My inside source tells me they have a marketing budget of $1 Billion. I had to capitalize and spell that out, writing $1B doesn't seem to do it justice.
It's better to spell it out, otherwise some people may think it was $1 Bullion.
So right now Microsoft is getting decked out in cool clothes from its fairy godmother, and about to make a stunning entrance that turns everybody's head?
... Inside a carriage made of a fruit with attached mice?
This is my new internet filter. Load news / aggregation site , press "Ctrl+F" in chrome, type "apple" and count. If count > 10 on a single page, I never go there again.
Not the greatest fan of orchards or cider, I gather.
Are we really, really much better off than the poor schmucks in N. Korea?
You're a fucking retard and I hope you some day get to know in person someone who's been tortured so you get to understand what are "the poor schmucks in N.Korea" going through.
With my excuses to the rest of slashdotters for having to read this.
If it's illegal then, even if a large number of members of the general public know how to do it, they won't because they don't want to risk being thrown in jail over it.
That was before the war on pirates. Nowadays most people are already guilty beyond any chance of payment if the government decides to target their computer activities, so many people* stopped caring about computer related crimes.
Additionally, if the penalty for encryption is lower than "everything you own or will ever own", it pays to encrypt your P2P activities.
*:Obviously that's just a personal perception based on my environment, not the result of a sociological study I can reference.
The mafia is smart enough to outsmart this, street gangs are smart enough, terrorists are smart enough. This is to watch the civilian population like you and me.
Are you implying that you and him aren't smart enough to develop your own encryption scheme?
I'm not completely sure about the slashdot demographics but I think more than three quarters of the readers are capable of searching an algorithm and implementing it in less than a day in a way that wouldn't leave beckdoors for the government.
Not true - taking a picture is by definition determining the colour of the surface -if you can get the colour of the surface exactly, you can get the picture.
That's only partially true. In a photo the received surface's color comes from the position and angle of that surface relative to the camera and the lights. If you know the 3D map of the object you can reverse that composition and gather the original information. That original information is what I called the "color data".
For example, with a picture of a sphere and a 3D map you can determine the real color of the sphere (not the color of the light it's currently reflecting towards your objective) and use that information to render a new sphere with a different source of lighting.
Not only source but also intensity, color, etc. Essentially that lets you render the picture you want over your 3D colored canvas.
You need much less light to know the color of a surface than to make a decent picture.
A badly directed light that gives you an awful picture, does give you color data. Take that data, apply on 3d model, create light sources, render picture.
That problem will be solved shortly. We just need a bit more computational power on the cameras and a separable flash.
You point the camera to your target. The camerta creates a 3D map of the room, calculates the perfect surface for reflection and, in the screen, it points that angle to you.
You separate the flash (camera in one hand, flash in the other) point it as the camera showed you, and make the picture.
The camera will have a secondary flash to remove shadows.
All the technology exists at this moment but I don't think a camera sized computer can do 3D maps at a reasonable speed.
These robots obey the three laws, so one won't ever go bezerk and crush the skull of a human...
I think that's precisely the point. It must be relatively easy to just not give the robot enough strength to harm a skull. So, you get a almost completely safe robot that handle's people's heads.
Five years later, the population becomes ready to accept robots in their homes. This is but a stepping stone to make people feel safe:
Head wash -> back massage -> chiropraxis -> open heart operations -> brain tumor removal -> handjob.
You may think otherwise but fucking with the general public in France is not a good idea. First cars start to combust spontaneously. Then it's buildings. Before you have time to react, people are having their head separated from the rest of their body.
Slashdot Mirror
It would have been much better to turn the iPod into an Android phone.
Unless they now release a way to install Android in the resulting pseudo-iPhone.
They can call it iBerration.
iTypical?
iBnormality?
Damn! you're a tough public. Tip the waitress anyway and don't worry, I won't be here all week.
I guess that's ONE way to disagree with people on Slashdot.
Well, it's a first step.
"One day I'm going to become rich and famous after I invent a device that allows you to stab people in the face over the internet"
Lexi Lacey?Seriously?
Aren't there laws to protect children from that?
My inside source tells me they have a marketing budget of $1 Billion. I had to capitalize and spell that out, writing $1B doesn't seem to do it justice.
It's better to spell it out, otherwise some people may think it was $1 Bullion.
So right now Microsoft is getting decked out in cool clothes from its fairy godmother, and about to make a stunning entrance that turns everybody's head?
... Inside a carriage made of a fruit with attached mice?
It's a PROPHECY!
The Windows powered IDesktop is coming!
REPENT!
This is my new internet filter. Load news / aggregation site , press "Ctrl+F" in chrome, type "apple" and count. If count > 10 on a single page, I never go there again.
Not the greatest fan of orchards or cider, I gather.
What do you expect to see as entrance to the MMO lego city?
1 - Two majestic statues of great kings of the antiquity.
2 - A large lego WOW-like portal.
3 - A giant penis.
If you answered anything but 3, please select "noob" difficulty, as you clearly know nothing of online gaming.
Have they upgraded to ELF binaries yet?
They did but the result was... a bit gay.
They're now planning an upgrade to DWARF binaries.
Are we really, really much better off than the poor schmucks in N. Korea?
You're a fucking retard and I hope you some day get to know in person someone who's been tortured so you get to understand what are "the poor schmucks in N.Korea" going through.
With my excuses to the rest of slashdotters for having to read this.
If it's illegal then, even if a large number of members of the general public know how to do it, they won't because they don't want to risk being thrown in jail over it.
That was before the war on pirates. Nowadays most people are already guilty beyond any chance of payment if the government decides to target their computer activities, so many people* stopped caring about computer related crimes.
Additionally, if the penalty for encryption is lower than "everything you own or will ever own", it pays to encrypt your P2P activities.
*:Obviously that's just a personal perception based on my environment, not the result of a sociological study I can reference.
what are the practical applications for the real world? How will this help prevent our extinction?
Easy. Before our extinction by blackhole impact we apply our knowledge on blackhole dissipation and dissolve it.
The mafia is smart enough to outsmart this, street gangs are smart enough, terrorists are smart enough. This is to watch the civilian population like you and me.
Are you implying that you and him aren't smart enough to develop your own encryption scheme?
I'm not completely sure about the slashdot demographics but I think more than three quarters of the readers are capable of searching an algorithm and implementing it in less than a day in a way that wouldn't leave beckdoors for the government.
let's not resort to slippery slope arguments.
First I didn't resort to slippery slope arguments.
Then I didn't denouce fallacies. ...
When it came down to basic logic, and by that time it was too late.
You're talking about a group of people that intentionally blow themselves up to make their point.quote>
I'm all for condemning terrorism but calling stupid everyone who's ever sacrificed his life for his ideals is pretty shortsighted.
Head wash -> back massage -> chiropraxis -> open heart operations -> brain tumor removal -> handjob.
umm. I think I can speak for all present when I say we are more than comfortable with that handjob being available right now.
Ok; you put your stuff in the iron grip.
I'll keep it in my pants until I've seen it do neurosurgery on the president during an earthquake.
Not true - taking a picture is by definition determining the colour of the surface -if you can get the colour of the surface exactly, you can get the picture.
That's only partially true. In a photo the received surface's color comes from the position and angle of that surface relative to the camera and the lights. If you know the 3D map of the object you can reverse that composition and gather the original information. That original information is what I called the "color data".
For example, with a picture of a sphere and a 3D map you can determine the real color of the sphere (not the color of the light it's currently reflecting towards your objective) and use that information to render a new sphere with a different source of lighting.
Not only source but also intensity, color, etc. Essentially that lets you render the picture you want over your 3D colored canvas.
With no light, there is no colour data.
You need much less light to know the color of a surface than to make a decent picture.
A badly directed light that gives you an awful picture, does give you color data. Take that data, apply on 3d model, create light sources, render picture.
Photoshop filters are no replacement for actual light.
...Yet.
Eventually, a raw 3D picture with color data can be rendered into any picture you may want.
We will be able to take a picture in awful conditions and then recreate a "fake" picture with the 3D model, the true colors and any lighting we want.
I predict this will exist in under ten years.
That problem will be solved shortly. We just need a bit more computational power on the cameras and a separable flash.
You point the camera to your target. The camerta creates a 3D map of the room, calculates the perfect surface for reflection and, in the screen, it points that angle to you.
You separate the flash (camera in one hand, flash in the other) point it as the camera showed you, and make the picture.
The camera will have a secondary flash to remove shadows.
All the technology exists at this moment but I don't think a camera sized computer can do 3D maps at a reasonable speed.
These robots obey the three laws, so one won't ever go bezerk and crush the skull of a human...
I think that's precisely the point. It must be relatively easy to just not give the robot enough strength to harm a skull. So, you get a almost completely safe robot that handle's people's heads.
Five years later, the population becomes ready to accept robots in their homes. This is but a stepping stone to make people feel safe:
Head wash -> back massage -> chiropraxis -> open heart operations -> brain tumor removal -> handjob.
Well, at least they started in France.
You may think otherwise but fucking with the general public in France is not a good idea. First cars start to combust spontaneously. Then it's buildings. Before you have time to react, people are having their head separated from the rest of their body.
Offtopic personal stress release. Please ignore.
FUCK!FUCK!FUCK THEM TO FUCKING HELL!
FUCK!
I'm so fucking tired of being surrounded by useless retards!
FUCK!
Fucking hell...
FUCK!
A very similar experiment was run in Lomonosov (Moscow State University) in 1982.
Their results, however, followed the pattern:
'%NOUN% felt %EMOTION% for you.'
I admit being truly scared of alzheimer's.
It may be completely irrational, but cancer looks much less scary in comparison.
Oh, I see.
My retort is therefore reduced to: "I concur".