing but a common thing is the NO left / right trun light ups that come on when the gates are on now after and at times before the preemption sequence to allow traffic queued up on the tracks an opportunity to clear the tracks before the train arrives. northwest highway gets a green but cars still make right and left moves that the light up sings say NO to (there is room for 1-2 cars per lane) is technically illegal also right turners some times stack up in the right lane waiting for train to pass and technically that may be illegal.

Now on to some crossing that a auto car must be able to handle as there are not all the same.

http://maps.google.com/maps?daddr=42.039648,-87.883614&hl=en&ll=42.039497,-87.882466&spn=0.002948,0.006845&sll=42.039497,-87.883485&sspn=0.002948,0.008889&gl=us&mra=mift&mrsp=1&sz=18&t=h&z=18&iwloc=ddw1

This is common but just down the tacks there is a slimier setup with the lights but it's not the same in how it works.

http://maps.google.com/maps?daddr=42.039648,-87.883614&hl=en&ll=42.056582,-87.920451&spn=0.002947,0.006845&sll=42.039497,-87.883485&sspn=0.002948,0.008889&gl=us&mra=mift&mrsp=1&sz=18&t=h&z=18

Hear on Mt. Prospect you only get the left arrow before the tacks when the gates are down after preemption sequence the arrow to trun left is ONLY to trun on to prospect ave and the one after the tracks is only for the preemption sequence.

http://maps.google.com/maps?daddr=42.039648,-87.883614&hl=en&ll=42.062652,-87.935013&spn=0.001474,0.003422&sll=42.039497,-87.883485&sspn=0.002948,0.008889&gl=us&mra=mift&mrsp=1&sz=18&t=h&z=19

at Emerson and prospect ave there is no stop sign for the side coming over tracks and all other sites do have one.

Over at prospect ave and main they added a LEFT ON A arrow only to the prospect to main trun going over the tracks after some deaths. On the other side there are a lot of lights as well and a auto car may get confused there.

http://maps.google.com/maps?daddr=42.039648,-87.883614&hl=en&ll=42.01878,-87.88831&spn=0.001483,0.003422&sll=42.039497,-87.883485&sspn=0.002948,0.008889&gl=us&mra=mift&mrsp=1&sz=18&t=h&z=19

Is a very odd crossing in where you have a stop sign and a traffic light both in effect at same time on the side street side of the tracks go to (street view)

don't for get the 1995 Fox River Grove bus–train collision a auto car better be able to run a red to get out of the way of a train if need (As the light can be slow to give the preemption sequence due to poor timings)

Now there are some technically legal / illegal cases even some times with them. I see a lot of people do technically illegal moves near them. And there have been changes do to deaths on how the lights are setup in the area. Let me talk about some local area lights / crossing.

People start to move when the gates are going but be for they are all the way up / lights off.

1st off generally along northwest highway there are a lot of linked crossing but a common thing is the NO left / right trun light ups that come on when the gates are on now after and at times before the preemption sequence to allow traffic queued up on the tracks an opportunity to clear the tracks before the train arrives. northwest highway gets a green but cars still make right and left moves that the light up sings say NO to (there is room for 1-2 cars per lane) is technically illegal also right turners some times stack up in the right lane waiting for train to pass and technically that may be illegal.

Now on to some crossing that a auto car must be able to handle as there are not all the same.

http://maps.google.com/maps?daddr=42.039648,-87.883614&hl=en&ll=42.039497,-87.882466&spn=0.002948,0.006845&sll=42.039497,-87.883485&sspn=0.002948,0.008889&gl=us&mra=mift&mrsp=1&sz=18&t=h&z=18&iwloc=ddw1

This is common but just down the tacks there is a slimier setup with the lights but it's not the same in how it works.

http://maps.google.com/maps?daddr=42.039648,-87.883614&hl=en&ll=42.056582,-87.920451&spn=0.002947,0.006845&sll=42.039497,-87.883485&sspn=0.002948,0.008889&gl=us&mra=mift&mrsp=1&sz=18&t=h&z=18

Hear on Mt. Prospect you only get the left arrow before the tacks when the gates are down after preemption sequence the arrow to trun left is ONLY to trun on to prospect ave and the one after the tracks is only for the preemption sequence.

http://maps.google.com/maps?daddr=42.039648,-87.883614&hl=en&ll=42.062652,-87.935013&spn=0.001474,0.003422&sll=42.039497,-87.883485&sspn=0.002948,0.008889&gl=us&mra=mift&mrsp=1&sz=18&t=h&z=19

at Emerson and prospect ave there is no stop sign for the side coming over tracks and all other sites do have one.

Over at prospect ave and main they added a LEFT ON A arrow only to the prospect to main trun going over the tracks after some deaths. On the other side there are a lot of lights as well and a auto car may get confused there.

http://maps.google.com/maps?daddr=42.039648,-87.883614&hl=en&ll=42.01878,-87.88831&spn=0.001483,0.003422&sll=42.039497,-87.883485&sspn=0.002948,0.008889&gl=us&mra=mift&mrsp=1&sz=18&t=h&z=19

Is a very odd crossing in where you have a stop sign and a traffic light both in effect at same time on the side street side of the tracks go to (street view)

don't for get the 1995 Fox River Grove bus–train collision a auto car better be able to run a red to get out of the way of a train if need (As the light can be slow to give the preemption sequence due to poor timings)

Now there are some technically legal / illegal cases even some times with them. I see a lot of people do technically illegal moves near them. And there have been changes do to deaths on how the lights are setup in the area. Let me talk about some local area lights / crossing.

People start to move when the gates are going but be for they are all the way up / lights off.

1st off generally along northwest highway there are a lot of linked crossing but a common thing is the NO left / right trun light ups that come on when the gates are on now after and at times before the preemption sequence to allow traffic queued up on the tracks an opportunity to clear the tracks before the train arrives. northwest highway gets a green but cars still make right and left moves that the light up sings say NO to (there is room for 1-2 cars per lane) is technically illegal also right turners some times stack up in the right lane waiting for train to pass and technically that may be illegal.

Now on to some crossing that a auto car must be able to handle as there are not all the same.

http://maps.google.com/maps?daddr=42.039648,-87.883614&hl=en&ll=42.039497,-87.882466&spn=0.002948,0.006845&sll=42.039497,-87.883485&sspn=0.002948,0.008889&gl=us&mra=mift&mrsp=1&sz=18&t=h&z=18&iwloc=ddw1

This is common but just down the tacks there is a slimier setup with the lights but it's not the same in how it works.

http://maps.google.com/maps?daddr=42.039648,-87.883614&hl=en&ll=42.056582,-87.920451&spn=0.002947,0.006845&sll=42.039497,-87.883485&sspn=0.002948,0.008889&gl=us&mra=mift&mrsp=1&sz=18&t=h&z=18

Hear on Mt. Prospect you only get the left arrow before the tacks when the gates are down after preemption sequence the arrow to trun left is ONLY to trun on to prospect ave and the one after the tracks is only for the preemption sequence.

http://maps.google.com/maps?daddr=42.039648,-87.883614&hl=en&ll=42.062652,-87.935013&spn=0.001474,0.003422&sll=42.039497,-87.883485&sspn=0.002948,0.008889&gl=us&mra=mift&mrsp=1&sz=18&t=h&z=19

at Emerson and prospect ave there is no stop sign for the side coming over tracks and all other sites do have one.

Over at prospect ave and main they added a LEFT ON A arrow only to the prospect to main trun going over the tracks after some deaths. On the other side there are a lot of lights as well and a auto car may get confused there.

http://maps.google.com/maps?daddr=42.039648,-87.883614&hl=en&ll=42.01878,-87.88831&spn=0.001483,0.003422&sll=42.039497,-87.883485&sspn=0.002948,0.008889&gl=us&mra=mift&mrsp=1&sz=18&t=h&z=19

Is a very odd crossing in where you have a stop sign and a traffic light both in effect at same time on the side street side of the tracks go to (street view)

don't for get the 1995 Fox River Grove bus–train collision a auto car better be able to run a red to get out of the way of a train if need (As the light can be slow to give the preemption sequence due to poor timings)

Now there are some technically legal / illegal cases even some times with them. I see a lot of people do technically illegal moves near them. And there have been changes do to deaths on how the lights are setup in the area. Let me talk about some local area lights / crossing.

People start to move when the gates are going but be for they are all the way up / lights off.

1st off generally along northwest highway there are a lot of linked crossing but a common thing is the NO left / right trun light ups that come on when the gates are on now after and at times before the preemption sequence to allow traffic queued up on the tracks an opportunity to clear the tracks before the train arrives. northwest highway gets a green but cars still make right and left moves that the light up sings say NO to (there is room for 1-2 cars per lane) is technically illegal also right turners some times stack up in the right lane waiting for train to pass and technically that may be illegal.

Now on to some crossing that a auto car must be able to handle as there are not all the same.

http://maps.google.com/maps?daddr=42.039648,-87.883614&hl=en&ll=42.039497,-87.882466&spn=0.002948,0.006845&sll=42.039497,-87.883485&sspn=0.002948,0.008889&gl=us&mra=mift&mrsp=1&sz=18&t=h&z=18&iwloc=ddw1

This is common but just down the tacks there is a slimier setup with the lights but it's not the same in how it works.

http://maps.google.com/maps?daddr=42.039648,-87.883614&hl=en&ll=42.056582,-87.920451&spn=0.002947,0.006845&sll=42.039497,-87.883485&sspn=0.002948,0.008889&gl=us&mra=mift&mrsp=1&sz=18&t=h&z=18

Hear on Mt. Prospect you only get the left arrow before the tacks when the gates are down after preemption sequence the arrow to trun left is ONLY to trun on to prospect ave and the one after the tracks is only for the preemption sequence.

http://maps.google.com/maps?daddr=42.039648,-87.883614&hl=en&ll=42.062652,-87.935013&spn=0.001474,0.003422&sll=42.039497,-87.883485&sspn=0.002948,0.008889&gl=us&mra=mift&mrsp=1&sz=18&t=h&z=19

at Emerson and prospect ave there is no stop sign for the side coming over tracks and all other sites do have one.

Over at prospect ave and main they added a LEFT ON A arrow only to the prospect to main trun going over the tracks after some deaths. On the other side there are a lot of lights as well and a auto car may get confused there.

http://maps.google.com/maps?daddr=42.039648,-87.883614&hl=en&ll=42.01878,-87.88831&spn=0.001483,0.003422&sll=42.039497,-87.883485&sspn=0.002948,0.008889&gl=us&mra=mift&mrsp=1&sz=18&t=h&z=19

Is a very odd crossing in where you have a stop sign and a traffic light both in effect at same time on the side street side of the tracks go to (street view)

don't for get the 1995 Fox River Grove bus–train collision a auto car better be able to run a red to get out of the way of a train if need (As the light can be slow to give the preemption sequence due to poor timings)

Cheeck the pictures https://www.google.com/search?q=renault+zoom&hl=en&safe=off&tbm=isch

http://support.google.com/websearch/bin/answer.py?hl=en&p=g_verb&answer=1734130 verbatim tool. Use that and you get Google of old.

It's official: iOS now has more marketshare than Android. Reuters reports that Apple completely erased Android's marketshare lead, confirming earlier reports by both Nielsen and NPD. Over 150 Android smartphones couldn't outcompete the iPhone 4S. With 37 million iPhones sold last quarter, Apple is the largest smartphone marker, and their profits exceed Google’s entire revenue, $13 billion to $10.6 billion. Finally, with 15 million iPads sold last quarter, the tablet market is now larger than the entire desktop PC market.

The clock is ticking, Fandroids.

Funny that you mention the f word, after the expected RETURN of Apples marketshare lead has been comented as a "complete erase". Note: Apples marketshare accoring to the quoted market researchers is 44.9 versus googles 44.8. Wow. Beaten into the ground eh? And then.. 10.6 isnt Googles entire revenue. It s their profit. http://investor.google.com/financial/tables.html With all that said. Even if Apple had a marketshare of 70 or 80 percent or more on smartphones (NOT:all mobile phones): thats totally not a reason to buy their product. It would be a reason to worry bout market domination though. But besides that, for many people there are other more valid reason to decide for another phone.

Most privacy policies are just as bad as the "worst" privacy policy: https://www.google.com/search?sourceid=chrome&ie=UTF-8&q=privacy+%22or+as+allowed+by+law%22

Note that they give a bunch of circumstances in which they will use your private information, but then they add in "or as *allowed* by law" which means they can do absolutely anything with your information that isn't illegal.

Somehow I think people misread it as "or as required by law" which is an altogether different thing.

That's it, I am convinced this SOPA shit is going to get passed against our will one way or another. I was talking with the guy I work with about all this shit and he has had enough too. We have puppets of the banking and media industry running for office any more, lobbyists and lawyers hire politicians to do their bidding all over the world and I am god damned fed up with it.

Guess it is time to make sure you are armed so when they try to take that right from us too we have something to stop them. Ron Paul might be the only mother fucker that doesn't have some corporation's arm up his ass telling him everything to do, and see how much media coverage he gets?

Anyone who sees this comment, please watch this video: America: Freedom to Fascism

It's a long video, but once you start watching it you can't stop. It really made me open my eyes on a lot of shit, and it made me want to exercise my second amendment right.

... I'ld play her all day and night.

Probably wouldn't be nearly as educational though.

Hasn't it always been that way? I really think that is just a reiteration of the status quo, not a change. But I have to admit that I haven't read all of the old privacy policies carefully.

No, it hasn't always been that way. For example (not the only one), this is new (from https://www.google.com/policies/privacy/preview/):

In addition, we may replace past names associated with your Google Account so that you are represented consistently across all our services. If other users already have your email, or other information that identifies you, we may show them your publicly visible Google Profile information, such as your name and photo.

Yes, it's a little thing, but this sort of thing bothers me primarily because of the loss of control. Sure, it reveals nothing that people couldn't suss out for themselves -- but it greases those skids, and turns google into something that requires more work from me and is a hassle because now I have to consider the impact of using one google service on the other google services I may use. It restricts my use of google. I solve this by no longer using google services (outside of my cell phone, alas), but it's terrible that I have to go to such an extreme. Why can't google provide an opt-out for this kind of cross-contamination?

I understand that google wants to become facebook. I had hoped, though, that they'd do this in such a way that those of us who actively don't want to use a facebook-like system can just ignore it. That this isn't possible dramatically reduces google's value to me.

But, then, I don't mind targeted ads. In fact, I like them. I'd rather not have ads at all, but if they have to be there (and I'd rather they were than to have to pay for all these services directly), then I prefer they be for things that I might actually be interested in buying.

Well, we just represent two different opinions on this point. If I have to see ads, I definitely don't want them to be targeted.

I'd say that depends on what Google does with the data, whether it serves to benefit or harm the users.

In the short term at least, I see no harm and some potential benefit.

I agree this depends on what google does with the data. I disagree that there's no short term harm. I am harmed by the new policies and they present exactly no benefit to me. Not to overstate this, as the "harm" is slight enough to be merely annoying for me -- although there are likely others who will be harmed to a greater degree. But it's harm nonetheless. You may feel differently, and that's entirely fair. You are not harmed, I am. We are different people.

This is why the whole deal should be opt-out. My only opt-out option is to stop using google entirely, so this is what I'm doing to the extent that's possible. It's just too bad that their policy change renders their products unacceptable to me.

thanks to Microsoft's open-source Kinect platform for Windows

This was done using https://code.google.com/p/simple-kinect-touch/ not the microsoft SDK.

I'm pretty sure the journals don't deliberately serve up the whole journal to Google, then block it to you though.

It's fairly well documented on the Internet that they do. Google digs up citations on google scholar cloaking . Essentially, there's a tacit agreement that paywalled scholarly journals participating in the Google Scholar program are allowed to cloak.

Unfortunately they're also heavily linked and highly relevant, so they end up at the top.

It wouldn't be a problem if Google provided an option to always exclude search results that are noarchive .

... or we can follow the example set out by Mr Oz Rock Cafe;

As it turns out, the Crysler was actually the last straw in what has been something of a niggling showdown between Phil Harte and Hard Rock owner Peter Morton. Harte opened the Oz Rock Cafe two years ago and immediately ran into problems with Morton for appropriating the concept, logo and name. Solicitors at 10 paces failed to resolve the question, as Harte changed his name to Mr Oz Rock Cafe by deed poll to ensure he could go on trading.

Between a rock and a Hard Rock, Sydney Morning Herald, 21 April 1989

I, for one, would happily sign checks as "Google Kensuk Mybalz" for a month ...

In the GOOGLE MAP where the creek joins the river, it's pretty obvious.

I'm wondering how this could have been going on for so long, long enough for Google to have images (so obviously it's not a one time or sporadic event) event, without anyone noticing, does no one boat up that river? Fish on it? No nearby land owners?

Odd...

That is bullshit. Not only is there a clearly visible skip button in the image on that story, but I just created my fourth google account (via IGoogle) and never even saw that screen.

If I go to http://www.google.com/accounts to create one, I am indeed forced to get GMail, but I can still skip the Google profile by unchecking the "personalization" checkbox on step one.

Furthermore, once you have a Google account with Gmail it is possible to delete the Gmail account while keeping the rest of the account (you must supply a non-Google email address, which will become you new sign-in email address.)

Wow that was hard...

For example, if you go to http://mail.google.com/mail/signup [google.com] and create a Gmail account, it will automatically make a Google account as part of the process (of course). However using the above link does NOT automatically create a Google+ account. I know this because I did so yesterday, as I specifically wanted to make a new Google account without G+.

All of which is moot - I just tried the same thing, and in order to create the gmail account, it wanted a real-world phone number.

As a practical matter, that means that all gmail accounts you create are still tied to your real-world identity (or that of one of your friends or cow orkers, and it should be pretty easy to figure out who you are by seeing where your social graph intersects with the social graphs of others who signed up with that phone number.)

Even if you are forced to create a g+ account, just delete the damn thing after its created. Google actually makes it easy... http://support.google.com/plus/bin/answer.py?hl=en&answer=1044503&rd=1

And since new Google account users are reportedly now forced to join Google+

Not quite. There are ways to create a Google account without Google+ being tacked on.

For example, if you go to http://mail.google.com/mail/signup and create a Gmail account, it will automatically make a Google account as part of the process (of course). However using the above link does NOT automatically create a Google+ account. I know this because I did so yesterday, as I specifically wanted to make a new Google account without G+.

Of course, you need to know this either through research or someone telling you beforehand. All other ways of creating a Google account seem to force G+ unfortunately. Google sucks sometimes.

All your ideas are great, spot-on, 100% insightful - which is why they'll never happen :-(

As for the "getting some revenue streams", look at the damage that was done to their reputation with replacing the Amazon id in Banshee with their own. Was it really worth it?

Please keep in mind that the majority of that revenue is NOT from Canonical - several other major distros don't replace the Banshee projects' id with their own, unlike Canonical. opensuse, for example, is 100% to Banshee/Gnome. Mint gives 50% - and Canonical, since their take-it-or-leave-it offer was rejected, has since disabled it completely.

Something can generate revenue and still not, in the bigger scheme of things, be worth doing. Hummers were a good example - at one point they made money, then not so much, then they became a drain on resources, attention, and cash.

Canonical doesn't have the development resources to be a serious innovator, having decided to concentrate on marketing and "blingy" stuff instead.

What would I do differently? Get Android working properly. Hire real software developers, with cross-platform experience, and open up a porting lab. Then approach companies, the same as Loki did, and offer a percentage deal for doing ports from Windows to both the linux and mac platforms (a 2'fer). Not just consumer-facing software either. Grow the market instead of looking for change behind the cushions.

Maybe not but they can blossom

Most of Google's upper management are either incompetent assholes or hypocrites, why are you surprised?

--
There is a new arrogant asshole in town!