the only reason marijuana isn't legal today is that people make too much money on maintaining the status quo.
Interesting, since in Ontario it was decriminilized so more money could be made. Before you'd have to pay to house someone in jail, now they just have to collect the fine.
If it were legal, it could be taxed like alcohol and cigarettes, so again that would be a bonus for the government. Now companies that make synthetic alternatives stand to lose something, but hemp (it lacks THC) is already legal in many places.
So who exactly profits from marijuana being illegal? No one the government would care about.
Submit ID, computer logs it so it cannot be used again. Submit vote, computer prints it to a printer for manually tally. The two have no link to each other, and the votes cannot be electronically modified once they have been printed. Combine that with decent encryption and multiple hosts located in different locations in the country on different networks receiving the votes and it's probably more secure than a physical voting boot.
Nothing is 100% secure of course, and a voting boot isn't either. Just plant a tiny video camera and you can watch people vote. I mean it would probably be a lot easier to pull that off than it would to be in the right place to capture packets, decrypt the packets and the link the ID to the vote.
I could probably think of as many ways to crack a voting boot as I can an online voting system. So I don't see why it's such a bad idea if there is a realized benifit (like more people voting). Of course if there is no benifit, then the old trusty pencil/paper method is the best bet.
But what do you do if the number of votes doesn't match the number of voters? Someone could vote more than once, or someone's vote may not register for whatever reason. Now suddenly all the votes cannot be trusted.
I would never trust any kind of "voting machine". There is no transparancy. Being an engineer, I can see too many ways to cheat with them.
It's pretty easy to cheat the pencil/paper method as well.
Case in point: When I was in college there was an election. I voted in the riding where I lived during school, but all my personal information stated I lived in another location. Now that other location was only an hour's drive away. So if I really wanted to vote twice I'd just have to hop in the car.
Since no method is fool proof, I say do it over the internet. Hopefully it would increase voter turn out, which is more important than the small chance of tampering.
I disagree. Windows' GUI is the worst part of Windows. Get rid of drive letters and build a better GUI on the NT kernel and you'd have a decent system.
Now what if a host uploaded random data instead of a MP3? The catch is, that the random data can be transformed into a MP3. Technically the MP3 was created on the user's own computer and not shared at all.
To put it another way, if our computers were infinitely fast, all you would have to do is give someone a MD5 hash of a MP3 and the computer would eventually be able to generate the MP3 from only the MD5 sum. You can already do this today, but the time it would take to generate the MP3 would not be worth the effort.
But using my MD5 example, does transfering the MD5 of a copyright MP3 count as the same thing as transfering the MP3 itself? Both can be used to play the same song. (given enough computing time) It gets even sketchier because my e-mail to my grandma could also be transformed into a MP3 given the right transformation algorithm. Remember it's all just 1s and 0s, you can do whatever you want with them.
So what I'd like to know, what exactly does the law cover here?
Turn on the radio and you hear the same songs over and over and over again. So lets assume that I only buy music that I hear on the radio, which is probably the case for a large portion of consumers. I am now limited to a very small group of artists that get pushed by the media. Now factor in that I don't like most of them and now I'm left with one or two CDs that I would consider buying.
I remember in my childhood even hearing the big hits on the radio was a somewhat rare occurance. Now just turn on the radio and they will be playing it. Obviously the hits are taking over time from other bands that could mean more purchases by me. Not to mention that I don't need to buy the CD because it's on the radio all the time. I realize the RIAA's motives for trying to limit the number of big named bands, but I think it's starting to come back and bite them in the foot.
Where people come up with this license bullshit is totally beyond me. There just isn't one.
If you want to use the speeding law analogy, you must first realize that you need a license to drive the car. So, if the analogy holds true, you must alos have a license to listen to the music and therefore there is a license.
Eventually the material things will come back, outsourced by the foreign nations, and then their intellectual outsourcing and the cycle will continue once again.
You could technically reconstruct a larger image from thumbnails as well if the thumbnails were created in a manner that allows that.
I can probably explain better with a diagram. Imagine each number is a pixel.
012 345 678
Now thumbnail 1 looks like:
0 4
and thumbnail 2 looks like:
1 5
And so on...
Spread that method over the entire picture and you should have a relatively decent looking thumbnail. Combine all the thumbnails and you have all the data you need to restore the original.
Photoshop and Illustrator are the most annoying programs to use under Windows. They both use the MDI (Multiple document interface) model for drawing their windows which makes it very difficult to utilize the avalible screen space.
MacOS and even the UNIX versions of Photoshop/Illustrator do not suffer from the same design flaws.
It will then be implemented within 2 months, I'm sure about that.
This is a joke right?
It has been in Bugzilla for as long as I can remember. There is the mozscroll project to implement this functionality, but it's progress has been very slow.
I was not satisfied with the time it was taking to bring middle-click scrolling to Phoenix so I wrote Autoscroll. It only took about 15 minutes to have a working implementation, although it has progressed since then. There are a few quirks that show up now and then, but as it has already been stated on here, it isn't production quality yet, but is still very usable.
I look forward to seeing what mozscroll brings to the table, but until then Autoscroll fulfills my needs and by the sounds of it, many others.
(I wish Mozilla would let me interactively resize the tab buttons, for instance. They take up too much space.)
And they are the wrong orientation. In almost all cases we have much more horizontal space to work with yet the tabs take up the precious vertical space! Also I want to be able to tear off the tabs to create a new window.
Slashdot Mirror
the only reason marijuana isn't legal today is that people make too much money on maintaining the status quo.
Interesting, since in Ontario it was decriminilized so more money could be made. Before you'd have to pay to house someone in jail, now they just have to collect the fine.
If it were legal, it could be taxed like alcohol and cigarettes, so again that would be a bonus for the government. Now companies that make synthetic alternatives stand to lose something, but hemp (it lacks THC) is already legal in many places.
So who exactly profits from marijuana being illegal? No one the government would care about.
Why not?
Submit ID, computer logs it so it cannot be used again. Submit vote, computer prints it to a printer for manually tally. The two have no link to each other, and the votes cannot be electronically modified once they have been printed. Combine that with decent encryption and multiple hosts located in different locations in the country on different networks receiving the votes and it's probably more secure than a physical voting boot.
Nothing is 100% secure of course, and a voting boot isn't either. Just plant a tiny video camera and you can watch people vote. I mean it would probably be a lot easier to pull that off than it would to be in the right place to capture packets, decrypt the packets and the link the ID to the vote.
I could probably think of as many ways to crack a voting boot as I can an online voting system. So I don't see why it's such a bad idea if there is a realized benifit (like more people voting). Of course if there is no benifit, then the old trusty pencil/paper method is the best bet.
But what do you do if the number of votes doesn't match the number of voters? Someone could vote more than once, or someone's vote may not register for whatever reason. Now suddenly all the votes cannot be trusted.
I would never trust any kind of "voting machine". There is no transparancy. Being an engineer, I can see too many ways to cheat with them.
It's pretty easy to cheat the pencil/paper method as well.
Case in point: When I was in college there was an election. I voted in the riding where I lived during school, but all my personal information stated I lived in another location. Now that other location was only an hour's drive away. So if I really wanted to vote twice I'd just have to hop in the car.
Since no method is fool proof, I say do it over the internet. Hopefully it would increase voter turn out, which is more important than the small chance of tampering.
I disagree. Windows' GUI is the worst part of Windows. Get rid of drive letters and build a better GUI on the NT kernel and you'd have a decent system.
It's the same deal in Canada.
Now what if a host uploaded random data instead of a MP3? The catch is, that the random data can be transformed into a MP3. Technically the MP3 was created on the user's own computer and not shared at all.
To put it another way, if our computers were infinitely fast, all you would have to do is give someone a MD5 hash of a MP3 and the computer would eventually be able to generate the MP3 from only the MD5 sum. You can already do this today, but the time it would take to generate the MP3 would not be worth the effort.
But using my MD5 example, does transfering the MD5 of a copyright MP3 count as the same thing as transfering the MP3 itself? Both can be used to play the same song. (given enough computing time) It gets even sketchier because my e-mail to my grandma could also be transformed into a MP3 given the right transformation algorithm. Remember it's all just 1s and 0s, you can do whatever you want with them.
So what I'd like to know, what exactly does the law cover here?
but not understanding computers should not be a crime
I don't know how to use the brakes in my car, so I don't stop at stop signs.
As did I. I know because I was running my computer off of a generator and it was working just fine.
You mean MD5 sums from random people on the internet isn't good enough?
Linux can't afford braces because it trade it's dental plan for a keg of beer!
j pg
That would explain this: http://www.lbw2000.eu.org/lbw-1999aug10-13_small.
I just tried: And it had to install 47 packages, and that doesn't include any that I might have already had installed.
Turn on the radio and you hear the same songs over and over and over again. So lets assume that I only buy music that I hear on the radio, which is probably the case for a large portion of consumers. I am now limited to a very small group of artists that get pushed by the media. Now factor in that I don't like most of them and now I'm left with one or two CDs that I would consider buying.
I remember in my childhood even hearing the big hits on the radio was a somewhat rare occurance. Now just turn on the radio and they will be playing it. Obviously the hits are taking over time from other bands that could mean more purchases by me. Not to mention that I don't need to buy the CD because it's on the radio all the time. I realize the RIAA's motives for trying to limit the number of big named bands, but I think it's starting to come back and bite them in the foot.
Where people come up with this license bullshit is totally beyond me. There just isn't one.
If you want to use the speeding law analogy, you must first realize that you need a license to drive the car. So, if the analogy holds true, you must alos have a license to listen to the music and therefore there is a license.
Why can't you chain the computers together?
[ Screen A |] [ Screen B|] [ Screen C]
"|" denotes the area where it switches to the other computer. Network lag might be a problem if you get have too many systems though.
so we can move to an economy that produces what?
Eventually the material things will come back, outsourced by the foreign nations, and then their intellectual outsourcing and the cycle will continue once again.
Being a farmer is an insult?
I can probably explain better with a diagram. Imagine each number is a pixel.Now thumbnail 1 looks like:and thumbnail 2 looks like:And so on...
Spread that method over the entire picture and you should have a relatively decent looking thumbnail. Combine all the thumbnails and you have all the data you need to restore the original.
The DeLorian may be a perpetual machine, but it's maximum speed is 87mph. Anything over that and the car mysteriously disappears.
Curiously, does IE support more than one alpha channel with PNG?
Yes, it does.. But it requires doing more than just <img src="...">, you have to use their CSS filters.
Depends on the game, I'd rather play iSketch on it vs. a regular computer.
Thanks for the link. That sounds like the exact program I've been looking for for years!! I'm about to try it out now.
Photoshop and Illustrator are the most annoying programs to use under Windows. They both use the MDI (Multiple document interface) model for drawing their windows which makes it very difficult to utilize the avalible screen space.
MacOS and even the UNIX versions of Photoshop/Illustrator do not suffer from the same design flaws.
It will then be implemented within 2 months, I'm sure about that.
This is a joke right?
It has been in Bugzilla for as long as I can remember. There is the mozscroll project to implement this functionality, but it's progress has been very slow.
I was not satisfied with the time it was taking to bring middle-click scrolling to Phoenix so I wrote Autoscroll. It only took about 15 minutes to have a working implementation, although it has progressed since then. There are a few quirks that show up now and then, but as it has already been stated on here, it isn't production quality yet, but is still very usable.
I look forward to seeing what mozscroll brings to the table, but until then Autoscroll fulfills my needs and by the sounds of it, many others.
(I wish Mozilla would let me interactively resize the tab buttons, for instance. They take up too much space.)
And they are the wrong orientation. In almost all cases we have much more horizontal space to work with yet the tabs take up the precious vertical space! Also I want to be able to tear off the tabs to create a new window.