With the right accessorizing and appropriate leather:latex:chainmail ratio, you can ensure even the most intrepid airport screener will breeze you through in record time
Have you seen the people they are hiring at the airport security recently? You might be subject to an entirely different form of harassment, from someone who feels you are their perfect soul mate...
Read the link you posted: "Although border-searches are exempted from the Fourth Amendment warrant requirement, they are still subject to the amendment's reasonableness requirement" (Montoya de Hernandez, 473 U.S. at 537-38)
"In the border search context, reasonable suspicion means that the facts known to the customs officer at the time of the search, combined with the officer's reasonable inferences from those facts, provides the officer with a particularized and objective basis for suspecting that the search will reveal contraband." (Idem)
This is a typical case of the "slippery slope" problem. The government is using the "terrorism" and "child porn" catchwords to extend the meaning of "reasonable suspicion". It's up to the people to resist this.
The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.
That's all you need. If it doesn't work, let them have it and sue the hell out of them. The ACLU and EFF may help you.
Would you buy that $15 DVD if they were to sell it at $1?
Depending on the DVD, yes, I would. I have a collection of CDs and DVDs which I buy whenever I feel the price is right.
Anyhow, they play music and films for free on the advertisement-financed radio and TV, it's not as if it caused a loss to them when someone gets entertainment without paying.
If the media industry doesn't want to explore the marginal profits to be had from selling at a discount, that's their problem. They believe their profits are maximized when they try to sell at prices most people consider absurd, that's what happens when one pulls statistics out of thin air.
Since this white light does not penetrate opaque surfaces such as walls, there is a higher level of security, as eavesdropping is not possible
Not true, as mentioned in this old Slashdot article. Light emissions, even when they are not modulated, may transmit information that can be used by your enemies, for instance in wartime
But I believe your suggestion of tinfoiling windows is good. Just use the same foil you have on your walls (you *do* use tinfoil for wallpaper, don't you?)
If the copyright holders want to charge $1 for a song, or $15 for a CD or DVD, that's their business, I'd never pay those prices. When I copy a music or film that's being offered for sale at a price I wouldn't pay, I'm causing exactly $0.00 in losses to the copyright holder.
I usually watch movies which I downloaded through P2P when I ride the bus. If I didn't have the option to download those films for free or for a price I think fair, I would never pay the prices the copyright holders try to charge. I'd watch the scenery through the bus windows.
Or do you claim I'm pirating the view? Do you think we are morally obliged to pay the owners of property near the highways because it's "morally wrong" for someone to get entertainment for free?
I think the following provision should be in the law: if a jury decides a lawsuit is frivolous, then the lawyers that started it should pay everything they got plus punitive damages to the part that got sued, where "punitive" means "enough to hurt". No lawyer should be allowed to get *any* profit from a frivolous lawsuit. And lawyers should know enough about the law to realize that they are embarking on a frivolous lawsuit, whose purpose is just to intimidate or send a political message.
Could I host 30 seconds legally, and you host 30 seconds legally, and Bob hosts 30 sec and Jill hosts 30 sec?
That's *exactly* how BitTorrent works. But the doctrine of fair use also implies the purpose for which the parts are used. You can quote parts of a work, for instance, to make a criticism, but not to create a full copy of the original work.
We need humans to collect data, but if we don't use the analysis power of machines, it will be human against human. Who do you think has a bigger chance of success, a suicidal terrorist who is determined to cause harm at any cost in an open society, or an undercover agent who tries to infiltrate a closed group of fanatics?
In the old days (Revolution, World Wars, Cold War), when we were aware of our enemies, spies, analysts and cryptographers defeated the enemies with courage, brainpower and skill.
I think people are putting off some investments while they wait to see when will the next Microsoft OS come out. People are afraid to replace something that's more or less working with something that has been so criticized as Vista.
I still think cellphone antennas can affect more in this cancer matter than something that has happened before in Earth with no big impact at all
Cell phones transmit at a relatively low frequency, which is called "non-ionizing".
Electromagnetic radiation is transmitted by particles called photons, each of which carry a fixed amount of energy, proportional to its frequency. Therefore, to transmit a given amount of power, it takes more low-frequency photons than high-frequency ones. There is a certain frequency, higher than what cell phones use, where the energy of a single photon is enough to break the chemical bonds that keep molecules together, that's what is called "ionization".
At lower, "non-ionizing" frequencies, you can send as much power as you want, you may cook the tissue, but the chemical bonds will not be broken in the same way, because the photons don't have the required energy.
The sun emits particles in a very wide range of energies, including ionizing ones. The charged particles with ionizing energy which are diverted by the earth's magnetic field are certainly more dangerous than any cell phone antenna.
The dangers of non-ionizing radiation have been the subject of debate, but one should be careful when judging the data. With high enough power, like in a microwave oven, there will be damage to living tissues, of course, but it's in an entirely different level from ionizing radiation, where a single photon is enough to break a molecule and, pick your worse nightmare, start a cancer or cause a mutation.
It really isn't. The problem itself is not the reversal itself, but the period inbetween, when the magnetic field will be very small or inexistent. The earth's magnetic field has the effect of diverting charged energetic particles emitted by the sun towards the poles. It's those particles entering the atmosphere that cause the northern lights. Without a magnetic field, they would penetrate more into the atmosphere, possibly causing harm to living beings.
However, this reversal will happen several hundred years from now. By that time, I'm sure that, if I'm alive, it will be because we will have some pretty advanced medicine, capable of handling the increased radiation effects.
Such a system does exist: the iPod/iPhone and the iTunes store.
Except for the "cheap" part, at least the hardware isn't. But you are right, after I posted it occurred to me that that's exactly what Apple has been doing.
If only Asus had noticed it, they could have had the i* convenience, with Linux flexibility, at eeePC prices. Will the Asus board sometime realize they had a chance for world domination and failed?
I have an eeePC900 which has been very good for the use I originally intended: to watch movies in the bus. I commute a bit less than an hour each way, so I watch one movie per day. bittorrent+eePC is all I need to forget the traffic conditions.
There's a business model here that no company seems to catch.
1) sell a cheap computer with adequate software. Asus fails, their repository is ridiculous. 2) sell media at reasonable prices. I'd never pay $15 for a movie, and renting DVDs is a hassle. I'd be ready to pay $1 or $2 to download a 700MB mpeg, why don't the media companies want to sell it to me? 3) Profit!
I'd pay for a *system* that solves this specific need, give me entertainment during my daily bus ride. Other people would be willing to pay for other uses.
Asus has been very shortsighted, they see themselves as a hardware seller, they don't want to offer anything more. The eeePC doesn't even come with Gimp, for instance. Another convenient use for the eeePC is to get photos from my camera's SD card, I feel it's more convenient than plugging the USB cable. But then I want to crop the pictures, enhance this or that, and the eeePC lacks a decent image editor.
I just got it last week, so I'm still exploring the possibilities. One alternative would be to find a safe way to add Debian repositories to get software, another would be to install Xubuntu. I'm sure it will work well in the end, but all this wouldn't be necessary if Asus had gone to the trouble to set up a decent repository.
Same thing is happening with Nokia and Qt right now
And I'm licking my lips in anticipation of the future Nokia Qt phones. The reason why I haven't got a Nokia smartphone is Symbian. Yes, they work good, have great specs, Nokia even gives away a development environment for them. But it's not Linux.
If I can't have a phone where I can apt-get install whatever I want, create my own applications in kdevelop, then I have no reason to get a smartphone, one of those the phone company gives away will do for me.
30 TB per night sounds like a lot, but 1.5 TB drives are about AUD 350 each, retail
Funny, but the idea of buying and installing twenty top-of-the-line new disks each day sounds like really big numbers to me...
Not to mention that they need backups. How many tapes do they have to buy? And data transfer, too. All those bytes are worthless if no one gets to see them, so they need at least 30 TB / day data link capacity.
Would this mean the end of "bad sectors" as we know it? It would seem to me that if a part of the holographic storage device degrades in some way, one could simply read the data from any number of different "windows" (as described in the Wikipedia article) and get the proper result.
This can be done without holography. The field of science that studies this is information theory. By a proper encoding, one can put redundancy in any data set such that the original information can be recovered, no matter how much degradation there is.
I've heard a lot of "It won't run on my hardware" and "It won't run our winfax95" but c'mon...It's 2008.
Do you think it makes sense to upgrade the hardware without getting any additional functionality?
Just to show a different point of view, I have recently bought a Linux eeePC-900 and am loving it. It has more or less the same capability as a typical notebook of a few years ago: 900 MHz CPU, 20 GB storage, 1 MB RAM, yet it weighs less than one kilogram. That's what I consider TRUE progress. I have the same functionality I had before, but with a big gain in portability.
If you have to upgrade your hardware just to keep the same functionality, without any significant gain, then why do it? Why not keep the same old hardware and software you had before?
Slashdot Mirror
Which of them?
Have you seen the people they are hiring at the airport security recently? You might be subject to an entirely different form of harassment, from someone who feels you are their perfect soul mate...
Read the link you posted: "Although border-searches are exempted from the Fourth Amendment warrant requirement, they are still subject to the amendment's reasonableness requirement" (Montoya de Hernandez, 473 U.S. at 537-38)
"In the border search context, reasonable suspicion means that the facts known to the customs officer at the time of the search, combined with the officer's reasonable inferences from those facts, provides the officer with a particularized and objective basis for suspecting that the search will reveal contraband." (Idem)
This is a typical case of the "slippery slope" problem. The government is using the "terrorism" and "child porn" catchwords to extend the meaning of "reasonable suspicion". It's up to the people to resist this.
That's all you need. If it doesn't work, let them have it and sue the hell out of them. The ACLU and EFF may help you.
Depending on the DVD, yes, I would. I have a collection of CDs and DVDs which I buy whenever I feel the price is right.
Anyhow, they play music and films for free on the advertisement-financed radio and TV, it's not as if it caused a loss to them when someone gets entertainment without paying.
If the media industry doesn't want to explore the marginal profits to be had from selling at a discount, that's their problem. They believe their profits are maximized when they try to sell at prices most people consider absurd, that's what happens when one pulls statistics out of thin air.
FTFA:
Not true, as mentioned in this old Slashdot article. Light emissions, even when they are not modulated, may transmit information that can be used by your enemies, for instance in wartime
But I believe your suggestion of tinfoiling windows is good. Just use the same foil you have on your walls (you *do* use tinfoil for wallpaper, don't you?)
If the copyright holders want to charge $1 for a song, or $15 for a CD or DVD, that's their business, I'd never pay those prices. When I copy a music or film that's being offered for sale at a price I wouldn't pay, I'm causing exactly $0.00 in losses to the copyright holder.
I usually watch movies which I downloaded through P2P when I ride the bus. If I didn't have the option to download those films for free or for a price I think fair, I would never pay the prices the copyright holders try to charge. I'd watch the scenery through the bus windows.
Or do you claim I'm pirating the view? Do you think we are morally obliged to pay the owners of property near the highways because it's "morally wrong" for someone to get entertainment for free?
When did you last see a poor person suing someone to intimidate, send a political statement, or to put someone out of business?
I think the following provision should be in the law: if a jury decides a lawsuit is frivolous, then the lawyers that started it should pay everything they got plus punitive damages to the part that got sued, where "punitive" means "enough to hurt". No lawyer should be allowed to get *any* profit from a frivolous lawsuit. And lawyers should know enough about the law to realize that they are embarking on a frivolous lawsuit, whose purpose is just to intimidate or send a political message.
That's *exactly* how BitTorrent works. But the doctrine of fair use also implies the purpose for which the parts are used. You can quote parts of a work, for instance, to make a criticism, but not to create a full copy of the original work.
With 430 pistons, I'd say about forty rods per hogshead.
This assertion is not true not at all.
We need humans to collect data, but if we don't use the analysis power of machines, it will be human against human. Who do you think has a bigger chance of success, a suicidal terrorist who is determined to cause harm at any cost in an open society, or an undercover agent who tries to infiltrate a closed group of fanatics?
Those "cryptographers and analysts" you mention were people in offices working with computers.
I think people are putting off some investments while they wait to see when will the next Microsoft OS come out. People are afraid to replace something that's more or less working with something that has been so criticized as Vista.
Cell phones transmit at a relatively low frequency, which is called "non-ionizing".
Electromagnetic radiation is transmitted by particles called photons, each of which carry a fixed amount of energy, proportional to its frequency. Therefore, to transmit a given amount of power, it takes more low-frequency photons than high-frequency ones. There is a certain frequency, higher than what cell phones use, where the energy of a single photon is enough to break the chemical bonds that keep molecules together, that's what is called "ionization".
At lower, "non-ionizing" frequencies, you can send as much power as you want, you may cook the tissue, but the chemical bonds will not be broken in the same way, because the photons don't have the required energy.
The sun emits particles in a very wide range of energies, including ionizing ones. The charged particles with ionizing energy which are diverted by the earth's magnetic field are certainly more dangerous than any cell phone antenna.
The dangers of non-ionizing radiation have been the subject of debate, but one should be careful when judging the data. With high enough power, like in a microwave oven, there will be damage to living tissues, of course, but it's in an entirely different level from ionizing radiation, where a single photon is enough to break a molecule and, pick your worse nightmare, start a cancer or cause a mutation.
Instead of using OCR, they can outsource it to India, have someone read the text and use speech to text software
It starts small. It WILL be an ocean. AFTER it goes through the sea stage. Right now it's still just a "rift".
When thinking about geologic processes, it's very important to consider the time dimension.
It really isn't. The problem itself is not the reversal itself, but the period inbetween, when the magnetic field will be very small or inexistent. The earth's magnetic field has the effect of diverting charged energetic particles emitted by the sun towards the poles. It's those particles entering the atmosphere that cause the northern lights. Without a magnetic field, they would penetrate more into the atmosphere, possibly causing harm to living beings.
However, this reversal will happen several hundred years from now. By that time, I'm sure that, if I'm alive, it will be because we will have some pretty advanced medicine, capable of handling the increased radiation effects.
Except for the "cheap" part, at least the hardware isn't. But you are right, after I posted it occurred to me that that's exactly what Apple has been doing.
If only Asus had noticed it, they could have had the i* convenience, with Linux flexibility, at eeePC prices. Will the Asus board sometime realize they had a chance for world domination and failed?
I have an eeePC900 which has been very good for the use I originally intended: to watch movies in the bus. I commute a bit less than an hour each way, so I watch one movie per day. bittorrent+eePC is all I need to forget the traffic conditions.
There's a business model here that no company seems to catch.
1) sell a cheap computer with adequate software. Asus fails, their repository is ridiculous.
2) sell media at reasonable prices. I'd never pay $15 for a movie, and renting DVDs is a hassle. I'd be ready to pay $1 or $2 to download a 700MB mpeg, why don't the media companies want to sell it to me?
3) Profit!
I'd pay for a *system* that solves this specific need, give me entertainment during my daily bus ride. Other people would be willing to pay for other uses.
Asus has been very shortsighted, they see themselves as a hardware seller, they don't want to offer anything more. The eeePC doesn't even come with Gimp, for instance. Another convenient use for the eeePC is to get photos from my camera's SD card, I feel it's more convenient than plugging the USB cable. But then I want to crop the pictures, enhance this or that, and the eeePC lacks a decent image editor.
I just got it last week, so I'm still exploring the possibilities. One alternative would be to find a safe way to add Debian repositories to get software, another would be to install Xubuntu. I'm sure it will work well in the end, but all this wouldn't be necessary if Asus had gone to the trouble to set up a decent repository.
And I'm licking my lips in anticipation of the future Nokia Qt phones. The reason why I haven't got a Nokia smartphone is Symbian. Yes, they work good, have great specs, Nokia even gives away a development environment for them. But it's not Linux.
If I can't have a phone where I can apt-get install whatever I want, create my own applications in kdevelop, then I have no reason to get a smartphone, one of those the phone company gives away will do for me.
Is this your office? I think it's in your best interest to start taking some precautions against those pesky androids...
Funny, but the idea of buying and installing twenty top-of-the-line new disks each day sounds like really big numbers to me...
Not to mention that they need backups. How many tapes do they have to buy? And data transfer, too. All those bytes are worthless if no one gets to see them, so they need at least 30 TB / day data link capacity.
This can be done without holography. The field of science that studies this is information theory. By a proper encoding, one can put redundancy in any data set such that the original information can be recovered, no matter how much degradation there is.
Do you think it makes sense to upgrade the hardware without getting any additional functionality?
Just to show a different point of view, I have recently bought a Linux eeePC-900 and am loving it. It has more or less the same capability as a typical notebook of a few years ago: 900 MHz CPU, 20 GB storage, 1 MB RAM, yet it weighs less than one kilogram. That's what I consider TRUE progress. I have the same functionality I had before, but with a big gain in portability.
If you have to upgrade your hardware just to keep the same functionality, without any significant gain, then why do it? Why not keep the same old hardware and software you had before?
the money shots would be pretty cool: bukkake from across the room
Is it just me, or haven't we all dreamed of wanking off so hard the cum hits the ceiling?...