Looking at it, it seems to be a case of adding letters (seems "E" is a likely candidate as well as a few of the consonants), removing letters (vowels seem like most likely candidate), jumbling what's left of the words and some words where he has changed the lettering to (and remembers that particular word like that permanently).
If he's of normal intelligence, and started doing it as a child, he can't have done more if he wanted to make sure he could read it again without too much effort.
Not sure whether the numbers are jumbled or not, a child would either think the numbers didn't make sense without the context, or have a simple rule to encrypt them (like half of each number always rounded down, or up [or maybe not always, maybe down or up to the "better" number]).
I agree, I'd also go as far as make her do the work of finding a laptop for herself, it's just stupid to let a mac-idiot who has no idea what to pick make choices for a woman.
It's been proven that for every 5 criteria a man has, a woman with the same 5 have an extra 5 on top of that as well. [citation needed]
tell her to get off her lazy ass and work it out for herself.
"when it's really the desire for safe nuclear power vs the desire for maximising profit at inappropriate risk." - is not even the right argument.. The right argument is "a nuclear power plant got hit by a huge fucking tsunami", this isn't about greed, or environment, it's about trying to contain the situation. Future plans will be about those things, but right now, there is no argument, there is only the question: can this be contained?
I'm guessing that they are recuperating the cost of each item by selling the item above that cost, not like with the Xbox and PS3 where they expect to recuperate the cost from sales of games.
If they are happy with the profit for each purchase of the item, why not allow people to do what they want with the items? it just makes sense.
I have problems with your comments in more ways than one:
"I was a member of this class, and I'm glad this settlement got overturned" and " I don't have any out-of-print books". - Let's forget the monetary value of a book, and focus on the fact that a book is a message from a person to society, i.e. focus on the importance of the message a book (your book?) is to the world. What do you think will happen when your book is out of print? Do you think the information you put out there is going to be useful to anyone when no one can find it? Out of print means out of sight and out of mind and it also means nowhere to be found with ease, you're purposefully neutering your own message to the world.
"Google is indexing and posting online all books that they can, not just ones that are out of print." - I find it very surprising that you think this is a bad thing, this is a positive thing. Your message in the book that you wrote will be for everyone to see. If your book is still being sold and not out of copyright, google links to online stores where people can buy your book, if people "google" for things your book is relevant to, they'll find your book, see excerpts from it, and can decide to buy it. If it's out of copyright, or you didn't opt-out, people can read the books which were all in all lost. This is a good thing, this is a just thing.
"The reason that I'm glad that the settlement was overturned is that it gives Google far too much power. After paying the token sum, Google may put any out of print books online, but anyone else doing so gets a statutory fine for wilful copyright infringement of $750-$150,000 per book." - You're kidding yourself if you think out-of-print books will magically all be reprinted whenever people want. This isn't about google getting power, this is about changing things so that people who are interested in _your_ book has access to _your_ message, and it isn't done to rip you off, it's done so that people can know that _your_ book is out there and relevant to what they're looking for.
"Google basically gambled that they could violate copyright on all books and get away with it." - no, Google wanted to make sure that all authors who have made the effort of writing something of value to society got their work indexed and accessible online for the betterment of both the writers and the readers. the fact that you don't see this is because you're tainted with your own greed.
"Rather than lobbying to make some sane changes to copyright law, they want copyright to remain overly strict, but to just apply to everyone except them." - What? Google is trying to fight the strictness and stupidity of the system, so you're either willfully ignorant, lying because you think you're protecting some self-interested idea of control, or just plain stupid. The copyright system is broken and out of date with the internet, computers, and the service google and other IT companies can offer people in the way of access to information within books. Google knows this, but there's too many little people like you who think that controlling whether an out-of-print book gets publicity or not is worth the cost of the books being completely forgotten, inaccessible and thus valueless to anyone and everyone. You're asking for control of something which is valueless with the control, but valuable to both writer and reader if you give it up.
Now lets put the monetary question back into the picture. an indexable, searchable online library of books, where if it's out of copyright, you can read it, if it's in copyright, you can read excerpts and then decide if you want to buy it, is a benefit to both seller and buyer. You're removing all obstacles between you as a seller and the buyers interested in your message.
The current system is that once a book is out of print, it's dead to the world, used copies will survive, and get handed around, but they will get destroyed one by one, maybe it will get reprinted, maybe not, and those who won't will not get read, and will thus be as useful as if the writer hadn't written it.
1) they're as low as 10 euros per year.. 2) if a normal request takes 50 milliseconds, starting your secure connection will take 250ms, and any new requests will take 50-150ms to process. 3) this is fud.
So for a "little" extra lag for security and a "little" extra cost for a certificate, your security worries are less. Why aren't you already doing this?
The fact that there is a lag hit and a cost isn't the problem, your lack of security is.
From Wikipedia: The Great Moore's Law Compensator (TGMLC), generally referred to as bloat, and also known as Wirth's law, is the principle that successive generations of computer software acquire enough bloat to offset the performance gains predicted by Moore's Law. In a 2008 article in InfoWorld, Randall C. Kennedy,[34] formerly of Intel, introduces this term using successive versions of Microsoft Office between the year 2000 and 2007 as his premise. Despite the gains in computational performance during this time period according to Moore's law, Office 2007 performed the same task at half the speed on a prototypical year 2007 computer as compared to Office 2000 on a year 2000 computer.
- I'll be happy once we finally break into quantum computers and can't have smaller transistors, and can't develop smaller or faster things than electron states, hopefully we'll start to focus on improving code, removing bloat, and making better software (madly optimistic, I know).
This way people who take overt care of their looks and social etiquette get the deal from you, so you're opening yourself up to social engineering, i.e. people who want to dupe you.
This and only this should be what claims of copyright infringement is.
Normal people downloading crap instead of buying them should just be labelled smart people.
Re:I like the concept, just not the application
on
Light Painting Wi-Fi
·
· Score: 1
It still wouldn't be a good representation, as the measurement isn't taken from multiple points on the row, it's a single point, and the height of the graph equals the signal strength of that single point, so you're not getting a 3d map, but a 2d map as it's a sensor strapped to his back that's taking the measurement.
If you want a real 3d map of wireless connectivity, you'd need to take 3 - 5 measurements per spot at different heights, and have very accurate gps location data per measurement, and via computers build up a real 3d map of networks and add all kinds of neat information like number of networks, intensity per network, openness/non-openness of networks and so on.
You shouldn't then forget the cellphone networks - or radio networks, and if you've already started measuring these, then the next step would be to measure all radiation just to show how much is natural and how much is technological and how things around us affect these things.
But that's perhaps a tad more difficult, would be interesting to see how and if it would work though.
It's open source, meaning you -yes you- can add code to it to help the blind. The blind can even help themselves if they know how to code, and I bet some already do.
This is what I hate about people who view themselves as victims. Blind people are not stupid people, just get off your lazy asses and create the code yourself, or get someone to help you do it.
Complaining about it doesn't help, and you're just making yourselves look stupid and naive.
That is the true power of open source, you don't have to beg someone else to do the work for you, you don't even have to ask, you just get the thing done yourself if that's what you want, and guess what, that's the normal procedure whether you're disabled or not. If you're interested in adding features to an open source project, add them yourself, whether you're disabled or not has nothing to do with it.
It's good research. Meaning it's not just because he says how he did it (and might be lying, or misremembering the truth, or have a case of truthiness), he can prove it every step of the way with evidence.
For instance, your anecdote is not provable, you can't show me or anyone else a single proof that what you say is the truth, that's why it's an anecdote, as believable as a lie.
There's far more lies in our world then truths based on real evidence, and this man has paved the way to establish the learning procedure between parent and child, I wouldn't be surprised if this would in the future help people by developing better methods of teaching your child.
Nice to see that the melting pot of the US of A is still not melting. No one figured out to try and teach kids spanish in elementary school?
I learned danish and english in elementary school, and I could pick either french or german for high school, mandatory languages I had to learn as well as my native language of Icelandic.
Since then I've learnt a smattering of Japanese as well as italian, and as a kid I learned norwegian and swedish by reading books in those languages.
If more than 20% of the population speaks another language then english, it's stupid of you not to learn it, and it's stupid of americans not to teach their kids spanish.
It's like this business with the change from imperial units to metric units. The reason America failed at changing it was they were always giving people "ratio-translators" so when someone told you the kilometres, you'd calculate it back into miles, even though _he_just_told_you_how_far_it_was_already_
These translators are in the same way stupid, teach people spanish, that's the simplest and best way to do it, and if you're dumb and lazy enough to not want to do it, at least make your kids do it, they'll be better then you at least at something.
It's normal for you to not remember details from six months ago.
That's why before we had writing anything you needed to remember which was complicates, like complicated ideas you put in rhyme so that you could remember the rhyme.
It sounds stupid, but if you really want to remember something by yourself, either re-remember it regularly, or put it into somekind of rhyme to make concepts simpler to remember. All the hallmarks of good poetry bear with it the structure to remember it better as well.
I'm from Iceland, and here the "noon" - or the time of day when the sun is at its highest is around 13:30 - this is because we set ourself to GMT standard time.
It's kind of weird, as the mornings over the winter are very dark, on the other hand you do have more "useful" daylight left.
I feel it's a better system then daylight savings, which we don't have.
Or, deal with facebook same as LinkedIn, i.e. it's all professional relationships.
That way, even though you're commenting on a friends link, you won't go overboard, and any decisions whether to comment or not will be done conservatively so you won't be looked at as an immature retard.
That might help you in the future, if someone decides to look you up on facebook from your new workplace after you friended him/her.
I always loved the music in Civ IV, especially this song, and Leonard Nimoy did a wonderful job on the quotations, here's a taste:http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=U1Z6e7igvMA.
The song is the "Our father" prayer in Swahili, if people didn't know.
Well, that's because they are fundamentally different.
With a hierarchial structure, you have the file in one place, and if the file truly should be in more than one place for ease of finding it through the directory structure, then you need to link to it (or worse) copy it to the other place. Let's say you link to it, then you need to go to the other place and create the shortcut to the file, the more directories your file needs to be under, the more you need to manually set this up, and manually change, if a change is needed. It's worse if you copy it, as you need to update the copies and most would do that manually. Most people don't do this, they put it under one palce, and just remember that it's there. New people who need the data won't know that, and have to traverse any/all trees until they find it.
a 'tag' based hierarchy is fundamentally different in that the information about the file stays with the file itself, if you want to add some parent link to it, you edit the file itself, and you don't have to do anything else, the system recognises the changes and readjusts on the fly.
It makes the data itself self-advertising and self-identifiable, thus organisation becomes quite simple and easy and very future proof regarding any changes because you don't have to recreate a directory structure manually just because you got a new file and you're wondering where to put it, it's all there already within the file itself.
example: a picture of Ma, Pa, brother X, brother Y, and sister Z, taken on location x: 64.163277,y: -21.859124, date:14/02/2011 10:16 relative terms: vacation, family, peacelight, Iceland, Ma, Pa, X, Y, Z, date, location - Someone managing a directory structure would never do anything more than just put it under "images/2011/vacation feb" - Someone doing tags on the picture itself adds whatever seems appropriate, and they don't have to worry about where it's kept as they can look up any tag they want and the picture will be found.
There is a crucial difference, a fundamental difference, and I hope going forward that this is the way data in the future will be organised.
Samsung has a history of crap support, their support for I8910 which was the Galaxy S predecessor is gone, even though the phone was released just 2 years ago.
Think about that, they released a product 2 years ago, and they've stopped any and all development for it, they've stopped any and all support for it, and the worst of it is that they didn't release anything as open source so that hobby developers could extend functionality for it, they just told everyone who bought an I8910 to go fuck themselves.
I'm never going to buy a Samsung product which depends on them having to upgrade it, or depends on them having to support it in the future, so something like the tab, nope. Forget it.
Ah the sweet irony of that paper.. everything he writes is a well constructed lie, he's lying to people about people lying to you to control you, and he does that so he can control them, could this be any more circular?
Could someone tell me what fallacy of argument this would fall under? Would be nice to know, I only know this as "the Bush argument" as he used this kind of circular thinking to take blame away from himself and put it on others.
Slashdot Mirror
Looking at it, it seems to be a case of adding letters (seems "E" is a likely candidate as well as a few of the consonants), removing letters (vowels seem like most likely candidate), jumbling what's left of the words and some words where he has changed the lettering to (and remembers that particular word like that permanently).
If he's of normal intelligence, and started doing it as a child, he can't have done more if he wanted to make sure he could read it again without too much effort.
Not sure whether the numbers are jumbled or not, a child would either think the numbers didn't make sense without the context, or have a simple rule to encrypt them (like half of each number always rounded down, or up [or maybe not always, maybe down or up to the "better" number]).
I agree, I'd also go as far as make her do the work of finding a laptop for herself, it's just stupid to let a mac-idiot who has no idea what to pick make choices for a woman.
It's been proven that for every 5 criteria a man has, a woman with the same 5 have an extra 5 on top of that as well. [citation needed]
tell her to get off her lazy ass and work it out for herself.
The interesting fact is, you really don't need them or any traffic signs for that matter: http://videosift.com/video/German-town-removed-all-traffic-signs-lights-and-crosswalks
"when it's really the desire for safe nuclear power vs the desire for maximising profit at inappropriate risk."
- is not even the right argument.. The right argument is "a nuclear power plant got hit by a huge fucking tsunami", this isn't about greed, or environment, it's about trying to contain the situation. Future plans will be about those things, but right now, there is no argument, there is only the question: can this be contained?
I'm guessing that they are recuperating the cost of each item by selling the item above that cost, not like with the Xbox and PS3 where they expect to recuperate the cost from sales of games.
If they are happy with the profit for each purchase of the item, why not allow people to do what they want with the items? it just makes sense.
And his merkin turns 25.
I have problems with your comments in more ways than one:
"I was a member of this class, and I'm glad this settlement got overturned" and " I don't have any out-of-print books".
- Let's forget the monetary value of a book, and focus on the fact that a book is a message from a person to society, i.e. focus on the importance of the message a book (your book?) is to the world. What do you think will happen when your book is out of print? Do you think the information you put out there is going to be useful to anyone when no one can find it? Out of print means out of sight and out of mind and it also means nowhere to be found with ease, you're purposefully neutering your own message to the world.
"Google is indexing and posting online all books that they can, not just ones that are out of print."
- I find it very surprising that you think this is a bad thing, this is a positive thing. Your message in the book that you wrote will be for everyone to see. If your book is still being sold and not out of copyright, google links to online stores where people can buy your book, if people "google" for things your book is relevant to, they'll find your book, see excerpts from it, and can decide to buy it. If it's out of copyright, or you didn't opt-out, people can read the books which were all in all lost. This is a good thing, this is a just thing.
"The reason that I'm glad that the settlement was overturned is that it gives Google far too much power. After paying the token sum, Google may put any out of print books online, but anyone else doing so gets a statutory fine for wilful copyright infringement of $750-$150,000 per book."
- You're kidding yourself if you think out-of-print books will magically all be reprinted whenever people want. This isn't about google getting power, this is about changing things so that people who are interested in _your_ book has access to _your_ message, and it isn't done to rip you off, it's done so that people can know that _your_ book is out there and relevant to what they're looking for.
"Google basically gambled that they could violate copyright on all books and get away with it."
- no, Google wanted to make sure that all authors who have made the effort of writing something of value to society got their work indexed and accessible online for the betterment of both the writers and the readers. the fact that you don't see this is because you're tainted with your own greed.
"Rather than lobbying to make some sane changes to copyright law, they want copyright to remain overly strict, but to just apply to everyone except them."
- What? Google is trying to fight the strictness and stupidity of the system, so you're either willfully ignorant, lying because you think you're protecting some self-interested idea of control, or just plain stupid. The copyright system is broken and out of date with the internet, computers, and the service google and other IT companies can offer people in the way of access to information within books. Google knows this, but there's too many little people like you who think that controlling whether an out-of-print book gets publicity or not is worth the cost of the books being completely forgotten, inaccessible and thus valueless to anyone and everyone. You're asking for control of something which is valueless with the control, but valuable to both writer and reader if you give it up.
Now lets put the monetary question back into the picture. an indexable, searchable online library of books, where if it's out of copyright, you can read it, if it's in copyright, you can read excerpts and then decide if you want to buy it, is a benefit to both seller and buyer. You're removing all obstacles between you as a seller and the buyers interested in your message.
The current system is that once a book is out of print, it's dead to the world, used copies will survive, and get handed around, but they will get destroyed one by one, maybe it will get reprinted, maybe not, and those who won't will not get read, and will thus be as useful as if the writer hadn't written it.
1) they're as low as 10 euros per year..
2) if a normal request takes 50 milliseconds, starting your secure connection will take 250ms, and any new requests will take 50-150ms to process.
3) this is fud.
So for a "little" extra lag for security and a "little" extra cost for a certificate, your security worries are less. Why aren't you already doing this?
The fact that there is a lag hit and a cost isn't the problem, your lack of security is.
From Wikipedia:
The Great Moore's Law Compensator (TGMLC), generally referred to as bloat, and also known as Wirth's law, is the principle that successive generations of computer software acquire enough bloat to offset the performance gains predicted by Moore's Law. In a 2008 article in InfoWorld, Randall C. Kennedy,[34] formerly of Intel, introduces this term using successive versions of Microsoft Office between the year 2000 and 2007 as his premise. Despite the gains in computational performance during this time period according to Moore's law, Office 2007 performed the same task at half the speed on a prototypical year 2007 computer as compared to Office 2000 on a year 2000 computer.
- I'll be happy once we finally break into quantum computers and can't have smaller transistors, and can't develop smaller or faster things than electron states, hopefully we'll start to focus on improving code, removing bloat, and making better software (madly optimistic, I know).
This way people who take overt care of their looks and social etiquette get the deal from you, so you're opening yourself up to social engineering, i.e. people who want to dupe you.
Does formal social bullshit matter, or results?
This and only this should be what claims of copyright infringement is.
Normal people downloading crap instead of buying them should just be labelled smart people.
It still wouldn't be a good representation, as the measurement isn't taken from multiple points on the row, it's a single point, and the height of the graph equals the signal strength of that single point, so you're not getting a 3d map, but a 2d map as it's a sensor strapped to his back that's taking the measurement.
If you want a real 3d map of wireless connectivity, you'd need to take 3 - 5 measurements per spot at different heights, and have very accurate gps location data per measurement, and via computers build up a real 3d map of networks and add all kinds of neat information like number of networks, intensity per network, openness/non-openness of networks and so on.
You shouldn't then forget the cellphone networks - or radio networks, and if you've already started measuring these, then the next step would be to measure all radiation just to show how much is natural and how much is technological and how things around us affect these things.
But that's perhaps a tad more difficult, would be interesting to see how and if it would work though.
It's open source, meaning you -yes you- can add code to it to help the blind. The blind can even help themselves if they know how to code, and I bet some already do.
This is what I hate about people who view themselves as victims. Blind people are not stupid people, just get off your lazy asses and create the code yourself, or get someone to help you do it.
Complaining about it doesn't help, and you're just making yourselves look stupid and naive.
That is the true power of open source, you don't have to beg someone else to do the work for you, you don't even have to ask, you just get the thing done yourself if that's what you want, and guess what, that's the normal procedure whether you're disabled or not. If you're interested in adding features to an open source project, add them yourself, whether you're disabled or not has nothing to do with it.
Try Project Reality - mod for BF2, comes pretty close and is pretty great.
It's good research. Meaning it's not just because he says how he did it (and might be lying, or misremembering the truth, or have a case of truthiness), he can prove it every step of the way with evidence.
For instance, your anecdote is not provable, you can't show me or anyone else a single proof that what you say is the truth, that's why it's an anecdote, as believable as a lie.
There's far more lies in our world then truths based on real evidence, and this man has paved the way to establish the learning procedure between parent and child, I wouldn't be surprised if this would in the future help people by developing better methods of teaching your child.
Nice to see that the melting pot of the US of A is still not melting. No one figured out to try and teach kids spanish in elementary school?
I learned danish and english in elementary school, and I could pick either french or german for high school, mandatory languages I had to learn as well as my native language of Icelandic.
Since then I've learnt a smattering of Japanese as well as italian, and as a kid I learned norwegian and swedish by reading books in those languages.
If more than 20% of the population speaks another language then english, it's stupid of you not to learn it, and it's stupid of americans not to teach their kids spanish.
It's like this business with the change from imperial units to metric units. The reason America failed at changing it was they were always giving people "ratio-translators" so when someone told you the kilometres, you'd calculate it back into miles, even though _he_just_told_you_how_far_it_was_already_
These translators are in the same way stupid, teach people spanish, that's the simplest and best way to do it, and if you're dumb and lazy enough to not want to do it, at least make your kids do it, they'll be better then you at least at something.
No.. you don't disagree, you can't disagree with false information, only opinions.
You should rather state : "What you have said/posted is false." as you back it up with good data which proves that he was stating a falsehood.
It's normal for you to not remember details from six months ago.
That's why before we had writing anything you needed to remember which was complicates, like complicated ideas you put in rhyme so that you could remember the rhyme.
It sounds stupid, but if you really want to remember something by yourself, either re-remember it regularly, or put it into somekind of rhyme to make concepts simpler to remember. All the hallmarks of good poetry bear with it the structure to remember it better as well.
... While golfing.
I'm from Iceland, and here the "noon" - or the time of day when the sun is at its highest is around 13:30 - this is because we set ourself to GMT standard time.
It's kind of weird, as the mornings over the winter are very dark, on the other hand you do have more "useful" daylight left.
I feel it's a better system then daylight savings, which we don't have.
Or, deal with facebook same as LinkedIn, i.e. it's all professional relationships.
That way, even though you're commenting on a friends link, you won't go overboard, and any decisions whether to comment or not will be done conservatively so you won't be looked at as an immature retard.
That might help you in the future, if someone decides to look you up on facebook from your new workplace after you friended him/her.
I always loved the music in Civ IV, especially this song, and Leonard Nimoy did a wonderful job on the quotations, here's a taste:http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=U1Z6e7igvMA.
The song is the "Our father" prayer in Swahili, if people didn't know.
Well, that's because they are fundamentally different.
With a hierarchial structure, you have the file in one place, and if the file truly should be in more than one place for ease of finding it through the directory structure, then you need to link to it (or worse) copy it to the other place. Let's say you link to it, then you need to go to the other place and create the shortcut to the file, the more directories your file needs to be under, the more you need to manually set this up, and manually change, if a change is needed. It's worse if you copy it, as you need to update the copies and most would do that manually. Most people don't do this, they put it under one palce, and just remember that it's there. New people who need the data won't know that, and have to traverse any/all trees until they find it.
a 'tag' based hierarchy is fundamentally different in that the information about the file stays with the file itself, if you want to add some parent link to it, you edit the file itself, and you don't have to do anything else, the system recognises the changes and readjusts on the fly.
It makes the data itself self-advertising and self-identifiable, thus organisation becomes quite simple and easy and very future proof regarding any changes because you don't have to recreate a directory structure manually just because you got a new file and you're wondering where to put it, it's all there already within the file itself.
example: a picture of Ma, Pa, brother X, brother Y, and sister Z, taken on location x: 64.163277,y: -21.859124, date:14/02/2011 10:16 relative terms: vacation, family, peacelight, Iceland, Ma, Pa, X, Y, Z, date, location
- Someone managing a directory structure would never do anything more than just put it under "images/2011/vacation feb"
- Someone doing tags on the picture itself adds whatever seems appropriate, and they don't have to worry about where it's kept as they can look up any tag they want and the picture will be found.
There is a crucial difference, a fundamental difference, and I hope going forward that this is the way data in the future will be organised.
Samsung has a history of crap support, their support for I8910 which was the Galaxy S predecessor is gone, even though the phone was released just 2 years ago.
Think about that, they released a product 2 years ago, and they've stopped any and all development for it, they've stopped any and all support for it, and the worst of it is that they didn't release anything as open source so that hobby developers could extend functionality for it, they just told everyone who bought an I8910 to go fuck themselves.
I'm never going to buy a Samsung product which depends on them having to upgrade it, or depends on them having to support it in the future, so something like the tab, nope. Forget it.
Ah the sweet irony of that paper.. everything he writes is a well constructed lie, he's lying to people about people lying to you to control you, and he does that so he can control them, could this be any more circular?
Could someone tell me what fallacy of argument this would fall under? Would be nice to know, I only know this as "the Bush argument" as he used this kind of circular thinking to take blame away from himself and put it on others.