This doesn't appear to be analyzing the photo. If you look at the binary of the jpg image, it probably takes a sample of the code that comprises the image as a seed for the security. The statement appears to suggest that they must exchange the actual photo image. I take a photo of myself and then send it to you...I guess IR or bluetooth...Perhaps that's where the security could be hacked?
Oh great!!/.er, the whole fricken mess the world is in right now is our fault!!!! Should have better tested the program and put in safe guards to make sure idiots couldn't enter data. Then we should have made sure idiots wouldn't read the data.
Florida! Really, you're going to start with the state that has the highest percentage of Electile Dysfunction and try to prove that it works. Does it come with a blue pill?
I can imagine the hats that look like a sidewalk from the top. Such paranoid people need to not do evil things that would cause someone to need to track you down or else stop watching conspiracy theory movies. You really think the government is going to start shaving an ID onto your head and force everyone to walk around without hats. The technology here is for tracking vehicles. Wouldn't be cool if they could employ this for the Amber Alert system too? Let them spend money working on these things.
They got a serious issue with the ground clearance. Did you see the prototype they are working with. The wing looks like its only 6 inches off the ground. You're not gonna land on anything but a typical airfield with that. Forget having fun and flying into the back country. You may land, but with only one wing left after a bump in the road, you won't be taking off again.
Gosh. I remember seeing this done a long time ago. It's really simple to do. In fact, you can use spare parts from around your house to build it...that is if you live in an old house with a large fireplace hood. The vehicle may look a little strange and make funny sounds while driving down the road, but you can always sing a little tune to mask the sound. Sorta sounds like, Chitty-Chitty Bang-Bang. You get used to it.
This is what I keep pointing out to people when we get into the Apple cart. Everyone that loves their Mac is desperately pleading to the world to get on board with them and buy one too. They want that horrible, monopolistic company called Microsoft to go away. Oh, wait a minute. Apple is even more of a monopoly. You must buy their hardware and software. If you don't like their changes, tough luck! This would be the future with Apple. They will make choices and you have none...other than what color of white or silver you want.
Thanks for being another voice of reason on these postings. Sometimes I feel the slant in opinions is more toward radical than just liberal. People come here to vent their frustrations in life and blame everything except themselves. They also dream of a utopian society that doesn't take into account all of the problems that will then be created by the change they desire. I'm with you. Let's talk more tech here and less campaigning.
You're forgetting the fact that the President doesn't specifically change anything in this country. Congress does. The President can beg and plead and try to influence, but the economy has nothing to do with W's policies...as bad or weak as they may be. Remember the days of congressional deadlock. That was because the two congresses couldn't pass anything between each other. Didn't matter what the President wanted. He couldn't get it if congress doesn't want it. What we are voting for is a concept of leadership. The Pres will hopefully communicate as best as he can what direction he thinks would be good. Congress can ultimately say "screw you" and do whatever they want. Pres can veto, but Congress can overturn. Ultimate power in the country is congress.
Let's see...They are usually selling things like "male enhancement" drugs, and you want to know the statistics on penetration from them?!?!? Walked right into that one;)
Hey, here's an idea. The next time you post something here, summarize it. If I want to read it all, give me a link. I came here to waste a few minutes--not all day. I'd love to know the highlights of the article, but that is more time that I have. Someone who has the time, how about a two minutes highlight summary posted for the rest of us.
They tested on lots of phones but found only the iPhone to not work correctly. For some reason, your music will all come out sounding like DEVO remixes.
Funny! You're asking for a Mac to be like an average WinPc but with the Mac OS. Why are we not simply begging for Apple to sell the OS like MS? Oh yeh, it would crap out with huge variety of hardware options and then have to deal with what MS deals with. Forget it. Leave the Apple monoploy like it is. If the Mac fanboys get their way, there will be no options on who you buy a computer from and what OS it will run. Apple will make MS look pale in comparison to the big-brother concept and a monopoly. You will just have to hope that Apple will always provide you the cool things and great innovations...even when they are not having to compete hard to be first. Is that the reality we are hoping for? Really? Then their marketing definitely sold you. Love the OS. Don't care about the hardware (or new potential hardware), hate the idea of one company controlling both hardware and software...no matter who they are!
But will it give the Mac fanboys an erection by just looking at it? That is the true test of a Mac. That's why they bought it in the first place. What else is worth that much money?
Your obvious anger does nothing to prove your point. I know a lot more about us than you think. Your statement is correct. People set the standards and government enforces it. The general morals of the people become the general laws that then protect them. That I think is what you are missing. People don't make laws. The government is representing the people and doing what their feel their constituents want. Unfortunately for you, in OUR country today, the law makers sense that more people agree with me than you. That means that laws will continue to be made to support the morals I hold and not you. I realize that is frustrating and would be frustrating to me if the tide turns. Then laws will start being passed that allow people to do what you want them to do. If that happens, I we can easily refer to many places around the world that are already functioning the way you want. I don't find those place enjoyable and they certainly still have their problems (people from those countries still flock to the US). I'm simply stating that you are wishing for a Utopia in your mind. It wouldn't look like that once you head down that road. Problems you are not even imagining will come into place, and then you would say "Oh hell! What did we do to ourselves!!"
Yes and no. You are right (and as I stated clearly above) there are hotly debated definitions of what is right and wrong. When enough people in a society agree (or a majority or dictator or ruler), it is generally made into a law. This is simply an obvious example of how morals are the foundations of law. And then NO, you don't want everyone to simply live by their own morals. This is called lawlessness. If we had no laws, there are some that are comfortable with destroying nature...they own the land, it doesn't hurt you, why care? Others will treat animals any way they want. Doesn't hurt you. Different understanding of right and wrong. We may not agree on every law, but we need something. To some it will ALWAYS seem a limitation. To others it will always seem a protection.
Example for you. Two biggest moral/legal issues in America today. Abortion and gay marriage. Both are based on people's understanding of morality and are argued over as to how to legislate (or not). Many items we seem to easily agree upon (morally) and laws are easily made. Others are not. Maybe a better question for you...how do you know what is right and wrong without morals? If it's wrong but there is no moral underpinning behind that conclusion, how do you know it is wrong?
You've obviously not lived outside the US to see the other side of the coin. I'm American and live in America. I've also lived in Asia and Africa. I can see what a cmplete lack of moral standards and no censorship leads to. Leave America for a while and tell me what you like better. You have no idea what you are wishing for. That's a fact.
You need to take some classes in law, ethics, and philosophy. You're not understanding what morals are. Morals are the foundation of what helps us decide what is inherently right and wrong. You are obvously on the side of argument that there are no moral absolutes. I'm on the side that believes there are. Moral absolutes will transcend government, society, and social norms. Like it or not, laws are not just to protect us from each other. You have to decide what is worth protecting and why. This is where morals are argued over until laws (common understanding of the morals) are agreed upon and enforced.
If you have a problem with it, don't use it. Nobody will force you. That's your freedom. Providing unfettered access to porn to my child in my house is not cool. I'd have no way to stop the signals from coming in and going out. This is not private communication like a phone. This is public information that you will be given free access to. Want more. Pay for more...just like cable. Don't like the restriction, get the Playboy channel added to your subscription. There are not stopping anyones freedom of speech. Porn will still be on the internet and anyone can get to it whenever they want. They are simply stating that what will come over the airways to everyone without cost (other than advertising) will not be perfect and meet everyone's standard, but there will be an attempt to be more PG than XXX. Want more, pay for it.
Wow! You sound like you work for tha ACLU. Do you like the rating system for movies in the US and a lot of the world? Are you glad there are now billboards of naked women up and down the public highways in the US...especially those showing violent sex against women? Are you glad that when your little children turns on the TV to watch cartoons that they're not showing commercials with people being killed right in front of your eyes? Be real. There is a lot of consorship that help to provide a SAFER SOCIETY FOR US TO LIVE IN. Have you lived in a society with no laws of censorship whatsoever. Not pretty! Brings up callosed children that have little respect for life and certainly don't care about themselves. I've seen it in Africa when I lived there for a while.
What about laws in general then? Lets take your argument further. You are stating that the government should stay away from moral legislation. What laws in force today are morally based? Hum? Lets see? MOST OF THEM!! Its illegal to kill someone in this country. Why? Its morally wrong. Its illegal to scam someone of money. Why? Because it is morally wrong. When subject ourselves to a government and desire laws that help provide a common morality for us to live in. Don't like the general moral of the country, go to the country that thinks more like you. Don't like any moral legislation, there are many places in Africa you can go and experience first hand lawlessness. Should the government help provide control over what people can do and can't do. They have to!!!
I don't think we're reading the same thing here. I see the FCC saying that if they sell a range of frequency for broad, consistent, not carrier-specific signal braodcasting, it cannot be used as a paid for service...just like TV and Radio. You don't pay for those but get the benefit. They are attempting to do exactly the same thing as Radio and TV but for internet now. The cost to you and I will be advertising to help pay for the service. The benefit for families, is that the government will still require that the communication (free stuff) is brought to a common moral denominator...just like TV and Radio. Porn is not freely broadcast over the air to everyone. I'm glad than my young boy can't easily go anywhere and be led down that road.
I don't have a problem with that. If it's free, limit the product to be safe and a moral common denomitor. If you pay for it, they have no right to stop you from whatever you want. The bandwagon that too many people jump on is demanding everything for free. We need to get over this entitlement mentality in the US. Get access for free but pay for porn. Nothing unfair about it.
Slashdot Mirror
This doesn't appear to be analyzing the photo. If you look at the binary of the jpg image, it probably takes a sample of the code that comprises the image as a seed for the security. The statement appears to suggest that they must exchange the actual photo image. I take a photo of myself and then send it to you...I guess IR or bluetooth...Perhaps that's where the security could be hacked?
Oh great!! /.er, the whole fricken mess the world is in right now is our fault!!!! Should have better tested the program and put in safe guards to make sure idiots couldn't enter data. Then we should have made sure idiots wouldn't read the data.
Florida! Really, you're going to start with the state that has the highest percentage of Electile Dysfunction and try to prove that it works. Does it come with a blue pill?
When they can do at least three things really well. We have only monocorders and bicorders today.
I can imagine the hats that look like a sidewalk from the top. Such paranoid people need to not do evil things that would cause someone to need to track you down or else stop watching conspiracy theory movies. You really think the government is going to start shaving an ID onto your head and force everyone to walk around without hats. The technology here is for tracking vehicles. Wouldn't be cool if they could employ this for the Amber Alert system too? Let them spend money working on these things.
They got a serious issue with the ground clearance. Did you see the prototype they are working with. The wing looks like its only 6 inches off the ground. You're not gonna land on anything but a typical airfield with that. Forget having fun and flying into the back country. You may land, but with only one wing left after a bump in the road, you won't be taking off again.
Gosh. I remember seeing this done a long time ago. It's really simple to do. In fact, you can use spare parts from around your house to build it...that is if you live in an old house with a large fireplace hood. The vehicle may look a little strange and make funny sounds while driving down the road, but you can always sing a little tune to mask the sound. Sorta sounds like, Chitty-Chitty Bang-Bang. You get used to it.
This is what I keep pointing out to people when we get into the Apple cart. Everyone that loves their Mac is desperately pleading to the world to get on board with them and buy one too. They want that horrible, monopolistic company called Microsoft to go away. Oh, wait a minute. Apple is even more of a monopoly. You must buy their hardware and software. If you don't like their changes, tough luck! This would be the future with Apple. They will make choices and you have none...other than what color of white or silver you want.
Thanks for being another voice of reason on these postings. Sometimes I feel the slant in opinions is more toward radical than just liberal. People come here to vent their frustrations in life and blame everything except themselves. They also dream of a utopian society that doesn't take into account all of the problems that will then be created by the change they desire. I'm with you. Let's talk more tech here and less campaigning.
You're forgetting the fact that the President doesn't specifically change anything in this country. Congress does. The President can beg and plead and try to influence, but the economy has nothing to do with W's policies...as bad or weak as they may be. Remember the days of congressional deadlock. That was because the two congresses couldn't pass anything between each other. Didn't matter what the President wanted. He couldn't get it if congress doesn't want it. What we are voting for is a concept of leadership. The Pres will hopefully communicate as best as he can what direction he thinks would be good. Congress can ultimately say "screw you" and do whatever they want. Pres can veto, but Congress can overturn. Ultimate power in the country is congress.
Let's see...They are usually selling things like "male enhancement" drugs, and you want to know the statistics on penetration from them?!?!? Walked right into that one ;)
Hey, here's an idea. The next time you post something here, summarize it. If I want to read it all, give me a link. I came here to waste a few minutes--not all day. I'd love to know the highlights of the article, but that is more time that I have. Someone who has the time, how about a two minutes highlight summary posted for the rest of us.
They tested on lots of phones but found only the iPhone to not work correctly. For some reason, your music will all come out sounding like DEVO remixes.
Funny! You're asking for a Mac to be like an average WinPc but with the Mac OS. Why are we not simply begging for Apple to sell the OS like MS? Oh yeh, it would crap out with huge variety of hardware options and then have to deal with what MS deals with. Forget it. Leave the Apple monoploy like it is. If the Mac fanboys get their way, there will be no options on who you buy a computer from and what OS it will run. Apple will make MS look pale in comparison to the big-brother concept and a monopoly. You will just have to hope that Apple will always provide you the cool things and great innovations...even when they are not having to compete hard to be first. Is that the reality we are hoping for? Really? Then their marketing definitely sold you. Love the OS. Don't care about the hardware (or new potential hardware), hate the idea of one company controlling both hardware and software...no matter who they are!
But will it give the Mac fanboys an erection by just looking at it? That is the true test of a Mac. That's why they bought it in the first place. What else is worth that much money?
Your obvious anger does nothing to prove your point. I know a lot more about us than you think. Your statement is correct. People set the standards and government enforces it. The general morals of the people become the general laws that then protect them. That I think is what you are missing. People don't make laws. The government is representing the people and doing what their feel their constituents want. Unfortunately for you, in OUR country today, the law makers sense that more people agree with me than you. That means that laws will continue to be made to support the morals I hold and not you. I realize that is frustrating and would be frustrating to me if the tide turns. Then laws will start being passed that allow people to do what you want them to do. If that happens, I we can easily refer to many places around the world that are already functioning the way you want. I don't find those place enjoyable and they certainly still have their problems (people from those countries still flock to the US). I'm simply stating that you are wishing for a Utopia in your mind. It wouldn't look like that once you head down that road. Problems you are not even imagining will come into place, and then you would say "Oh hell! What did we do to ourselves!!"
Yes and no. You are right (and as I stated clearly above) there are hotly debated definitions of what is right and wrong. When enough people in a society agree (or a majority or dictator or ruler), it is generally made into a law. This is simply an obvious example of how morals are the foundations of law. And then NO, you don't want everyone to simply live by their own morals. This is called lawlessness. If we had no laws, there are some that are comfortable with destroying nature...they own the land, it doesn't hurt you, why care? Others will treat animals any way they want. Doesn't hurt you. Different understanding of right and wrong. We may not agree on every law, but we need something. To some it will ALWAYS seem a limitation. To others it will always seem a protection.
Example for you. Two biggest moral/legal issues in America today. Abortion and gay marriage. Both are based on people's understanding of morality and are argued over as to how to legislate (or not). Many items we seem to easily agree upon (morally) and laws are easily made. Others are not. Maybe a better question for you...how do you know what is right and wrong without morals? If it's wrong but there is no moral underpinning behind that conclusion, how do you know it is wrong?
You've obviously not lived outside the US to see the other side of the coin. I'm American and live in America. I've also lived in Asia and Africa. I can see what a cmplete lack of moral standards and no censorship leads to. Leave America for a while and tell me what you like better. You have no idea what you are wishing for. That's a fact.
You need to take some classes in law, ethics, and philosophy. You're not understanding what morals are. Morals are the foundation of what helps us decide what is inherently right and wrong. You are obvously on the side of argument that there are no moral absolutes. I'm on the side that believes there are. Moral absolutes will transcend government, society, and social norms. Like it or not, laws are not just to protect us from each other. You have to decide what is worth protecting and why. This is where morals are argued over until laws (common understanding of the morals) are agreed upon and enforced.
If you have a problem with it, don't use it. Nobody will force you. That's your freedom. Providing unfettered access to porn to my child in my house is not cool. I'd have no way to stop the signals from coming in and going out. This is not private communication like a phone. This is public information that you will be given free access to. Want more. Pay for more...just like cable. Don't like the restriction, get the Playboy channel added to your subscription. There are not stopping anyones freedom of speech. Porn will still be on the internet and anyone can get to it whenever they want. They are simply stating that what will come over the airways to everyone without cost (other than advertising) will not be perfect and meet everyone's standard, but there will be an attempt to be more PG than XXX. Want more, pay for it.
Wow! You sound like you work for tha ACLU. Do you like the rating system for movies in the US and a lot of the world? Are you glad there are now billboards of naked women up and down the public highways in the US...especially those showing violent sex against women? Are you glad that when your little children turns on the TV to watch cartoons that they're not showing commercials with people being killed right in front of your eyes? Be real. There is a lot of consorship that help to provide a SAFER SOCIETY FOR US TO LIVE IN. Have you lived in a society with no laws of censorship whatsoever. Not pretty! Brings up callosed children that have little respect for life and certainly don't care about themselves. I've seen it in Africa when I lived there for a while.
What about laws in general then? Lets take your argument further. You are stating that the government should stay away from moral legislation. What laws in force today are morally based? Hum? Lets see? MOST OF THEM!! Its illegal to kill someone in this country. Why? Its morally wrong. Its illegal to scam someone of money. Why? Because it is morally wrong. When subject ourselves to a government and desire laws that help provide a common morality for us to live in. Don't like the general moral of the country, go to the country that thinks more like you. Don't like any moral legislation, there are many places in Africa you can go and experience first hand lawlessness. Should the government help provide control over what people can do and can't do. They have to!!!
I don't think we're reading the same thing here. I see the FCC saying that if they sell a range of frequency for broad, consistent, not carrier-specific signal braodcasting, it cannot be used as a paid for service...just like TV and Radio. You don't pay for those but get the benefit. They are attempting to do exactly the same thing as Radio and TV but for internet now. The cost to you and I will be advertising to help pay for the service. The benefit for families, is that the government will still require that the communication (free stuff) is brought to a common moral denominator...just like TV and Radio. Porn is not freely broadcast over the air to everyone. I'm glad than my young boy can't easily go anywhere and be led down that road.
I don't have a problem with that. If it's free, limit the product to be safe and a moral common denomitor. If you pay for it, they have no right to stop you from whatever you want. The bandwagon that too many people jump on is demanding everything for free. We need to get over this entitlement mentality in the US. Get access for free but pay for porn. Nothing unfair about it.