...considering Bose have single-driver units that fill a room, and I have a pair of headphones made by Angle & Curve (with one driver either side) which, with the softHD sound processor in my netbook, gives me "virtual" surround that sounds every bit as good as my acoustically balanced 5.1 PC setup.
I disagree. Providing new directions for sound to come from (above and below) will definitely provide a more immersive experience. Just think about a scene where planes fly overhead; in a current 7.1 setup the plane sounds like it's at your level, but with speakers overhead it will "feel" like the plane is flying over your head. Or imagine a rerelease of Tremors with a new audio mix so you can "feel" those things underneath you.
Convincing people to upgrade their hardware, be it in a home theater or at the theater itself, will take some effort not unlike previous audio hardware upgrades such as from mono to stereo to LCR to surround. But I think in 10 to 15 years we'll all be convinced how much more it adds to the movie and sports viewing experience.
Although for a successful home market, 62 + 2 speakers?! I don't know about that. Either units with multiple speakers within them so the number of "devices" to purchase is small and easy(ish) to setup or a reworking of the standard to bring the number of speakers down to something more realistic, like a 16+2.
Since then I haven't heard of any accidents. So please inform us what other accidents have occured at Scaled Composites relating to the rocket motors.
Furthermore, I've love to hear about your sources that characterize the current state of Scaled Composites' rocket motor development as being "problematic".
I think your information is four years old. Scaled Composites already has a schedule in place that includes, later this year, firing the rocket motor in flight, possibly even putting SpaceShipTwo into space by the end of this year (but that will probably happen in early 2012). And by the end of 2012 we'll probably see the first paid flights.
Future PS3 games will require the latest firmware be installed in order to play.
There's no way in hell I want to install a firmware that intentionally creates a backdoor into my system.
Therefore I have no other choice but to stop buying PS3 games. Sony will be losing my (albeit small) source of revenue and perhaps others will handle the situation in a similar way. Thus Sony loses out on revenue they'd otherwise have had they not made this move.
And I wonder if those in such a position will turn to piracy simply because they don't want to install a backdoored firmware -- further hurting Sony's bottom line.
Sony really doesn't seem to think these things through.
Fixed vertical navigation elements are a bad design choice. Anyone whose browser window is shorter than the vertical navigation element will not be able to scroll down and access those items in the menu that are below the height of the browser window.
Links are no longer underlined in summaries. This is bad because it makes locating and identifying clickable text much more difficult. The color and contrast difference between the non-link black color and the dark-green link color is too small to make identifying links easy without the underlined text. Underlined text representing links is a convention that's been in place since the modern web came into being. It's what people expect and are use to. By removing the underline of links you're removing a very critical piece of usability from the design.
And lastly, but having a fixed horizontal element along the top you make linking to bookmarks (named anchors) within the web page far more problematic. The browser will move the window down to a position that puts the anchor at the top of the window. But the top of the window is now blocked by this horizontal bar. As a result anyone who clicks on a bookmark to a position in the page will then be forced to scroll up a bit to reveal the crucial first few lines of text that they're trying to get to. What's worse is if a user doesn't realize this they may wind up missing out on critical information and may come away from reading comments or an article with the wrong impression or understanding of the content.
You're assuming the NIC manufacturer is conducting audits in the first place. If they are, there's probably single person who maintains a list of good hash values for the firmware. Bribe that person and the audits won't matter.
The easier solution is to simply buy the cards from the OEM, flash them with a malicious firmware, then resell those cards at discount prices. Are NIC manufacturers purchasing off-the-shelf goods and conducting audits on those? Probably not.
And even then, you could always create a worm that detects your NIC and flashes the firmware then removes itself. You've been rooted and there's no trace at the OS level of it and even if the NIC manufacturer is auditing their products off-the-shelf they're not auditing the one in your computer.
Blizzard has had some crap QA issues before, but 4.0.1 was one of their most atrocious releases to the point that they said some of the Mage glyph bugs just simply can't be fixed right now and that they had to just deal with it. How does crap like that get by their QA? We're not talking about some arcane feature with a small bug, we're talking about a major component of the system that is totally broken.
I think you really see it in the patch notes, which tend to contain about 1/10th of the actual changes made in a given patch. For example 4.0.1 includes a ton of new UI features such as graphical elements used to alert the user that a special ability is ready to be used. However nothing was ever disclosed about it nor were players given a chance to learn what each graphical identity means when its displayed. It becomes trial and error. Watch for the new graphic to appear, now look at your list of buffs to see if there's some new, temp buff there. Wait for it to go away and see if the graphic goes away as well. That's a lot of tedious crap to deal with, especially when you're in the middle of a boss fight.
I wonder if this guy's approach to development by keeping development teams small is responsible for the poor quality of both documentation and product.
This is just mathematician masturbation and it drives me nuts.
Order of birth, as is the exclusivity of the day of birth, are not given in this problem. Therefore boy,girl and girl,boy should not be included as separate items in the set, but rather treated simply as one item. Also why the whole Tuesday thing should be ignored as well. We're not told the other child was or was not born on a Tuesday. The information is irrelevant.
* That the evidence shows that the risk of having a crash is increased both for vehicles traveling slower than the average speed, and for those traveling above the average speed. * That the risk of being injured increases exponentially with speeds much faster than the median speed. * That the severity of a crash depends on the vehicle speed change at impact. * That there is limited evidence that suggests that lower speed limits result in lower speeds on a system wide basis. * That most crashes related to speed involve speed too fast for the conditions. * That more research is needed to determine the effectiveness of traffic calming.
Median speed. These stats are based around median speed. Increase the speed limit to 100mph and nothing changes according to these stats. So let's do that!
But
* That the severity of a crash depends on the vehicle speed change at impact. * That most crashes related to speed involve speed too fast for the conditions.
Really? These are quoted as reasons for speed limits?
Did you know most crashes that occur when it's raining out are due to slippery roads caused by rain? Did you know most crashes that happen at night are caused by low visibility? Did you know that if you don't get into a car, you're less likely to be involved in a car accident?
Right, so let's put limits on rain, the night, and ban all cars.
The real cause for the vast majority of accidents is the driver simply not being aware of both his or her surroundings and his or her's car's abilities. Like trying to take an exit in a top-heavy SUV at 60 and not realizing you might just roll over or that the light has turned red so you should probably stop before you get to the intersection. If you want to make a real impact on automobile-related accidents then there needs to be a major overhaul in driver's ed to include on-track emergency driving training and as well as requiring drivers to take refresher courses (which include on-track emergency driving training) every 5 to 10 years. You want a template? Look at Sweden, who have one of the lowest automobile accident rates in the world.
This seems to prove that DRM is bad even for the companies that use it.
DRM on old software no longer maintained could make it difficult for companies to redistribute their old software via new channels in the future. Imagine how many DRM'd CD/DVD games there are that may never be made available through online distribution systems like Steam because the copyright owner can't break the CD/DVD requirement mechanism and are unable to recompile the code to remove that restriction.
Do you think the people who implemented such DRM back in the 1990s and early 2000s ever thought about such a possibility?
What future distribution channels will be created that current software won't be distributed through because of limitations created through implementing DRM? Maybe there's a whole new industry about to be born around legally cracking DRM for copyright owners? Or does the DMCA make cracking DRM illegal even if it's done by or on behalf of the copyright owner?
The client (read:web browser) doesn't need Java installed. That's about it.
If you have Java installed on your machine you can run a Java-based VNC client. The Java-based VNC client could be stored on a web server. So the benefits of cross-platform compatibility or use-anywhere accessibility aren't new or unique to the HTML5 client.
But you don't need Java. But you do need an HTML5 capable browser. Both solutions require you install an application of some kind. But everyone has a browser, you say. Well, HTML5 isn't set to be ratified until 2012. Changes to the spec could still happen. Changes that might break this HTML5-based client. Whereas the Java-based client, I know, will work right now and will continue to work.
What's worse, you're introducing a new point of attack/failure into the system. If you're paranoid enough to want an encrypted VNC connection you now have to worry whether or not the VNC/XML server is encrypting it's connection to the VNC server. You can't prove that it is, you just have to trust that it is. Whereas with a Java-based client you can setup a tunnel through any number of means and know that your direct connection to the VNC server is safe.
You might argue the HTML5 client approach is more user-friendly; a less-technical user would find this solution far more convenient. A system admin might like the solution too as there's no need to worry about installing a JVM on the client or teaching the client how to start a Java application. But those arguments don't fly. Whether it's a JVM or a browser you will have to install some piece of software on the client machine. And a Java application can be delivered and launched over the web just as easily as some embedded HTML5 client. The ease-of-use to the end-user is the same.
It's a nice hack to showcase what HTML5 can do, but that's all it is.
I know these recent steps by Sony are done with the aim to prevent modding of PS3s, but these moves will actually drive more PS3 owners to mod or hack their PS3s.
The biggest problem with password security is user education.
USER. EDUCATION.
Forget the WHY password complexity and expiring passwords is important; end-users don't care about that.
Educate end-users on how to make passwords that are complex and easy to remember. Such a thing IS possible. For example teach users to pick a phrase or sentence and type that in, replacing all the instances of the letter E with the number 3 and to capitalize all vowels. All the user needs to remember is the phrase and the rules to make it complex. And the phrase can be something VERY easy to remember like "my daughter was born in march" which turns into "mydAught3rwAsbOrnInmArch". Maybe you leave the spaces in. Maybe you change A to 4 or L to 1. Whatever the user wants.
Apple's move to not include Flash will have some very good repercussions (I hope). Video on the web tends to be delivered through Flash. We need an open standard, not through a format or application owned by a single company. This is what makes HTML5 very enticing. And with Apple's move I think we'll see a stronger push towards HTML5 for video delivery.
I also hope Apple's move will force Adobe to put more effort towards building a stable and secure platform. Flash has a long history of being a major (if not #1) reason why browsers crash. If Adobe puts more effort into stabilizing Flash you will create a better user experience on the web.
And Adobe's work to make CS5 (and later) have the ability to export to HTML5 canvas is a brilliant way to keep Flash relevant. It will allow Flash to transfer from a content delivery platform to a content development platform. Apple's move will simply push this development forward a bit.
What exactly are they going to sue them for? Is there a law that says a company has to allow another company's product to interact with theirs?
Anti-trust violations. In the EU Microsoft has been forced to strip out IE from the OS and give end-users the option of installing a competitor's browser instead of IE in Windows. Microsoft never did anything to stop users from installing a third-party browser, they just gave you their own.
Apple is actively blocking Flash from their OS. You can't elect to install Flash.
So it would seem to me Adobe will look to sue Apple over anti-trust violations, perhaps under EU law.
If you're opening your PDFs with Google Docs then you're uploading your PDF to Google Docs first. Perhaps for some kind of unimportant document such as a manual or spec sheet this might not seem like a big deal. But if you're trying to open, say, last year's tax returns that you've saved in PDF, well now your tax return information is "in the cloud". Or maybe you're filling out a form from by your health care provider concerning some sort of particularly embarrassing medical issue. Do you really want that information "in the cloud"?
You may try to argue that Google Docs is safe and secure. I bet yesterday Adobe would have said Acrobat Reader was safe and secure too.
Next we'll see a six-panel LCD without bezels that can deform from a flat screen to having the monitors on either end of a 3x2 tilt out to create a concave screen (with proper distortion applied to the video simulate peripheral view) that creates an amazing and immerse experience.
But that's just a stop-gap (and probably a very expensive one at that).
The real end to this road is a giant 3-6' tall OLED screen that starts out flat, but can then be curved to create a similar wrap-around viewing experience. Only with OLEDs it will be one big, bendable screen and it'll cost a lot less in terms of electricity to run. Some kind of controller that handles video input would be responsible for detecting the curve in the screen and distorting the input video as necessary to make the whole thing look fan-fucking-tastic.
So their claim is legally correct and everything, isn't it?
IANAL, but an argument for fair use could be made. You could argue Cryptome's publication of the document is news worthy and being used for the purpose of criticism and comment.
I doubt any of those spiral galaxies are 500 million years from the big bang.
Just about every object in the image has a different age. Several of the spiral galaxies you see are billions of years from the big bang. The 500 million years from big bang objects are more likely to be giant clouds of gasses and stars. The sort of stuff we didn't see with the visible light images taken in 2004, but that we can now see with the infrared filters used to make the new image.
I took the 2004 UDF image and rotated/cropped as needed to match with the 2009 UDF image so you can switch between the two and compare the differences.
The new image uses infrared versus the visible light filters from the 2004 image. The resolution may not differ much between the two images, but the infrared will pick up deeper objects that we missed with the visible light filters. However the visible light image tends to pick up more detail such as in the spiral galaxy in the middle-left. That galaxy is known as UDF 7556 and what you see is how it was 6.1 billion years after the big bang.
What it has done is given IT administrators the opportunity to pass the buck when there's a problem with a system. Now when the e-mail system goes down for hours and employees can't access crucial data, the IT admin simply points at Google and says "it's not my fault or my problem".
That's all cloud computing offers. Unless you're a bit paranoid, in which case it also provides a single-point of attack for the government to eavesdrop under the banner of "keeping America safe".
Slashdot Mirror
Helicopters have the same problem of falling out of the sky if the engine fails. That has not stopped them from becoming quite popular.
...considering Bose have single-driver units that fill a room, and I have a pair of headphones made by Angle & Curve (with one driver either side) which, with the softHD sound processor in my netbook, gives me "virtual" surround that sounds every bit as good as my acoustically balanced 5.1 PC setup.
I disagree. Providing new directions for sound to come from (above and below) will definitely provide a more immersive experience. Just think about a scene where planes fly overhead; in a current 7.1 setup the plane sounds like it's at your level, but with speakers overhead it will "feel" like the plane is flying over your head. Or imagine a rerelease of Tremors with a new audio mix so you can "feel" those things underneath you.
Convincing people to upgrade their hardware, be it in a home theater or at the theater itself, will take some effort not unlike previous audio hardware upgrades such as from mono to stereo to LCR to surround. But I think in 10 to 15 years we'll all be convinced how much more it adds to the movie and sports viewing experience.
Although for a successful home market, 62 + 2 speakers?! I don't know about that. Either units with multiple speakers within them so the number of "devices" to purchase is small and easy(ish) to setup or a reworking of the standard to bring the number of speakers down to something more realistic, like a 16+2.
The accident you refer to happened four years ago. A little over a year later Scaled Composites released their findings into the cause of the accident and shared everything they learned in how to more safely handle the materials they were using with the industry.
Since then I haven't heard of any accidents. So please inform us what other accidents have occured at Scaled Composites relating to the rocket motors.
Furthermore, I've love to hear about your sources that characterize the current state of Scaled Composites' rocket motor development as being "problematic".
I think your information is four years old. Scaled Composites already has a schedule in place that includes, later this year, firing the rocket motor in flight, possibly even putting SpaceShipTwo into space by the end of this year (but that will probably happen in early 2012). And by the end of 2012 we'll probably see the first paid flights.
The engines are fine.
Future PS3 games will require the latest firmware be installed in order to play.
There's no way in hell I want to install a firmware that intentionally creates a backdoor into my system.
Therefore I have no other choice but to stop buying PS3 games. Sony will be losing my (albeit small) source of revenue and perhaps others will handle the situation in a similar way. Thus Sony loses out on revenue they'd otherwise have had they not made this move.
And I wonder if those in such a position will turn to piracy simply because they don't want to install a backdoored firmware -- further hurting Sony's bottom line.
Sony really doesn't seem to think these things through.
Fixed vertical navigation elements are a bad design choice. Anyone whose browser window is shorter than the vertical navigation element will not be able to scroll down and access those items in the menu that are below the height of the browser window.
Links are no longer underlined in summaries. This is bad because it makes locating and identifying clickable text much more difficult. The color and contrast difference between the non-link black color and the dark-green link color is too small to make identifying links easy without the underlined text. Underlined text representing links is a convention that's been in place since the modern web came into being. It's what people expect and are use to. By removing the underline of links you're removing a very critical piece of usability from the design.
And lastly, but having a fixed horizontal element along the top you make linking to bookmarks (named anchors) within the web page far more problematic. The browser will move the window down to a position that puts the anchor at the top of the window. But the top of the window is now blocked by this horizontal bar. As a result anyone who clicks on a bookmark to a position in the page will then be forced to scroll up a bit to reveal the crucial first few lines of text that they're trying to get to. What's worse is if a user doesn't realize this they may wind up missing out on critical information and may come away from reading comments or an article with the wrong impression or understanding of the content.
You're assuming the NIC manufacturer is conducting audits in the first place. If they are, there's probably single person who maintains a list of good hash values for the firmware. Bribe that person and the audits won't matter.
The easier solution is to simply buy the cards from the OEM, flash them with a malicious firmware, then resell those cards at discount prices. Are NIC manufacturers purchasing off-the-shelf goods and conducting audits on those? Probably not.
And even then, you could always create a worm that detects your NIC and flashes the firmware then removes itself. You've been rooted and there's no trace at the OS level of it and even if the NIC manufacturer is auditing their products off-the-shelf they're not auditing the one in your computer.
Blizzard has had some crap QA issues before, but 4.0.1 was one of their most atrocious releases to the point that they said some of the Mage glyph bugs just simply can't be fixed right now and that they had to just deal with it. How does crap like that get by their QA? We're not talking about some arcane feature with a small bug, we're talking about a major component of the system that is totally broken.
I think you really see it in the patch notes, which tend to contain about 1/10th of the actual changes made in a given patch. For example 4.0.1 includes a ton of new UI features such as graphical elements used to alert the user that a special ability is ready to be used. However nothing was ever disclosed about it nor were players given a chance to learn what each graphical identity means when its displayed. It becomes trial and error. Watch for the new graphic to appear, now look at your list of buffs to see if there's some new, temp buff there. Wait for it to go away and see if the graphic goes away as well. That's a lot of tedious crap to deal with, especially when you're in the middle of a boss fight.
I wonder if this guy's approach to development by keeping development teams small is responsible for the poor quality of both documentation and product.
When there stops being data to the contrary, I guess.
Care to share the contrary data?
When do we move on from whether or not the planet is warming up to why it's warming up?
This is just mathematician masturbation and it drives me nuts.
Order of birth, as is the exclusivity of the day of birth, are not given in this problem. Therefore boy,girl and girl,boy should not be included as separate items in the set, but rather treated simply as one item. Also why the whole Tuesday thing should be ignored as well. We're not told the other child was or was not born on a Tuesday. The information is irrelevant.
* That the evidence shows that the risk of having a crash is increased both for vehicles traveling slower than the average speed, and for those traveling above the average speed.
* That the risk of being injured increases exponentially with speeds much faster than the median speed.
* That the severity of a crash depends on the vehicle speed change at impact.
* That there is limited evidence that suggests that lower speed limits result in lower speeds on a system wide basis.
* That most crashes related to speed involve speed too fast for the conditions.
* That more research is needed to determine the effectiveness of traffic calming.
Median speed. These stats are based around median speed. Increase the speed limit to 100mph and nothing changes according to these stats. So let's do that!
But
* That the severity of a crash depends on the vehicle speed change at impact.
* That most crashes related to speed involve speed too fast for the conditions.
Really? These are quoted as reasons for speed limits?
Did you know most crashes that occur when it's raining out are due to slippery roads caused by rain?
Did you know most crashes that happen at night are caused by low visibility?
Did you know that if you don't get into a car, you're less likely to be involved in a car accident?
Right, so let's put limits on rain, the night, and ban all cars.
The real cause for the vast majority of accidents is the driver simply not being aware of both his or her surroundings and his or her's car's abilities. Like trying to take an exit in a top-heavy SUV at 60 and not realizing you might just roll over or that the light has turned red so you should probably stop before you get to the intersection. If you want to make a real impact on automobile-related accidents then there needs to be a major overhaul in driver's ed to include on-track emergency driving training and as well as requiring drivers to take refresher courses (which include on-track emergency driving training) every 5 to 10 years. You want a template? Look at Sweden, who have one of the lowest automobile accident rates in the world.
This seems to prove that DRM is bad even for the companies that use it.
DRM on old software no longer maintained could make it difficult for companies to redistribute their old software via new channels in the future. Imagine how many DRM'd CD/DVD games there are that may never be made available through online distribution systems like Steam because the copyright owner can't break the CD/DVD requirement mechanism and are unable to recompile the code to remove that restriction.
Do you think the people who implemented such DRM back in the 1990s and early 2000s ever thought about such a possibility?
What future distribution channels will be created that current software won't be distributed through because of limitations created through implementing DRM? Maybe there's a whole new industry about to be born around legally cracking DRM for copyright owners? Or does the DMCA make cracking DRM illegal even if it's done by or on behalf of the copyright owner?
The client (read:web browser) doesn't need Java installed. That's about it.
If you have Java installed on your machine you can run a Java-based VNC client. The Java-based VNC client could be stored on a web server. So the benefits of cross-platform compatibility or use-anywhere accessibility aren't new or unique to the HTML5 client.
But you don't need Java. But you do need an HTML5 capable browser. Both solutions require you install an application of some kind. But everyone has a browser, you say. Well, HTML5 isn't set to be ratified until 2012. Changes to the spec could still happen. Changes that might break this HTML5-based client. Whereas the Java-based client, I know, will work right now and will continue to work.
What's worse, you're introducing a new point of attack/failure into the system. If you're paranoid enough to want an encrypted VNC connection you now have to worry whether or not the VNC/XML server is encrypting it's connection to the VNC server. You can't prove that it is, you just have to trust that it is. Whereas with a Java-based client you can setup a tunnel through any number of means and know that your direct connection to the VNC server is safe.
You might argue the HTML5 client approach is more user-friendly; a less-technical user would find this solution far more convenient. A system admin might like the solution too as there's no need to worry about installing a JVM on the client or teaching the client how to start a Java application. But those arguments don't fly. Whether it's a JVM or a browser you will have to install some piece of software on the client machine. And a Java application can be delivered and launched over the web just as easily as some embedded HTML5 client. The ease-of-use to the end-user is the same.
It's a nice hack to showcase what HTML5 can do, but that's all it is.
I know these recent steps by Sony are done with the aim to prevent modding of PS3s, but these moves will actually drive more PS3 owners to mod or hack their PS3s.
The biggest problem with password security is user education.
USER. EDUCATION.
Forget the WHY password complexity and expiring passwords is important; end-users don't care about that.
Educate end-users on how to make passwords that are complex and easy to remember. Such a thing IS possible. For example teach users to pick a phrase or sentence and type that in, replacing all the instances of the letter E with the number 3 and to capitalize all vowels. All the user needs to remember is the phrase and the rules to make it complex. And the phrase can be something VERY easy to remember like "my daughter was born in march" which turns into "mydAught3rwAsbOrnInmArch". Maybe you leave the spaces in. Maybe you change A to 4 or L to 1. Whatever the user wants.
It produces a complex, easy to remember password.
Apple's move to not include Flash will have some very good repercussions (I hope). Video on the web tends to be delivered through Flash. We need an open standard, not through a format or application owned by a single company. This is what makes HTML5 very enticing. And with Apple's move I think we'll see a stronger push towards HTML5 for video delivery.
I also hope Apple's move will force Adobe to put more effort towards building a stable and secure platform. Flash has a long history of being a major (if not #1) reason why browsers crash. If Adobe puts more effort into stabilizing Flash you will create a better user experience on the web.
And Adobe's work to make CS5 (and later) have the ability to export to HTML5 canvas is a brilliant way to keep Flash relevant. It will allow Flash to transfer from a content delivery platform to a content development platform. Apple's move will simply push this development forward a bit.
What exactly are they going to sue them for? Is there a law that says a company has to allow another company's product to interact with theirs?
Anti-trust violations. In the EU Microsoft has been forced to strip out IE from the OS and give end-users the option of installing a competitor's browser instead of IE in Windows. Microsoft never did anything to stop users from installing a third-party browser, they just gave you their own.
Apple is actively blocking Flash from their OS. You can't elect to install Flash.
So it would seem to me Adobe will look to sue Apple over anti-trust violations, perhaps under EU law.
This is a very bad idea.
If you're opening your PDFs with Google Docs then you're uploading your PDF to Google Docs first. Perhaps for some kind of unimportant document such as a manual or spec sheet this might not seem like a big deal. But if you're trying to open, say, last year's tax returns that you've saved in PDF, well now your tax return information is "in the cloud". Or maybe you're filling out a form from by your health care provider concerning some sort of particularly embarrassing medical issue. Do you really want that information "in the cloud"?
You may try to argue that Google Docs is safe and secure. I bet yesterday Adobe would have said Acrobat Reader was safe and secure too.
Next we'll see a six-panel LCD without bezels that can deform from a flat screen to having the monitors on either end of a 3x2 tilt out to create a concave screen (with proper distortion applied to the video simulate peripheral view) that creates an amazing and immerse experience.
But that's just a stop-gap (and probably a very expensive one at that).
The real end to this road is a giant 3-6' tall OLED screen that starts out flat, but can then be curved to create a similar wrap-around viewing experience. Only with OLEDs it will be one big, bendable screen and it'll cost a lot less in terms of electricity to run. Some kind of controller that handles video input would be responsible for detecting the curve in the screen and distorting the input video as necessary to make the whole thing look fan-fucking-tastic.
I give it 20 years. But this will be mainstream.
So their claim is legally correct and everything, isn't it?
IANAL, but an argument for fair use could be made. You could argue Cryptome's publication of the document is news worthy and being used for the purpose of criticism and comment.
Flash has been allowing this for years. Along with web cam access.
I doubt any of those spiral galaxies are 500 million years from the big bang.
Just about every object in the image has a different age. Several of the spiral galaxies you see are billions of years from the big bang. The 500 million years from big bang objects are more likely to be giant clouds of gasses and stars. The sort of stuff we didn't see with the visible light images taken in 2004, but that we can now see with the infrared filters used to make the new image.
I took the 2004 UDF image and rotated/cropped as needed to match with the 2009 UDF image so you can switch between the two and compare the differences.
2004 UDF | 2009 UDF
The new image uses infrared versus the visible light filters from the 2004 image. The resolution may not differ much between the two images, but the infrared will pick up deeper objects that we missed with the visible light filters. However the visible light image tends to pick up more detail such as in the spiral galaxy in the middle-left. That galaxy is known as UDF 7556 and what you see is how it was 6.1 billion years after the big bang.
This stuff is so cool.
Has cloud computing stepped up to prime time?
No.
What it has done is given IT administrators the opportunity to pass the buck when there's a problem with a system. Now when the e-mail system goes down for hours and employees can't access crucial data, the IT admin simply points at Google and says "it's not my fault or my problem".
That's all cloud computing offers. Unless you're a bit paranoid, in which case it also provides a single-point of attack for the government to eavesdrop under the banner of "keeping America safe".
those who receive the checks do whatever they do with the check WITHOUT REPORTING ON IT IN ANY WAY WHATSOEVER.
If it doesn't generate press they're going to stop doing it.