The man was worried that burglars would use the images of the OUTSIDE of homes to their advantage when planning a burglary. A legitimate concern. It basically allows would-be-thieves to "case the joint" without the risk of physically doing so.
Are you suggesting they erect walls around their houses? Should we all live in visually fortified residences? I am willing to bet that when these people bought their houses, Google wasn't around. So, now, Google has the right to degrade the security of their residences? For what? Freedom of information? MONEY?
To those of you that feel you are going to have Google coming down the street, taking images of your property, and you don't like it, place a LARGE sign in your yard that simply says "FUCK GOOGLE"(fully protected by freedom of speech if it is on your property). See if they use the images after that. Photo-shopping images takes time and costs money. Make it less worthwhile for them to do.
"There are only about 30 devices approved to work on that network, though the company expects 100 to be available by year's end. As the first carrier to roll out the new technology on a network of this scale, Clearwire needs to encourage attractive applications for subscribers to use."
From a consumer standpoint, this is what has kept me from investing any money into the technologies.
When the people running the network have control over what devices may use it, I see that as an opportunity for shenanigans. Will my device ALWAYS be able to use the network? Will some corporate squabble kill it?
I tend to not spend money on things I have no assurance will work(or be supported) for a reasonable amount of time. I see it as pretty much the same situation I was in when BETA and VHS were both on the market. I bought neither.
You are correct. Neither the GTX275(not listed) or the Radeon4890(listed, but no data) are available for comparison on that site.
I already tried that. That very same site is what I used to decide on my GeForce 8600GTS, and I am quite happy with the results. I feel the comparison was pretty accurate, having used the card for almost a year now, and having had a chance to compare to the cards friends have.
I stand by my original statement. The test in the article provides me with no usable information other then "One is slightly better then the other, but it is still unknown if either is better then an 8600GTS, on any particular hardware arrangement".
Thanks for the link though. I had originally found it here on Slashdot myself, and I am sure someone else was just exposed to it by your posting. Excellent site, when it has the data.
I'm a self-proclaimed EULA/License Nazi, and I have to agree.
It did occur to me that Microsoft might actually have a toe in the pool of common sense...testing the waters, so to speak. Play fair and see what happens?
Depending on what the employee is viewing, it is also an opportunity to LEARN something.
My wife regularly surfs the web at work, often news, and consistently finds stories that directly effect the industry she works in, sometimes her actual place of employment. She then brings this information to the people she works for, the people that need to know about it.
Kind of a useless test from my point of view, that of someone that would be looking to upgrade, for one simple reason.
These comparisons never seem to include the last generation of cards, and thus of no real value to me since I cannot determine how much of an upgrade I would be getting.
I don't care how many fucking cores it has if it doesn't perform better then what I have right now.
Benchmark testing my own machine(as a comparison tool) is sort of useless as well since the REST of my machine may be totally different then what they used.
Which is better then which is an entirely moot point if neither is better then what I have.
I REALLY need to stop reading the news on April 1st.
I can't decide what is a fucking joke and what isn't. This story and the CNN story about drug testing all unemployment/foodstamp recipients sounded equally foolish to me.
Maybe the first post I made in this thread may have been seen as a little bit "hip shooting", and I admit it was, but my response to YOUR post was NOT.
No trollin' there, and it appears I'm not alone in that sentiment.
But, in all seriousness, in a day and age where there is more taking then giving of personal liberties, we can not afford to be on slippery ground. Each step in ANY direction that threatens my, as well as your, personal liberties needs to be fought tooth and nail. We cannot afford to lose what so many have fought for, and in many cases, given their lives for.
The value we all place on liberty and freedom REQUIRES a healthy cynicism be firmly in place whenever dealing in such matters.
How is it that my above post was modded +4 insightful, with the thread having several people supporting my position, until I responded to YOUR post, in a negative way?
Now your post is +5 insightful, and I'm down exactly -5...an apparent troll.
Now, don't get me wrong, I'm not accusing you of anything, it just seems REALLY odd to me.
I'll go out on a limb here, and assume that the folks that are doing the investigating here are probably aware of, maybe, 10% of the actual information gleaned by the use of NSLs. Most of it has probably been squirreled away for later use.
But, the requirement that all information be destroyed doesn't look as "after-the-fact-useless" as it may seem at first glance. Even if the information is not destroyed, it can no longer be USED in any real sense, at least in a courtroom. Although, I can imagine a few lawyers out there would beg to differ.
Essentially, once deemed "fit for destruction", it is as useless as if it HAD been destroyed. Any information that isn't has probably already served its purpose, or has been "used".
Heroes of Might and Magic 3 was NOT an Electronic Arts game, but it DID contain SecuROM, so the makers of SecuROM and New World Computing are the culprits here...at least for the FIRST bricked CD burner.
The other two were EA bricked by Command and Conquer or one of the subsequent sequels(not sure which, as I had them installed concurrently).
Regardless, SecuROM sucketh, even from a non-piratin' point of view(I had NEVER pirated a game back then...so why did my drives get bricked?).
"In the United States, this might be true because Verizon and Sprint use a Qualcomm CDMA stack, while AT&T and T-Mobile use GSM. Besides, contracts in the United States seldom guarantee the customer's right to remove the subsidy lock from the phone once the contract is over."
That's all fine and dandy, had I been told such a "lock" was in place, permanently. Only problem was that I wasn't told(and yes, I looked at the contract I signed...tried for 2 years to get out of it). As a matter of fact, the clerk that sold me the service responded with "Of course!" when I specifically asked about taking my phone to another service after my contract ran out.
I now use that same cellphone to RECORD such conversations. One has to do what one has to do when they intentionally mis-bill you in order to renew your contract when you ask for a paper copy of the bill(considered an "added" service...which renews your contract).
"Slippery Slope arguements are fallacy's. There is no proof that one step forward equates the same thing as ensuring that someone is going to go the full nine yards, or even that if they were, they'd end up where you want to paint them as going."
I've heard THAT bullshit before, and I'll respond the exact same way I do every time I hear it used.
While it may be true that a certain step, in a certain direction, MAY not end up with bad results, if it DOES, you then have to go back two steps, instead of one, to fix that which is broken.
That is PRECISELY the thought process these people are using to THEIR advantage. Take a little at a time, under the radar, infuse yourself into the "system", to the point it is too hard to undo the damage once everyone gets wise to the effects.
The A.I.G. mess is similar. Too big to fail? Not at all. Simply to big to LET fail...as was their intended goal all along.
While I can agree with you on some points, this is still a "foot in the door", so to speak, for censoring, a foot in MY door, regardless of where I live.
What is next? Government editing of dictionary entries? Wikipedia? Banning the word "pornography" from all search entries? Will I still be able to park my soapbox on the corner and mutter the word "pornography" over and over without fear of arrest?
It's the same foot in the door(censorship), just with a different shine on it...slam the door on it before it gets in.
Is the obvious(everyone starts using a different word! Gasp!) that far from their mental grasp? Or is there ulterior motive here? Hrmm?
That's what "they" told us about cell phones, yet when I go to another company for service, I am informed that the phone I purchased from my previous provider is UNUSABLE on other networks...YEARS after I purchased it.
And what happens after the required "lease" runs out?
If you read the article, you would have noticed that after 2 years, the purchaser is FREE of any obligation to anyone(subsidizers), but the company with the kill switch STILL has the ability to push it.
"Once again, an undeserved sense of entitlement from a Slashdotter! It's yours when the contract is over. That's what you signed. Deal with it."
It isn't YOURS if someone can take it from you on a whim.
The list of companies to NOT do business with continues to grow.
Speak with your dollars, refuse to purchase devices from companies that have these modems installed, and these companies will no longer install them. Simple as that.
The next step is legislation that PRECLUDES companies from disabling purchased products, IN ANY WAY, SHAPE OR FORM. Simply put, command-destruct/self-destruct functions should be illegal in ANY product. Legislation wouldn't be needed if everyone KNEW what these asshole companies do, but that is not going to happen since they(the manufacturers/sellers) will ALWAYS try to hide the fact of "limited ownership" until after purchase(and even after)
Heroes of Might and Magic 3 was my first experience with SecuROM. It disabled my CD burner...permanently. EA owes me $55 for that one.
In total, SecuROM has been the demise of three of my drives. There was no way to determine whether or not a game had it back then, so it was hit and miss. SecuROM, or EA, owe me approx. $150 for disabled drives over the last 12 years or so.
Since I NEVER expect to receive a buck from them in compensation, I protect my drives instead. I stopped BUYING THEIR GAMES. And every one that I bought in the past, I have since downloaded cracked versions and use them instead.
Is that what you wanted, EA?
Drop SecuROM, entirely, or you've still lost a customer.
"This experiment has proved that iron fertilization is not going to work as a carbon storage strategy."
It did no such thing.
If this was done in the middle of the ocean, in deep water, then it might not be such a hot idea.
But what if you do it in CORAL RICH areas? Can the phytoplankton be eaten by corals? If so, then the bulk of the carbon absorbed would be deposited in the form of coral skeletons(calcium carbonate) that persist for millions of years. Sounds like a handy place to store carbon to me.
The idea just needed to be focused in a different way, maybe...
How about feeding captive mollusk beds(clams, mussels, oysters...) with phytoplankton? Eat the good part, then bury the shells. Food AND carbon sequestration.
The videos? I certainly hope they based their findings on more then that.
Correct me if I am wrong, but the untreated dogs shown at the beginning of the video do not appear to be the treated dogs shown in the latter half of the video. The age given for one of the treated dogs is actually 3 months younger then either of the untreated ones shown.
So, what exactly is the video supposed to portray? It is impossibly to make any comparison based on the video because there is no "before" and "after" nor do we have the opportunity to see ANY of the dogs in more then one state, treated or untreated.
All I see is several dogs, never more then once, suffering varying degrees of motor skill loss.
Slashdot Mirror
Did you read TFA, Chyeld?
The man was worried that burglars would use the images of the OUTSIDE of homes to their advantage when planning a burglary. A legitimate concern. It basically allows would-be-thieves to "case the joint" without the risk of physically doing so.
Are you suggesting they erect walls around their houses? Should we all live in visually fortified residences? I am willing to bet that when these people bought their houses, Google wasn't around. So, now, Google has the right to degrade the security of their residences? For what? Freedom of information? MONEY?
To those of you that feel you are going to have Google coming down the street, taking images of your property, and you don't like it, place a LARGE sign in your yard that simply says "FUCK GOOGLE"(fully protected by freedom of speech if it is on your property). See if they use the images after that. Photo-shopping images takes time and costs money. Make it less worthwhile for them to do.
FTFA:
"There are only about 30 devices approved to work on that network, though the company expects 100 to be available by year's end. As the first carrier to roll out the new technology on a network of this scale, Clearwire needs to encourage attractive applications for subscribers to use."
From a consumer standpoint, this is what has kept me from investing any money into the technologies.
When the people running the network have control over what devices may use it, I see that as an opportunity for shenanigans. Will my device ALWAYS be able to use the network? Will some corporate squabble kill it?
I tend to not spend money on things I have no assurance will work(or be supported) for a reasonable amount of time. I see it as pretty much the same situation I was in when BETA and VHS were both on the market. I bought neither.
You are correct. Neither the GTX275(not listed) or the Radeon4890(listed, but no data) are available for comparison on that site.
I already tried that. That very same site is what I used to decide on my GeForce 8600GTS, and I am quite happy with the results. I feel the comparison was pretty accurate, having used the card for almost a year now, and having had a chance to compare to the cards friends have.
I stand by my original statement. The test in the article provides me with no usable information other then "One is slightly better then the other, but it is still unknown if either is better then an 8600GTS, on any particular hardware arrangement".
Thanks for the link though. I had originally found it here on Slashdot myself, and I am sure someone else was just exposed to it by your posting. Excellent site, when it has the data.
I'm a self-proclaimed EULA/License Nazi, and I have to agree.
It did occur to me that Microsoft might actually have a toe in the pool of common sense...testing the waters, so to speak. Play fair and see what happens?
This is a good thing, no?
Depending on what the employee is viewing, it is also an opportunity to LEARN something.
My wife regularly surfs the web at work, often news, and consistently finds stories that directly effect the industry she works in, sometimes her actual place of employment. She then brings this information to the people she works for, the people that need to know about it.
Kind of a useless test from my point of view, that of someone that would be looking to upgrade, for one simple reason.
These comparisons never seem to include the last generation of cards, and thus of no real value to me since I cannot determine how much of an upgrade I would be getting.
I don't care how many fucking cores it has if it doesn't perform better then what I have right now.
Benchmark testing my own machine(as a comparison tool) is sort of useless as well since the REST of my machine may be totally different then what they used.
Which is better then which is an entirely moot point if neither is better then what I have.
Uh...whoosh?
Distilled down...and the meat in my post.
"This story and the CNN story about drug testing all unemployment/foodstamp recipients sounded equally foolish to me."
The story on CNN wasn't a joke...oh, never mind.
I REALLY need to stop reading the news on April 1st.
I can't decide what is a fucking joke and what isn't. This story and the CNN story about drug testing all unemployment/foodstamp recipients sounded equally foolish to me.
Ah, yes, the Fates are fickle creatures.
Maybe the first post I made in this thread may have been seen as a little bit "hip shooting", and I admit it was, but my response to YOUR post was NOT.
No trollin' there, and it appears I'm not alone in that sentiment.
But, in all seriousness, in a day and age where there is more taking then giving of personal liberties, we can not afford to be on slippery ground. Each step in ANY direction that threatens my, as well as your, personal liberties needs to be fought tooth and nail. We cannot afford to lose what so many have fought for, and in many cases, given their lives for.
The value we all place on liberty and freedom REQUIRES a healthy cynicism be firmly in place whenever dealing in such matters.
How is it that my above post was modded +4 insightful, with the thread having several people supporting my position, until I responded to YOUR post, in a negative way?
Now your post is +5 insightful, and I'm down exactly -5...an apparent troll.
Now, don't get me wrong, I'm not accusing you of anything, it just seems REALLY odd to me.
I'll go out on a limb here, and assume that the folks that are doing the investigating here are probably aware of, maybe, 10% of the actual information gleaned by the use of NSLs. Most of it has probably been squirreled away for later use.
But, the requirement that all information be destroyed doesn't look as "after-the-fact-useless" as it may seem at first glance. Even if the information is not destroyed, it can no longer be USED in any real sense, at least in a courtroom. Although, I can imagine a few lawyers out there would beg to differ.
Essentially, once deemed "fit for destruction", it is as useless as if it HAD been destroyed. Any information that isn't has probably already served its purpose, or has been "used".
Correction.
Heroes of Might and Magic 3 was NOT an Electronic Arts game, but it DID contain SecuROM, so the makers of SecuROM and New World Computing are the culprits here...at least for the FIRST bricked CD burner.
The other two were EA bricked by Command and Conquer or one of the subsequent sequels(not sure which, as I had them installed concurrently).
Regardless, SecuROM sucketh, even from a non-piratin' point of view(I had NEVER pirated a game back then...so why did my drives get bricked?).
"In the United States, this might be true because Verizon and Sprint use a Qualcomm CDMA stack, while AT&T and T-Mobile use GSM. Besides, contracts in the United States seldom guarantee the customer's right to remove the subsidy lock from the phone once the contract is over."
That's all fine and dandy, had I been told such a "lock" was in place, permanently. Only problem was that I wasn't told(and yes, I looked at the contract I signed...tried for 2 years to get out of it). As a matter of fact, the clerk that sold me the service responded with "Of course!" when I specifically asked about taking my phone to another service after my contract ran out.
I now use that same cellphone to RECORD such conversations. One has to do what one has to do when they intentionally mis-bill you in order to renew your contract when you ask for a paper copy of the bill(considered an "added" service...which renews your contract).
"Slippery Slope arguements are fallacy's. There is no proof that one step forward equates the same thing as ensuring that someone is going to go the full nine yards, or even that if they were, they'd end up where you want to paint them as going."
I've heard THAT bullshit before, and I'll respond the exact same way I do every time I hear it used.
While it may be true that a certain step, in a certain direction, MAY not end up with bad results, if it DOES, you then have to go back two steps, instead of one, to fix that which is broken.
That is PRECISELY the thought process these people are using to THEIR advantage. Take a little at a time, under the radar, infuse yourself into the "system", to the point it is too hard to undo the damage once everyone gets wise to the effects.
The A.I.G. mess is similar. Too big to fail? Not at all. Simply to big to LET fail...as was their intended goal all along.
While I can agree with you on some points, this is still a "foot in the door", so to speak, for censoring, a foot in MY door, regardless of where I live.
What is next? Government editing of dictionary entries? Wikipedia? Banning the word "pornography" from all search entries? Will I still be able to park my soapbox on the corner and mutter the word "pornography" over and over without fear of arrest?
It's the same foot in the door(censorship), just with a different shine on it...slam the door on it before it gets in.
Is the obvious(everyone starts using a different word! Gasp!) that far from their mental grasp? Or is there ulterior motive here? Hrmm?
That's what "they" told us about cell phones, yet when I go to another company for service, I am informed that the phone I purchased from my previous provider is UNUSABLE on other networks...YEARS after I purchased it.
So, I call bullshit.
And what happens after the required "lease" runs out?
If you read the article, you would have noticed that after 2 years, the purchaser is FREE of any obligation to anyone(subsidizers), but the company with the kill switch STILL has the ability to push it.
"Once again, an undeserved sense of entitlement from a Slashdotter! It's yours when the contract is over. That's what you signed. Deal with it."
It isn't YOURS if someone can take it from you on a whim.
The list of companies to NOT do business with continues to grow.
Speak with your dollars, refuse to purchase devices from companies that have these modems installed, and these companies will no longer install them. Simple as that.
The next step is legislation that PRECLUDES companies from disabling purchased products, IN ANY WAY, SHAPE OR FORM. Simply put, command-destruct/self-destruct functions should be illegal in ANY product. Legislation wouldn't be needed if everyone KNEW what these asshole companies do, but that is not going to happen since they(the manufacturers/sellers) will ALWAYS try to hide the fact of "limited ownership" until after purchase(and even after)
Heroes of Might and Magic 3 was my first experience with SecuROM. It disabled my CD burner...permanently. EA owes me $55 for that one.
In total, SecuROM has been the demise of three of my drives. There was no way to determine whether or not a game had it back then, so it was hit and miss. SecuROM, or EA, owe me approx. $150 for disabled drives over the last 12 years or so.
Since I NEVER expect to receive a buck from them in compensation, I protect my drives instead. I stopped BUYING THEIR GAMES. And every one that I bought in the past, I have since downloaded cracked versions and use them instead.
Is that what you wanted, EA?
Drop SecuROM, entirely, or you've still lost a customer.
So, why the fuck are you buying Blu-rays discs?
Not to sound facetious, but really, don't buy them. I don't.
"This experiment has proved that iron fertilization is not going to work as a carbon storage strategy."
It did no such thing.
If this was done in the middle of the ocean, in deep water, then it might not be such a hot idea.
But what if you do it in CORAL RICH areas? Can the phytoplankton be eaten by corals? If so, then the bulk of the carbon absorbed would be deposited in the form of coral skeletons(calcium carbonate) that persist for millions of years. Sounds like a handy place to store carbon to me.
The idea just needed to be focused in a different way, maybe...
How about feeding captive mollusk beds(clams, mussels, oysters...) with phytoplankton? Eat the good part, then bury the shells. Food AND carbon sequestration.
But, will they sell me an application that can use that much RAM? I'm fresh out.
No point having that much gas if I've no car to put it in...
Game companies could provide their customers with a portal to post game videos?
Sorry, I don't know what the fuck I was thinkin'. Providing a means for customers to tout your product always seems to backfire...
The page I viewed this morning had this mornings date on it.
The current page is what was up 5 days ago, the 20th of march.
All information about the search warrent, etc. , since it had not happened on yet, on the 20th, is now absent from the main page.
The videos? I certainly hope they based their findings on more then that.
Correct me if I am wrong, but the untreated dogs shown at the beginning of the video do not appear to be the treated dogs shown in the latter half of the video. The age given for one of the treated dogs is actually 3 months younger then either of the untreated ones shown.
So, what exactly is the video supposed to portray? It is impossibly to make any comparison based on the video because there is no "before" and "after" nor do we have the opportunity to see ANY of the dogs in more then one state, treated or untreated.
All I see is several dogs, never more then once, suffering varying degrees of motor skill loss.
Am I missing something here?