Slashdot Mirror

this may be a solution while walking in public, let's say in a shopping mall and having your image on fazebook - 11 LED's.
How it holds up in bright daylight will need to be seen.

Privacy Protection Techniques Using Differences in Human and Device Sensitivity

There is a small typo in the summary.
If you get past this, you can find many results on Google, like this one : http://kaken.nii.ac.jp/en/r/10159634

There are plenty of machine translation conferences/shared tasks going on that are targeting patent translation (e.g. PatentMT - http://ntcir.nii.ac.jp/PatentMT/). Instead of just handing this patent task to Google, why didn't the European Commission host an MT shared task and give a prize to the winner? There are a lot of decent systems being designed by universities and research laboratories, especially in Europe. Oh, well, at least the European Commission is starting to adopt machine translation.

There is a saying for modern historians that when you are faced with too much data, your job is to select representative sets.
No-one will ever be able to keep everything. I had to discard collections of 50 years of hard to get subscription papers, newsprint etc because no-one wanted them, no storage possible and no digital scanning available at the time. It got thrown out, with only some items kept. Even those are getting damaged over time, but I don't want to spend hours scanning them, storing the data or making them public. No-one cares for that sort of stuff and your own collections will eventually be thrown out. I'm faced with the same prospect and I hope someone will keep a representative set of what I had for a few years.
Ultimately, you backup, then convert, then backup as a cycle until you die.
Then, out of the blue, someone in the future will come across parts of your life represented by these collections, either in a 2nd hand shop, the garbage tip, deceased estate, relative or what/whoever and some of it may be kept.

So you're approaching 60 and you still have 1000 LPs? Are you going to spend 45,000 minutes resurrecting them? Maybe some rarities.
Photos? 8mm film stock? I have 1000's of photos of dogs in dog shows in the 60s and 70s. Most of the people are dead, the dogs certainly are and as they are slides, there is no captions or any indication what they represent.
So the decision is - Is it worth archiving? Who will eventually be the custodian? What value has it for future generations?
When you look at it like that, then there's very little you want to keep.

Here's some links for everyone's consideration.

Are you interested? http://www.cs.arizona.edu/patterns/weaving/lace.html

What about this? http://dsr.nii.ac.jp/toyobunko/index.html.en

Or: http://www.oucs.ox.ac.uk/ww1lit/gwa/document/8685?REC=6

They have tours of Japan Steel Work's sword factories, following link has some pictures:
http://ameblo.jp/machizukuri-engineer/entry-10070632943.html

An older example of the swords they make (from the Russo-Japanese war):
http://www.e-sword.jp/sale/0650/0650_1006syousai.htm

The company also uses sword-making as a source of research that they apply to other field's of forging
http://ci.nii.ac.jp/naid/110001457129/

I've read Rider's papers and thesis. He basically goes through the various ways of creating a non-Maxwellian electron/ion distribution, and shows that there are significant problems with those concepts. The Polywell is supposed to sidestep those issues rather than proving Rider wrong.

WB-6 ran for a short time and a few neutrons were caught in a detector. The estimated fusion rate is an extrapolation that I am not entirely comfortable with. The statistics simply are not there, nor do I agree with the claim that steady-state operation was reached.

While the Polywell is a fresh concept, it looks like nothing more than a three-dimensional arrangement of magnetic mirrors. I simply don't see how cusp losses can be overcome, nor the collisional dumping of energy from the ions to the electrons. There are lots of things that can go "wrong" in plasmas.

Looking around talk-polywell, the Yoshikawa paper doesn't seem to have much to do with the Polywell (though it's interesting that nobody's measured a double well before).

http://wwwsoc.nii.ac.jp/aesj/division/fusion/aesjfnt/Yoshikawa.pdf

Does it matter? Well, the first to build a working waverider aircraft was a Scottish amateur rocketry group. Story has it that when NASA and Boeing engineers saw footage of the vehicle flying, they were staring at the screen in sheer envy. They'd got no further than theory. We also all know the story of the New Zealander who has jet-propelled go-karts and his own low-cost cruise missile. And the Gauss Rifle linked to above didn't look too complex, either.

Although amateurs are very unlikely to be building supersonic or hypersonic spy planes in the near future, none of this looks so complex that it could not be done by other nations in comparable time. Don't think it won't happen - too many potential benefits. Variants will also inevitably be adopted by commercial space planes, as it's so much cheaper than using vanilla rocketry and should be much more reliable.

To me, the only question I think worth asking at this point is who will be there first? Lockheed-Martin, China or Rutan? (And after Lockheed's disastrous hovering shuttle replacement in the late 1990s, it's not wise to just assume they'll automatically win such a race.)

Huh? Duoploy? I assume you mean Microsoft and Google?

Are you suggesting that having just two companies competing against each other for market share has no advantages compared to a monopoly?

Look at Intel/AMD.

The only problem is if they work together to control the market and then share each others profits, but I cannot see that happening.

What do CPU cycles and information have in common? Both are commodities. Once a commodities market is established, production itself only represents a growth opportunity during periods of increased global demand. Innovation is a calculated risk such companies are often not willing to take when tacit collusion promises steady cash flow.

In other words, the paper seems to suggest that being able to see the flicker on a monitor is the result of eye fatigue from long use of computer monitors, and that continued use will only increase the problem. It would be interesting to know if there is an "upper limit" (ie, you can see 60Hz now, but not 75Hz - but will exposure over long periods to 75Hz make it so you eventually see 75Hz and have to move it up another notch?). Now - if all of this is true, think about those "mad gamers" who crank the frequency of their system up several notches...

Now - I am not calling the kettle here - I have used a computer since I was 10 years old and my monitor was a 19 inch TV less than a foot from my face (which might -maybe- be a reason for my myopia - heh) - so I too can see the flicker of a 60Hz display, so I knock it up a bit, especially on higher-res output (ie, I find a 640x480 or 800x600 60Hz screen acceptable - but anything greater and the Hz goes up for me).

Incidentally, some people here mentioned the Amiga and its flicker. I own a couple of Amigas, and a lot of gear - and one of the items I purchased (because at the time a true multi-sync/multi-scan monitor was hella expensive to buy - anyone know where I could get one today?) was a "flicker-fixer" filter - basically a piece of smoked-color plexiglass (which I paid waaay to much for) velcroed over the screen - which eliminated or reduced the flicker on the screen...

So, I wonder if something of a similar nature could be used on a 60Hz display? Or - perhaps wear a pair of sunglasses (which Amigan's also did back in the day)? Basically, I think the reason this worked is similar to what is known as the "Pulfrich Effect". So, perhaps two of these filters (or one large filter covering the screen) would simply delay the flickering of the image, forcing you to see a steady image, which is why this works?

I smell a new research paper here: "Theraputic Application of the Pulfrich Effect in the Reduction of Flicker Fusion Frequency" - just remember to give me a mention in a footnote or something, will ya?

or maybe propose a theory that could explain the results another way

Instead of saying 'we don't yet fully understand the isotopic effects of hydrogen in a palladium lattice' the "Cold Fusion" crowd is begging the question and assuming any energy they don't immediately understand the source of must be caused by cold fusion, and when they find "extra" energy they proclaim their preconceived supposition of fusion as fact.

I hope DOE doesn't squander any of its limited research budget on these quacks.