If this is for face recognition technology then the most video you really need to store is pictures of individuals that aren't recognized by your system. Once someone is logged by the system then all you need to store is a message like:
"Subject N passed camera Z at HH:MM:SS"
Everyone would be numbered as they entered the facility and then tracked by that number.
Excellent- then contact me about my royalties since I have patents on this. I knew I could get at least one sucker...:):)
Seriously- I had thought of this as well years ago (also for a security system) that I was contemplating development on (I bagged the whole thing though). I thought this would suit Robs system well since it is also for security purposes and no one is really going to care about 20 year old data.
As for my "co-inventor" commit- I think it's important for everyone to remember the MORAL obligation to credit those that provide you with direct assistance (even if their ideas are not completely original).
I question why you would need to have recordings that are 20 years old that are as good as those in the last day so you could consider scaling and degrading the video quality with time.
Example: Record everything in color with high framerates and high resolution on hard disks. After the data is a week old (or whatever), compress it to B&W with half the frame rate and resolution. Repeat till you have a minimal desired quality then move it to long term storage (tape, etc).
Feel free to count me as a co-inventor- I have no application for this algorithm at this time.
Over the last three years, G.A. Modefine has been involved in more than 10 disputes involving Web addresses that used variations of the Armani name, and has won all but two -- Mani's, and one ivolving a New Jersey man who registered the name mani.org.
Well, mani.org seems to be gone- so much for that.
Quote: If you have more projects available than people, then you may need to hire people to get those projects going. Where would that cash come from?
This is right on the money. The question is does Googles really has some worthwhile projects to fund?
After reading last weeks interview with Goggles Director of Research - I have to say a solid "No" I didn't see any ideas that, when coded, would make my life better so as a investor, you can count me out of the IPO- regardless of how hyped it may become.
My tax money will alway go to supporting "brain dead morons"- and I guess I would prefer to support them in school rather than on welfare. JUST KIDDING.
Seriously, to understand my argument you have to divide the two primary functions of a university: educating students and performing research.
(Actually a good friend of mine who is a university professor says only the latter is really true but that's another topic.) I didn't make any arguments about subsiding education- just research. Never-the-less, to answer your question about how I feel about subsiding education, I have to tell you that I honestly can't make up my mind between these two arguments:
First, the hard nose one- Americans are said to be granted "Life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness" There's nothing in there about a subsidized college education. So why should I pay for it? On top of that- taxpayers end up subsidizing the education for foreigners who take their education back home... Any we should pay for this because? Hey- I'm just trying to make a living too...
The second version- Education is a great thing and we should give everyone a chance to get an education that can take them though life, better our nation and thus provide value to the taxpayers. I'll admit, going to college changed my life profoundly and I'd want other generations to have the same opportunity. However, I can see how people could disagree with this augment- even I do sometimes (think 1040).
My beef is with subsidizing research that doesn't benefit society in general. If a Ph.D. wants to do research on something that has commercial value, then he/she should get a job in the industry with a company that could profit from the research he/she's interested in doing. If this means that there is a mass exodus of profs in the colleges, so what- educate the students with fully qualified professionals and leave the bulk of the research to the industry. Yes, this could change the face of colleges, but maybe it's time (our current system is quite old). Maybe we're not getting a good value for our tax dollars on subsidizing college students.
As for subsidizing K - 12 education, I'll admit I'm a bit soft and think that tax dollars should be spent since many under privileged children otherwise wouldn't get a chance for any schooling. Although I don't know why I should be obligated to pay for this.
OK- let me pose this. Why is it that we need to maintain the same university structure that we have? So what if college research dries up and blows away? Why should the taxpayers pay for research that others will profit from?
I say we only fund research that will make an impact on society but has little commercial value- and if that causes universities to lose profs- well, too bad. Classes can always be taught by professionals after 5PM- you don't need a PhD to teach a class in history or microprocessor design.
Agreed. I've found internet cafes everywhere I go- from from Mendoza Argentina to Banos Ecaduor. (Banos? Who the hell ever heard of Banos? My point exactly- they're everywhere.) Seems internet cafes (as well as home gaming centers) are popular in countires where it's too expensive for most individuals to have private ownership (hence the shared resources.)
There is a difference with this and Gate's law since in this case the disk limit is tied directly to a particular machine. The limit isn't intented as a be-all, end-all "no one will ever". It's only "no one on THIS MACHINE (ie, your average PIII) will ever". Think your still be using your same machine once you get that 999TB disk? I hope I'm not. --BxT--
Slashdot Mirror
If this is for face recognition technology then the most video you really need to store is pictures of individuals that aren't recognized by your system. Once someone is logged by the system then all you need to store is a message like:
"Subject N passed camera Z at HH:MM:SS"
Everyone would be numbered as they entered the facility and then tracked by that number.
-BxT
Excellent- then contact me about my royalties since I have patents on this. I knew I could get at least one sucker... :) :)
Seriously- I had thought of this as well years ago (also for a security system) that I was contemplating development on (I bagged the whole thing though). I thought this would suit Robs system well since it is also for security purposes and no one is really going to care about 20 year old data.
As for my "co-inventor" commit- I think it's important for everyone to remember the MORAL obligation to credit those that provide you with direct assistance (even if their ideas are not completely original).
-BxT
I question why you would need to have recordings that are 20 years old that are as good as those in the last day so you could consider scaling and degrading the video quality with time.
Example: Record everything in color with high framerates and high resolution on hard disks. After the data is a week old (or whatever), compress it to B&W with half the frame rate and resolution. Repeat till you have a minimal desired quality then move it to long term storage (tape, etc).
Feel free to count me as a co-inventor- I have no application for this algorithm at this time.
-BxT
This isn't a big deal since it was a bad idea in the first place and just shows that the Comdex judging needs to improve.
-BxT
they don't give off THAT much light ...
This is a key point- the thing would be so dim even in a pitch black room that it wouldn't be funny.
Here's a good link that explains it all.
-BxT
Well, mani.org seems to be gone- so much for that.
-BxT
Quote: If you have more projects available than people, then you may need to hire people to get those projects going. Where would that cash come from?
This is right on the money. The question is does Googles really has some worthwhile projects to fund?
After reading last weeks interview with Goggles Director of Research - I have to say a solid "No" I didn't see any ideas that, when coded, would make my life better so as a investor, you can count me out of the IPO- regardless of how hyped it may become.
BxT
Two things:
1. From this article I read:
a. they got investing from the Defense Department (U.S tax dollars)
b. They will be licensing the technology for a fee.
So does this mean that they are going to repay the DoD or do us tax payers get to foot the bill to line their pockets?
2. basic math:
$50M / 500 man years = $100,000 per man year of work for salary, officer buildings, etc. Sounds pretty expensive to me.
BxT
-BxT
My tax money will alway go to supporting "brain dead morons"- and I guess I would prefer to support them in school rather than on welfare. JUST KIDDING. Seriously, to understand my argument you have to divide the two primary functions of a university: educating students and performing research. (Actually a good friend of mine who is a university professor says only the latter is really true but that's another topic.) I didn't make any arguments about subsiding education- just research. Never-the-less, to answer your question about how I feel about subsiding education, I have to tell you that I honestly can't make up my mind between these two arguments: First, the hard nose one- Americans are said to be granted "Life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness" There's nothing in there about a subsidized college education. So why should I pay for it? On top of that- taxpayers end up subsidizing the education for foreigners who take their education back home... Any we should pay for this because? Hey- I'm just trying to make a living too... The second version- Education is a great thing and we should give everyone a chance to get an education that can take them though life, better our nation and thus provide value to the taxpayers. I'll admit, going to college changed my life profoundly and I'd want other generations to have the same opportunity. However, I can see how people could disagree with this augment- even I do sometimes (think 1040). My beef is with subsidizing research that doesn't benefit society in general. If a Ph.D. wants to do research on something that has commercial value, then he/she should get a job in the industry with a company that could profit from the research he/she's interested in doing. If this means that there is a mass exodus of profs in the colleges, so what- educate the students with fully qualified professionals and leave the bulk of the research to the industry. Yes, this could change the face of colleges, but maybe it's time (our current system is quite old). Maybe we're not getting a good value for our tax dollars on subsidizing college students. As for subsidizing K - 12 education, I'll admit I'm a bit soft and think that tax dollars should be spent since many under privileged children otherwise wouldn't get a chance for any schooling. Although I don't know why I should be obligated to pay for this.
OK- let me pose this. Why is it that we need to maintain the same university structure that we have? So what if college research dries up and blows away? Why should the taxpayers pay for research that others will profit from? I say we only fund research that will make an impact on society but has little commercial value- and if that causes universities to lose profs- well, too bad. Classes can always be taught by professionals after 5PM- you don't need a PhD to teach a class in history or microprocessor design.
Agreed. I've found internet cafes everywhere I go- from from Mendoza Argentina to Banos Ecaduor. (Banos? Who the hell ever heard of Banos? My point exactly- they're everywhere.) Seems internet cafes (as well as home gaming centers) are popular in countires where it's too expensive for most individuals to have private ownership (hence the shared resources.)
There is a difference with this and Gate's law since in this case the disk limit is tied directly to a particular machine. The limit isn't intented as a be-all, end-all "no one will ever". It's only "no one on THIS MACHINE (ie, your average PIII) will ever". Think your still be using your same machine once you get that 999TB disk? I hope I'm not. --BxT--