Also the ICE weighs an awful lot more than 280lbs while four small in wheel motors weigh very little. then there's the gearbox, the driveshaft, the lead-acid battery (hint, hint "LEAD"). The coolant, the brake fluid (not needed with decent inwheel motors).
The electric version will be/much/ lighter overall.
I've looked at you example again and there are not enough samples to determine that it is a skewed normal curve so we can't know whether it is actually a counter example.
I suspect it isn't but I have ladies to meet and dance argentine tango with in a few hours so I'm not going to spend the time forming a pedantic proof or disproof of any of this.
Good counter example, but what are the chances of getting such a perfect example in the real world? That was constructed with the aim of landing 50% below the mean. Nature has no such purpose.
It's a skewed normal, with the mean at 100 and at least one person over 200, for 50% to be below the mean you'd need one with a negative IQ.
So it is likely that far/more/ than 50% have below average intelligence otherwise you need somebody who actually removes intelligence from the universe.
You might want to blur the image (and blur the inverse). This will allow for minor camera pan or rotation but you'll need a fairly high threshold. The thickness of the hands determines the blur kernel size and just how high is the threshold.
You have known lighting conditions and a strictly limited camera orientation and object configurations.
You can take the inverse of the pixel values as they would be if the hands weren't there (you can mock up the pixel values under the hands by hand since you only need an approximate inverse of the background plate). Then you add that inverse to an image and threshold to get black hands on white background.
Now you can use a hough transform to find all potential hands and you know the locations of the centres of the dials so you can sieve the potential hands down to actual hands. You can then do some simple trigonometry as you know which angles relate to which numbers.
And it doesn't prohibit all mere access of scrambled content. I just read it and I suggest you do too - if it did that, DVD-players would be banned, DVD-CCA licence or no.
My suggestion to produce a gstreamer stream type that the only shipped sinks will not copy but will only play satisfies the DMCA's commercially significant infringing uses clause, requiring a modsink to enable such uses as a DVD player requires a simple modchip.
No licences are required by the DMCA. Therefore canonical could provide a free player instead of a paid player as by Fluendo.
Rather, in the eyes of the law, it has an implicit licence.
Note that the DVD-CCA does not have an exclusive licensing contract for DVD player licences, neither express or implied, but all individual rights holders and duly licensed (express or implied) licensing bodies such as distributors and high street media retailers may also offer at least implicit licenses for playing without circumventing copy controls, and any devices that conform with that business model are/not/ circumvention devices.
If they're really concerned, Canonical could give the output of libdvdcss in gstreamer a stream type that encodes that it is for playing only, then do not ship any gstreamer elements that strip that type.
That route is water tight as it is what player manufacturers are required to do in their DVD-CSS agreements (which merely agree not to sue and license a set of prohibited rights of unstated ordinality, allowing for the set that can be described as "nil").
Transient copies necessary to enable a permitted business or consumer right (whether express or implied) are never counted as copying and many court cases support that explicitly in the judges ruling.
The consumer right is to watch the film, and an unmodified device that enables just that act requiring modification or obvious infringment on the part of the consumer (such as modification of the device or public display) to allow further acts does not copy the art in the eyes of the law.
Depends whether the process of decoding is also patented.
In this case, the process of decoding is prohibited by none of:
copyright
patent
trade secret
national secret
trademark
database right (UK copyright and designs Act 1988)
design right (UK...)
DMCA or equivalent circumvention prohibition (as mere decoding in a playing system like an unmodded Ubuntu install does not copy so does not circumvent copy controls)
DeCSS is a modification for a system to make it circumvent. the CSS component used in a linux player does not save anything. it only performs decoding for the players on the system.
You would need an illegal mod to turn an Ubuntu system with the CSS component into a circumvention device.
Unless Canonical signed an agreement not to distribute DVD player software, there is no lawful prohibition of that for them.
There is no default restriction on DVD player software, only on copy circumvention, and even a default Ubuntu system with the css decoding component will not copy a DVD - you must install or write some copying software or alter the product to make it do something which it was not capable of doing.
This has been true since CSS technology stopped being a trade secret.
Replacing one work of art with another by substituting a part of the art with a replacement designed by the copyright holder or a licenced agent to give the desired effect?
I don't think you need any explicit permission. Especially since the artwork itself is delivered with a functional component that performs this act for you.
The program is not the technical effect that it has on the world around it but the collection of static files on the disk. Unless those are modified, you have not modified the program - only modified its effects. Like if I put a shaped glass panel in front of a stained glass window. The projected image is modified but the protected art (which I can modify if I want anyway) remains unmodified.
You might need a licence to install on more than one computer per CD, but they don't need a popup dialog to give you a licence - they can just write an open letter and send it to a major media outlet to say that they give permission to all and sundry to install it and use it as much as they like. Now everybody on earth has a licence for that right of the copyright owner.
In fact they've just publically given that permission in this news article, so that bit is already sorted.
But your role includes being able to do the jobs of any of your team. that means your boss can do the job of anybody in your team and in your peers' teams. and your boss's boss can step into the shoes of your boss and any of his/her peers and anybody in your team, your peers' teams, and your boss's peers' teams' teams.
I don't believe a word of it. Managers should be able to do the/majority/ of their team's work to a standard merely high enough to allow people to carry on albeit at the expense of project timescales but not more than that. The team should simply not be utilised to 100% under normal circumstances and they can mostly take over a lost position.
Managers are HR + specialisation to understand and do/some/ of what their team does but this is/much/ softer a claim than what you wrote.
Re:I don't know if I fully agree with that
on
Fire Your IT Boss
·
· Score: 1
"The expert programmer, no matter how great he is at coding, is a terrible employee"
he's not a terrible employee, he can't obtusely interfere in the other guys work or style as he doesn't have the necessary authority.
He also can't go and talk to most managers as he obviously isn't a "TeamPlayer". It needs the manager to hear the average programmers' praise, see the slower programmer struggling, put two and two together and pair the two up./That/ is what managers are for and it's hard to do tactfully and effectively which is why they get paid so bloody much.
Re:I don't know if I fully agree with that
on
Fire Your IT Boss
·
· Score: 2, Insightful
/Never/ measure simple bug fixing rates. People get assigned to fix bugs in the code they wrote. Some competent programmers fix their bugs before the people who document present bugs get to look.
Also you can't use bug reporting rates because some competent programmers will allow others to see a work in progress (since, technically,/everything/ is a work in progress and never perfect) and bugs can then be reported weeks after they're fixed. A competent programmer often checks in buggy work and reports all the bugs having discovered them since it is better to share the state of your work than to leave the product missing a required feature.
The only thing you can do is ask for appraisals, and that requires trusting your people.
So two rules for softeng managers:
1) trust your people 2) listen to your people when they say something is wrong and listen to them when they say something is right 3) fight beancounters tooth and nail - they will turn your team into an abject failure
Slashdot Mirror
Also the ICE weighs an awful lot more than 280lbs while four small in wheel motors weigh very little. then there's the gearbox, the driveshaft, the lead-acid battery (hint, hint "LEAD"). The coolant, the brake fluid (not needed with decent inwheel motors).
The electric version will be /much/ lighter overall.
Medicine and Sports Science :)
(The two go hand in hand - they could both come under the umbrella of "phisicianism"
I've looked at you example again and there are not enough samples to determine that it is a skewed normal curve so we can't know whether it is actually a counter example.
I suspect it isn't but I have ladies to meet and dance argentine tango with in a few hours so I'm not going to spend the time forming a pedantic proof or disproof of any of this.
Hah! Who's the smart one now?
Good counter example, but what are the chances of getting such a perfect example in the real world? That was constructed with the aim of landing 50% below the mean. Nature has no such purpose.
It's a skewed normal, with the mean at 100 and at least one person over 200, for 50% to be below the mean you'd need one with a negative IQ.
So it is likely that far /more/ than 50% have below average intelligence otherwise you need somebody who actually removes intelligence from the universe.
Or is that what politicians are for?
You might want to blur the image (and blur the inverse). This will allow for minor camera pan or rotation but you'll need a fairly high threshold. The thickness of the hands determines the blur kernel size and just how high is the threshold.
You have known lighting conditions and a strictly limited camera orientation and object configurations.
You can take the inverse of the pixel values as they would be if the hands weren't there (you can mock up the pixel values under the hands by hand since you only need an approximate inverse of the background plate). Then you add that inverse to an image and threshold to get black hands on white background.
Now you can use a hough transform to find all potential hands and you know the locations of the centres of the dials so you can sieve the potential hands down to actual hands. You can then do some simple trigonometry as you know which angles relate to which numbers.
Done.
For UK readers, http://www.bbc.co.uk/iplayer/episode/b00f085h/b00f07kv/James_Mays_Big_Ideas_Power_to_the_People/
Available for a while but if you're reading this from an archive the link probably won't work anymore. Slide to minute 50.
the GPL
the fourcc is 'drac'
And it doesn't prohibit all mere access of scrambled content. I just read it and I suggest you do too - if it did that, DVD-players would be banned, DVD-CCA licence or no.
My suggestion to produce a gstreamer stream type that the only shipped sinks will not copy but will only play satisfies the DMCA's commercially significant infringing uses clause, requiring a modsink to enable such uses as a DVD player requires a simple modchip.
No licences are required by the DMCA. Therefore canonical could provide a free player instead of a paid player as by Fluendo.
The DMCA is not law here (UK)
To the mods, mweather's comment is not offtopic - somebody please mod parent up.
I do not agree with mweather, but I will defend to my keyboard's death his right to say it.
... does not copy the art in the eyes of the law.
Rather, in the eyes of the law, it has an implicit licence.
Note that the DVD-CCA does not have an exclusive licensing contract for DVD player licences, neither express or implied, but all individual rights holders and duly licensed (express or implied) licensing bodies such as distributors and high street media retailers may also offer at least implicit licenses for playing without circumventing copy controls, and any devices that conform with that business model are /not/ circumvention devices.
If they're really concerned, Canonical could give the output of libdvdcss in gstreamer a stream type that encodes that it is for playing only, then do not ship any gstreamer elements that strip that type.
That route is water tight as it is what player manufacturers are required to do in their DVD-CSS agreements (which merely agree not to sue and license a set of prohibited rights of unstated ordinality, allowing for the set that can be described as "nil").
Transient copies necessary to enable a permitted business or consumer right (whether express or implied) are never counted as copying and many court cases support that explicitly in the judges ruling.
The consumer right is to watch the film, and an unmodified device that enables just that act requiring modification or obvious infringment on the part of the consumer (such as modification of the device or public display) to allow further acts does not copy the art in the eyes of the law.
That much is very, very clear.
Depends whether the process of decoding is also patented.
In this case, the process of decoding is prohibited by none of:
DeCSS is a modification for a system to make it circumvent. the CSS component used in a linux player does not save anything. it only performs decoding for the players on the system.
You would need an illegal mod to turn an Ubuntu system with the CSS component into a circumvention device.
Unless Canonical signed an agreement not to distribute DVD player software, there is no lawful prohibition of that for them.
There is no default restriction on DVD player software, only on copy circumvention, and even a default Ubuntu system with the css decoding component will not copy a DVD - you must install or write some copying software or alter the product to make it do something which it was not capable of doing.
This has been true since CSS technology stopped being a trade secret.
cplusplus.com?
good lord no. use it for iostreams quick reference at most.
http://www2.roguewave.com/support/docs/sourcepro/edition9/html/stdlibref/index.html
http://www.dinkumware.com/manuals/Default.aspx?manual=compleat
note that dinkumware wrote much of msvc's c++ standard library.
http://www.gotw.ca/gotw/
http://www.faqs.org/faqs/C++-faq/
Replacing one work of art with another by substituting a part of the art with a replacement designed by the copyright holder or a licenced agent to give the desired effect?
I don't think you need any explicit permission. Especially since the artwork itself is delivered with a functional component that performs this act for you.
The program is not the technical effect that it has on the world around it but the collection of static files on the disk. Unless those are modified, you have not modified the program - only modified its effects. Like if I put a shaped glass panel in front of a stained glass window. The projected image is modified but the protected art (which I can modify if I want anyway) remains unmodified.
You might need a licence to install on more than one computer per CD, but they don't need a popup dialog to give you a licence - they can just write an open letter and send it to a major media outlet to say that they give permission to all and sundry to install it and use it as much as they like. Now everybody on earth has a licence for that right of the copyright owner.
In fact they've just publically given that permission in this news article, so that bit is already sorted.
But your role includes being able to do the jobs of any of your team. that means your boss can do the job of anybody in your team and in your peers' teams. and your boss's boss can step into the shoes of your boss and any of his/her peers and anybody in your team, your peers' teams, and your boss's peers' teams' teams.
I don't believe a word of it. Managers should be able to do the /majority/ of their team's work to a standard merely high enough to allow people to carry on albeit at the expense of project timescales but not more than that. The team should simply not be utilised to 100% under normal circumstances and they can mostly take over a lost position.
Managers are HR + specialisation to understand and do /some/ of what their team does but this is /much/ softer a claim than what you wrote.
"The expert programmer, no matter how great he is at coding, is a terrible employee"
he's not a terrible employee, he can't obtusely interfere in the other guys work or style as he doesn't have the necessary authority.
He also can't go and talk to most managers as he obviously isn't a "TeamPlayer". It needs the manager to hear the average programmers' praise, see the slower programmer struggling, put two and two together and pair the two up. /That/ is what managers are for and it's hard to do tactfully and effectively which is why they get paid so bloody much.
/Never/ measure simple bug fixing rates. People get assigned to fix bugs in the code they wrote. Some competent programmers fix their bugs before the people who document present bugs get to look.
Also you can't use bug reporting rates because some competent programmers will allow others to see a work in progress (since, technically, /everything/ is a work in progress and never perfect) and bugs can then be reported weeks after they're fixed. A competent programmer often checks in buggy work and reports all the bugs having discovered them since it is better to share the state of your work than to leave the product missing a required feature.
The only thing you can do is ask for appraisals, and that requires trusting your people.
So two rules for softeng managers:
1) trust your people
2) listen to your people when they say something is wrong and listen to them when they say something is right
3) fight beancounters tooth and nail - they will turn your team into an abject failure