Sadly, even when it's possible to do otherwise, seeding is necessary for the safety factor.
In you example, you provided several good methods of creating rocket propulsion, and they would likely work. However, they're also a LOT more prone to blowing up on the launchpad or workshop... just think of welding a makeshift rocket (with live fuel inside) to the main body... goodbye team.
Similarly, they've been known to seed the junkyard for other vital parts. In one of the eps in the last series, the challenge was a steam-powered car (see www.the-nerds.org for one of the teams' website with design notes). For that, they provided steam boilers and engines, for both the safety and complexity factor...
Making a steam engine in the 10 hr time limit would be horrible, especially in conjunction with the rest of the car. Making a boiler would not only be as bad but also dangerous - the seeded ones had inspection certificates on file. Also, reportedly they needed a licensed plumber to inspect the plumbing on the cars before the race.
The purpose of this show is to highlight brilliant hackish mechanical engineering, not to be ultra-realistic, and it works.
Child-porn is illegal, and whether the medium is virtual or actual, does it matter? If not, then would only the child porn, observed first person be illegal? Those are just "pictures" and that's not the same as being there.
You are perfectly correct, sir, but you're not using the correct definition of 'virtual.' In this specific case, virtual does not mean electronic form, it (as I understand it) means computer-generated, as in computer rendered. The 'no children were harmed in the making of this picture' kinda thing: no acts had to be committed by or to anyone.
Hence, all your comments about the various distribution mechanisms were correct, but virtual child porn does not mean normal child porn in a.jpeg.
If I'm absolutly correct about that last one, sorry Slashdot. You can remove this comment if the lawyers knock on your door
BZZZZZZZT!
Congratulations, but you have probably ensured that something like that could never happen. (Let me be the first to say 'Thank God!')
As the current judiciary interprets the law, that is now 'your' idea - if they go and do it, it can easily be taken that they were ripping off your idea, especially if it can be shown that any of them read Slashdot. This has happened in the literature/screenwriter's world - J. Michael Straczynski recently (flamed isn't the right word... 'obliterated' sounds more like it) someone who posted to rec.arts.sf.tv.bab5.moderated with a possible story idea for a possible future series, relaying the tale of an author who had to can a novel because of the same/similar thing.
So the moral of the story here, folks, is to come up with every possible Pokemon and/or Pilsbury idea possible, post it here, and forward it to the heads of the respective companies - then they'll be able to do nothing.:)
However, there's not a chance in hell it will get implemented.
You are forgetting the Mighty Power (tm, patent pending) of the Broadcast industry/NAB. They cannot stream or individualize content. Your solution is great, but it would entail the demise of the entire broadcast industry.
If your system would require FCC regulation/approval at any step in the process (and it might as a content providing industry), you can bet that it would not pass muster.
Just as the Supreme Court has upheld the right to time-shift media, they will be forced to uphold the right to Location-shift media for personal use.
It is a fundamental gurantee of fair-use that you are allowed to record a program/song in order to play it back later for personal use. This is not different than recording in one location for palayback in another. Sure, this can be abused to allow for institutional/infringing copies, but so can time-shifting.
Disallowing location-shifting entirely to ban copyright infringement in this manner also bans a substantial amount of common, non-infringing uses. The copy-never bits on broadcast material (and possibly purchased video/DVD, depending on the true legality of backup copies) also disallow fair, already established time-shifting use, and thus are illegal for that.
Furthermore, eliminating institutional pirate copies is a rather simple matter if the above copy-protection is feasible. Instead of trying to block copies entirely, simply have the chips insert a unique, continuous, and non-personally identifiable (and invisible) watermark into each copy. Should the material turn up being sold on the street corner for $2 a pop, it can be traced back to the unique chip, and eventually the person (with enough investigation) who made the illegal copies.
Finally: Don't even try to use it in a math class or other highly symbolic class. Machines are optimized for text, and just don't deal well with inputting differential equations. It does seem a bit odd that Computer Engineers would have the hardest time using a computer to take notes, but that is what I've found. History, philosophy, even chemistry were fine, but all the nifty diagrams and charts made notetaking in upper division CS, CpE and EE classes substantially more difficult.
Hm. It won't be the cheapest thing on the block, but if you're willing to stick (so far as I know) to a standard Windows install and maybe a Pentium-class machine, you could try something akin to Mathematica or Maple. Those symbolic math [:)] programs allow you to store/save your work, and they'll help (if needed) with some of the math itself, too.
They'll also help with some of the graphing, iterating, etc. that you'd do with a normal calculator (*coughTI89cough*).
My computer priveleges were revoked for a month because they didn't want to "take chances".
I'm no lawyer, but, IMO, you should have immediately called a lawyer and asked for a writ of habeas corpus. Also, depending on the particularities of the computer 'contract' that they made you sign, you might have been able to sue for breac of the aformentioned contract.
But there are a few good teachers there, such as my electronics teacher, who is PAYING me to remove the security software off the computers in his room.
You lucky bastard. You get individual software - my high school (and the entire district, for that matter) has gone with a bess proxy.
I know that you can get around it pretty quickly, but I think the proxy is set up on a 56k modem - even when you operate w/o addt'l proxies to avoid bess, the network has slown from a really fast clip (last year) to something slow enough to take driving down to the local college for the download into serious consideration.
The saddest part about all this is that the school newspaper quoted a 'media specialist,' ie librarian, as saying the slowdown is good because it keeps people off of the network.
False. The distribution has nothing to do with it. Edit/etc/X11/XF86Config and change ONE LINE, which will be a very intuitive process if you know about that file.
Sadly, this is where the People Who Know What They Are Doing go wrong.
From the perspective of the Average User, you just spouted off some mumbo-jumbo that will never make any sense. "/etc/Xwhat? Wazzat?"
The Average User, as the article pointed out, does not even understand Windows! This is a nightmare situation! These people open up.txt files in Word, save things wherever the application tells them to, and don't delete the redundant backups of autoexec.bat and config.sys that everything under the sun makes.
Text files scare these people. Even 'resolution' scares these people. If you ever work with Average Users, you tell them, in regards to resolution, that the text becomes smaller but they fit more on the screen. Color depth is a little more concrete, bur don't even get started about 'bits'.
There is a market for 'protecting' software that hides and read-protects all important system files for a reson. Even given the (addmittedly usable) GUI of all Win9x, users will still manage to destroy their system.
And now you ask them to edit text files to change settings. What a brilliant idea! I'm sure their computer experience will increase (and their concurring fear of computers' flexibility decrease) once they have to fire up a bona-fide editor to change settings.
The GUI is there to protect people. People find it complex, we add in a graphical layer to organize all reasonable commands and (most importantly) limit the range of options to possible, if not strictly reasonable, values. All forms of Linux, although I love them and the respect for the user that they come with, simply do not have that kind of protection suitable for the end user.
In short, I agree with the original article - ignoring all other faults, Linux distributions are too complex for the average user. Interfaces are quickly moving the way of a single, gigantic button that says "OK," and Linux represents the opposite end of the spectrum. Not that it is a bad thing.
(On a side note, I suggest everyone read the BOFH archives. Funnyfunnyfunny.)
Has anyone else seen that that article makes almost no criticism if the split? It seems to be taken for given that the P2 wil lbe a runaway success, etc. IMO, the P two will be an interesting platform, but it will have to have the support of the gamemakers for it to do anything at all. Will the independant guys support this platform? It's a given that the technology is there, but considering the quality of many games produced, I'm not sure if it will provide a vast improvement over existing games. (Then again, many people are open-jawed, GrApHiCz RuLeZ idiots, so I'm buying stock.)
Slashdot Mirror
The blonde host, Cathy (Iforgetherlastname), is also one of the executive producers of the show, as I remember... they're not likely to remove her. :)
In you example, you provided several good methods of creating rocket propulsion, and they would likely work. However, they're also a LOT more prone to blowing up on the launchpad or workshop... just think of welding a makeshift rocket (with live fuel inside) to the main body... goodbye team.
Similarly, they've been known to seed the junkyard for other vital parts. In one of the eps in the last series, the challenge was a steam-powered car (see www.the-nerds.org for one of the teams' website with design notes). For that, they provided steam boilers and engines, for both the safety and complexity factor...
Making a steam engine in the 10 hr time limit would be horrible, especially in conjunction with the rest of the car. Making a boiler would not only be as bad but also dangerous - the seeded ones had inspection certificates on file. Also, reportedly they needed a licensed plumber to inspect the plumbing on the cars before the race.
The purpose of this show is to highlight brilliant hackish mechanical engineering, not to be ultra-realistic, and it works.
Okay, anyone here care to speculate why the DOD would want or care about this kind of info?
THIS is how you defeat crackers - you don't go after them with lawyers, you defeat them at their own game.
Of course, how long again do we have until they repeat the process all over again? :)
You are perfectly correct, sir, but you're not using the correct definition of 'virtual.' In this specific case, virtual does not mean electronic form, it (as I understand it) means computer-generated, as in computer rendered. The 'no children were harmed in the making of this picture' kinda thing: no acts had to be committed by or to anyone.
Hence, all your comments about the various distribution mechanisms were correct, but virtual child porn does not mean normal child porn in a .jpeg.
BZZZZZZZT!
Congratulations, but you have probably ensured that something like that could never happen. (Let me be the first to say 'Thank God!')
As the current judiciary interprets the law, that is now 'your' idea - if they go and do it, it can easily be taken that they were ripping off your idea, especially if it can be shown that any of them read Slashdot. This has happened in the literature/screenwriter's world - J. Michael Straczynski recently (flamed isn't the right word... 'obliterated' sounds more like it) someone who posted to rec.arts.sf.tv.bab5.moderated with a possible story idea for a possible future series, relaying the tale of an author who had to can a novel because of the same/similar thing.
So the moral of the story here, folks, is to come up with every possible Pokemon and/or Pilsbury idea possible, post it here, and forward it to the heads of the respective companies - then they'll be able to do nothing. :)
However, there's not a chance in hell it will get implemented.
You are forgetting the Mighty Power (tm, patent pending) of the Broadcast industry/NAB. They cannot stream or individualize content. Your solution is great, but it would entail the demise of the entire broadcast industry.
If your system would require FCC regulation/approval at any step in the process (and it might as a content providing industry), you can bet that it would not pass muster.
It is a fundamental gurantee of fair-use that you are allowed to record a program/song in order to play it back later for personal use. This is not different than recording in one location for palayback in another. Sure, this can be abused to allow for institutional/infringing copies, but so can time-shifting.
Disallowing location-shifting entirely to ban copyright infringement in this manner also bans a substantial amount of common, non-infringing uses. The copy-never bits on broadcast material (and possibly purchased video/DVD, depending on the true legality of backup copies) also disallow fair, already established time-shifting use, and thus are illegal for that.
Furthermore, eliminating institutional pirate copies is a rather simple matter if the above copy-protection is feasible. Instead of trying to block copies entirely, simply have the chips insert a unique, continuous, and non-personally identifiable (and invisible) watermark into each copy. Should the material turn up being sold on the street corner for $2 a pop, it can be traced back to the unique chip, and eventually the person (with enough investigation) who made the illegal copies.
- I also can't close my tags, apparantly. :)
Hm. It won't be the cheapest thing on the block, but if you're willing to stick (so far as I know) to a standard Windows install and maybe a Pentium-class machine, you could try something akin to Mathematica or Maple. Those symbolic math [:)] programs allow you to store/save your work, and they'll help (if needed) with some of the math itself, too.
They'll also help with some of the graphing, iterating, etc. that you'd do with a normal calculator (*coughTI89cough*).
I'm no lawyer, but, IMO, you should have immediately called a lawyer and asked for a writ of habeas corpus. Also, depending on the particularities of the computer 'contract' that they made you sign, you might have been able to sue for breac of the aformentioned contract.
You lucky bastard. You get individual software - my high school (and the entire district, for that matter) has gone with a bess proxy.
I know that you can get around it pretty quickly, but I think the proxy is set up on a 56k modem - even when you operate w/o addt'l proxies to avoid bess, the network has slown from a really fast clip (last year) to something slow enough to take driving down to the local college for the download into serious consideration.
The saddest part about all this is that the school newspaper quoted a 'media specialist,' ie librarian, as saying the slowdown is good because it keeps people off of the network.
Sadly, this is where the People Who Know What They Are Doing go wrong.
From the perspective of the Average User, you just spouted off some mumbo-jumbo that will never make any sense. "/etc/Xwhat? Wazzat?"
The Average User, as the article pointed out, does not even understand Windows! This is a nightmare situation! These people open up .txt files in Word, save things wherever the application tells them to, and don't delete the redundant backups of autoexec.bat and config.sys that everything under the sun makes.
Text files scare these people. Even 'resolution' scares these people. If you ever work with Average Users, you tell them, in regards to resolution, that the text becomes smaller but they fit more on the screen. Color depth is a little more concrete, bur don't even get started about 'bits'.
There is a market for 'protecting' software that hides and read-protects all important system files for a reson. Even given the (addmittedly usable) GUI of all Win9x, users will still manage to destroy their system.
And now you ask them to edit text files to change settings. What a brilliant idea! I'm sure their computer experience will increase (and their concurring fear of computers' flexibility decrease) once they have to fire up a bona-fide editor to change settings.
The GUI is there to protect people. People find it complex, we add in a graphical layer to organize all reasonable commands and (most importantly) limit the range of options to possible, if not strictly reasonable, values. All forms of Linux, although I love them and the respect for the user that they come with, simply do not have that kind of protection suitable for the end user.
In short, I agree with the original article - ignoring all other faults, Linux distributions are too complex for the average user. Interfaces are quickly moving the way of a single, gigantic button that says "OK," and Linux represents the opposite end of the spectrum. Not that it is a bad thing.
(On a side note, I suggest everyone read the BOFH archives. Funnyfunnyfunny.)
Has anyone else seen that that article makes almost no criticism if the split? It seems to be taken for given that the P2 wil lbe a runaway success, etc. IMO, the P two will be an interesting platform, but it will have to have the support of the gamemakers for it to do anything at all. Will the independant guys support this platform? It's a given that the technology is there, but considering the quality of many games produced, I'm not sure if it will provide a vast improvement over existing games. (Then again, many people are open-jawed, GrApHiCz RuLeZ idiots, so I'm buying stock.)